| Author | Message | ||
     Phatkidwit1eye |
First I'll start this thread by saying I'm NOT bashing police officers b/c I do have respect for them and what they do. Now that I have that out of the way... I Went on a long ride today with my Dad and some of his friends to visit one of the riders son's grave. We made a quick pit stop for gas and some water and we started talking and one of them brought up something weird that happened on a poker run a few weeks ago. I guess a local sheriff in one of the small towns pulled over about 40 or so riders for not having dot helmets. He also confiscated there helmets and then wouldn't let them leave until they towed there bikes home or had someone bring them a dot helmet. Then he also ticketed them 90 dollars for it as well. A lot of the riders where stuck for almost 3 hours waiting for helmet/tow. I've heard some weird story's about law enforcement being picky about weird stuff. Like the time my dad and others where escorted out of Wyoming by a State patrolman during Sturgis b/c one of the guys handlebars where to high. I always wear my helmet (dot/snell) so I'm not an anti-helmet law person. When my parents bought each other helmets for christmas I made sure the ones they bought where dot. I don't know about this one as always some story's are based on facts and where they go from there I could only imagine. I've only been riding for two years, so is this something that does happen now and then or do you call bs on this one? | ||
| Curtyd |
Not possible with any of the 40 riders I know, but with a HOG poker run, it could be possible. I guess the helmets may not have been being used to protect much, 40 to 1 and they all just SIT and STAYED, now that's respect, GOOD BOYS!!! | ||
| Dasxb9s |
Phatkid... I would say that was possible. In my career between local and now a federal agency I have met a few who would write their own mother a ticket for not signaling for a lane change on a empty stretch of highway! It is not common, but when cops meet at conventions and the like it is not hard to finds stories like that from across a broad area. The stories are NOT told with admiration or approval of their actions! The Barney Fife syndrome as I call it. It is human nature. No matter what the profession, there is always someone who gets to be a rules book thumper. I am also a believer that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely! Be it a supervisor at a grocery store acting like General Patton related to breaks or time off, or some cop who reads that helmets have to be DOT approved and will check every helmet of every bike rider he stops. Hopefully, there is someone above that kind of person that jerks their lead from time to time to bring that person in check, but the higher the position, the fewer checks available to curtail. I can think of a few names in history of dictators that had absolute power and it was way past tragic! Contrary to what some may think, this helmet fetish you tell of is the exception and not the rule. I once worked with a guy who got spastic about U-turns. The Sheriff would have seized the helmets as evidence for his traffic court in the case someone would have went to trial rather than pay the fine and walk away. Had he not seized the helmets it would have been his word against the dudes. AND... no all judges do not always take the cops side. There are rules of evidence and if there is no physical evidence it becomes a "who do I believe more" thing for the judge. And yes... they tend to believe the cop given all things are equal in how it is presented in court. Technically... the cop and lawyers are "officers of the court" and this in theory means it is their duty to rightly present things to the court. Anyway, with the helmets he can show the judge they did not have DOT stickers affixed. That is assuming he tagged each helmet to match it to the exact rider to prove each case. He might have had a secondary reason of no helmet... no riding with a non-DOT helmet as a secondary action, guaranteeing no continuing violation. That would be pretty petty! It might have also been. Here is your ticket, I am seizing your helmet as evidence, it will be returned after your court appearance. If you ride off without a helmet, I will cite you again and arrest you so you can post bond. So... here are your options, you can wait for a helmet or a vehicle to trailer you and your bike from here, but do not ride without a helmet!. AND he might have sat there to watch them to see if anyone would give it a go without a helmet. That may be why there was such a wide compliance. The thought of having a bike towed is not a good one... it is common that bikes are damaged when handled by tow companies. (I am not trashing tow truck drivers now. Some companies are not properly prepared to tow bikes, and will tow them with the equipment they have. If any tow truck drivers are reading this... don't take this as a slam. It is not intended that way!) It could be the guy had a DOT helmet is the law thing. Or he might not have liked "bikers" and made them his hobby (I am sad to say I have heard of this). Or he might have truly had a thing about helmets and safety, and thought he was doing the "right" thing in his justification much like this zero tolerance on seat belts this holiday weekend. Sorry... but I don't often have short answers. But thought you might want the point of view from what I have seen as a cop. If this did happen, and there is a real possibility what you