DAMN Riders - No rules, Just ride!

Good news! Senate Bill 80 was killed in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. This bill would have required ATV riders to wear helmets on public and private property.

This was a joint effort by ABATE of MD and the MD OHV Alliance. ABATE lobbied directly and the Alliance worked behind the scenes "educating and informing."

Note: The Alliance is a 501(c)(3) and cannot lobby but it can "educate and inform."

Just curious. Why is this good? Don't get me wrong I'm anti-everything when it comes to legislation but on what grounds did this make sense in todays ATGATT atmosphere?

anotherguy wrote:Just curious. Why is this good? Don't get me wrong I'm anti-everything when it comes to legislation but on what grounds did this make sense in todays ATGATT atmosphere?

The private property aspect is objectionable to many people. (1) do you want someone coming into your backyard to check for helmets? (2) It is not going to be enforced. The local sheriff or police aren't going to check your yard or farm.

Public riding areas already require protective gear.

Why pass a law that will be totally ignored by law enforcement and is already required on public land?

We all agree ATGATT. I won't ride with someone who won't wear protective gear.

Ken, As you know I'm a solid supporter of all your great efforts and of the MD OHV Alliance. THANKS AGAIN for all you do!

IMO it is a big mistake for the Alliance to do anything that unnecessarily associates The Alliance with ABATE in the eyes of the public or of the gov. officials.

From what I know of ABATE and what I imagine most people think when they see the term ABATE is that it is a group that is anti-helmet law focused. This is at best a controversial position and is very ideologically and politically charged. IMO it is a position that many in the general public view as making motorcyclists look less than smart/responsible. Thus it undermines the support of motorcyclists among the general public and hurts our chances of getting public support for important NON political MC/OHV objectives. IMO this is a pragmatic view for OHV supporters to take regardless of where they personally stand on helmet laws.

BigBird wrote:Ken, As you know I'm a solid supporter of all your great efforts and of the MD OHV Alliance. THANKS AGAIN for all you do!

IMO it is a big mistake for the Alliance to do anything that unnecessarily associates The Alliance with ABATE in the eyes of the public or of the gov. officials.

From what I know of ABATE and what I imagine most people think when they see the term ABATE is that it is a group that is anti-helmet law focused. This is at best a controversial position and is very ideologically and politically charged. IMO it is a position that many in the general public view as making motorcyclists look less than smart/responsible. Thus it undermines the support of motorcyclists among the general public and hurts our chances of getting public support for important NON political MC/OHV objectives. IMO this is a pragmatic view for OHV supporters to take regardless of where they personally stand on helmet laws.

Hi Sam - I understand your sentiments completely. It took me a while to warm to these guys.

Having said that, this isn't your Momma's ABATE. They run a pretty slick operation. I'm not sure where this will lead or end. I'm not the only voice in that decision.

I decided to delete my true opinion and say that I agree with Sam. I trust your judgment and thank you for all of your efforts, but I have never agreed with ABATE's methods.

Where as I never allow any of my kids to ride without a helmet on my property is still is my property.
If they had made the law for only public property then I wouldn't have an issue with it.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend can be applied here.

IMHO laws of this kind need to be signed into place and then beaten soundly in the courts. California(!!!???),Ohio and Florida judges have declared speed cameras unconstitutional so the foundation is being laid to eliminate them nationwide. We need to endure some hardship to rid ourselves of this crap permanently. Do any of you really believe this is the last attempt to enact this legislation?

anotherguy wrote:IMHO laws of this kind need to be signed into place and then beaten soundly in the courts. California(!!!???),Ohio and Florida judges have declared speed cameras unconstitutional so the foundation is being laid to eliminate them nationwide. We need to endure some hardship to rid ourselves of this crap permanently. Do any of you really believe this is the last attempt to enact this legislation?

I like your logic. And no, this legislation is being pushed by the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America (SVIA) which represents the manufacturers. They want this to reduce their liability exposure. SVIA has been pushing laws in all the states to make riding ATVs, UTVs, side-by-sides on paved roads illegal for exactly the same reason. I listened to their lobbyist talk on that subject at the NOVCC conference.

I agree with Sam. I'd stay far away from ABATE. I'd also agree with farmers who'd say this law, if passed, was a pain for them.