were told was totally what happened, please no one assume that I or every cop would agree that what this cop did was the best way to handle a helmet violation. Also... it is not just bike related. I have seen "things" about u-turns, excessive horn honking, writing on car windows with white shoe polish, license plate height, as examples. There are a few that have pet peeves about certain vehicle violations. I have to be totally candid on this. The child seatbelt and child safety seat laws came after I moved to the feds. If I were still doing patrol, my sure stop and great chance at getting a ticket would be for that. If an adult wants to drive without a belt (or wear a non-DOT approved helmet) and take the chance of getting more seriously injured or killed. They are all grown up and responsible for their own life. HOWEVER... when I see infants and toddlers and the such climbing all over the interior of a moving car... I know in the case of an accident those who are too young to make that choice and allowed to "car crawl" will be seriously hurt or killed. That is child endangerment. I have a big thing about kids! It is our responsibility to care for them so they can become grown up and at some point make their own choices. I had major issues about the guy we had in federal court for kidnaping a little girl and killing her because he wanted to know what it would be like to do that. He had no remorse. Or the little girl I saw who was a paraplegic, I asked what happened. She was sitting in an adults lap who was wearing a seat belt. In the collision the adult "folded" over the toddler and broke her spine. A preventable situation. Sorry... I went on a tangent!! Gawd I hope this does not spin out of control!!! Sorry for such a long post!!! LOL | ||
| Curtyd |
I can't quite believe why they all didn't just ride off, as a group, or as individuals albeit in 40 different directions. I guess the BAD BIKER image accompanied by all the black leather accessories didn't quite play out in practice. I am not sure there is authority for seizing the helmets, considering it was a civil citation, not a criminal violation. We both know the authority on the street is what the LEO says it is, BUT 40 bikers?? I am not advocating violent insurrection, but a democracy needs to also have non-violent dissent to stay viable. RIDE LIKE THE WIND... | ||
| Curtyd |
Didn't you ever think maybe it's his brother-in-law who has the local tow truck business and his cousin who is the traffic magistrate? WHOOPS, Blake, is that an out of line comment against all law enforcement? Damn, this self-censorship is darn difficult for me. | ||
| Phatkidwit1eye |
I'm still not entirely sure about the whole thing. I do know some of the smaller towns are not to kind to having their town invaded by riders. The only reason I could think of was b/c they stepped up the law enforcement a few weeks ago for the Memorial Day rush. Like this weekend if I remember correctly you can be pulled over for not having a seat belt on. Normally in Nebraska they can't pull you over for it unless you are doing something that would warrant being pulled over. Dax..I do agree with you totally about the seat belts. Nothing gets me more upset then seeing a lil kid with no seat belt/safety seat. As for 40 people getting pulled over. I guess I could see it after I saw a few riders this weekend. When we where stopped at a gas station a guy pulled up on a brand new v-rod. He had the normal "corporate" riding gear on. Which consisted of a polo shirt, shorts and lil penny loafers with no socks. If that cop pulled over a few of these guys I'm pretty sure they would have done every thing he wanted. As the guy pulled away I think just about every rider at this gas station shook his or her heads and started laughing. I've been looking around on the Internet to see if any of the local clubs posted any thing about this but I haven’t found anything yet. | ||
| Phatkidwit1eye |
Actually I e-mailed the state patrol about this and I really didn't get much but at least they sent me something. Pretty quick reply from them I might add. Mr. Schieffer, The Nebraska State Patrol does not have a list of approved helmets. Approved helmets are to bear a label stating they comply with, or exceed, D.O.T. standards. As you mentioned in abbreviated form, those standards are set forth in the United States Department of Transportation's Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 218, 49 C.F.R. 571.218. The Nebraska statute numbers regarding Protective Helmets for Motorcycles are: 60-6,278 to 60-6,282 Noncompliance of the Nebraska Protective Helmet law for Motorcycles is a traffic infraction and carries a fine of $50.00 plus court costs, which are currently $32.00. If you have further questions on this matter or another, please return to the NSP web site or you can e-mail me direct at the return address on this e-mail. Troop Headquarters Lincoln | ||
| Wyckedflesh |
My question is what prompted the officer to pull the riders over in the first place. Not all helmets show DOT on the outside (due to having fallen off). It would be quite possible to fight the ticket based on the original reason for the stop. Helmet check may not constitute "probable cause" much like the old style seatbelt laws, in which you couldn't be pulled over for it, but it was an add on ticket. Why did they all comply? You be the judge, 40 bikers show up in court all with the same ticket and all 40 fighting it...I would have also as a group. |
