Motorcyclist profiling bill to CA Assembly 4-19

norcalkid

norcalkid

Well-known member
Do we have the motorcycle only checkpoints they refer too here in California?
 
Last edited:
jdhu

jdhu

Well-known member
Interesting bill, and I'm surprised these legislators considered the issue important enough to try and pass a bill. They must have a strong moto lobby in their districts.

I'm not sure if this is more about moto "gangs," or simply cops stopping motorcyclists because "you look fast." I have been stopped a couple of times for the same reason (video shows I'm going same speed as traffic, at/under speed limit, still get stopped, cop says it's because of moto).
 
L

Lionel Cosgrove

Well-known member
So law enforcement can’t stop a motorcyclist absent a lawful reason....which is already specified in the 4th Amendment as well as state law. This is what legislators are wasting their time on? Awesome!
 
NoobCorpse

NoobCorpse

Well-known member
So this bill passing will stop that CHP Dodge truck w/ Camper shell ticketing folks by camping out at the Saratoga 76 / STP / Alice's?
 
DataDan

DataDan

Mama says he's bona fide
Imaginary problem.

Oh we got Trouble
Right here in California
With a capital T and that rhymes with P
And that stands for Profiling.​
No matter. The AMA needlessly scares the crap out of a few riders who join up and help pay the bills. Assembly members scare the crap out of a few voters who will remember them in November. And no one gets "profiled".

Of course, motorcycle-focused enforcement efforts funded by US DOT and allocated by California OTS will continue, since they pull over motorcyclists for, you know, breaking the law, not because of their leathers.

Regarding the checkpoint problem. Note that the state of New York does not appear in AMA's list of states where it is now prohibited. Yet New York was the ONLY place it ever occurred and was used by the AMA in a previous scare campaign.
 
RightCoastBias

RightCoastBias

F8TRED
Seems like fluffly useless and typical AMA shit. Pandering to wanna be outlaws, instead of pushing and supporting legistlation that will increase ridership, safety and generally support riders.
 
Last edited:
Surj

Surj

Uneasy Rider
DataDan said:
Imaginary problem.
Click to expand...

Yep. This is less of an AMA-driven thing, though they're involved, than ABATE, MMA, COC, MCANSG, etc, rallying around MCANSG's title and slogan: "Motorcycle Clubs Are Not Street Gangs."

The MC crowd don't like being fucked with for their patches. It's not a motorcyclist problem, it's a club problem, if a problem at all.

We ran a "position statement" on the topic in CityBike in our September 2017 issue ("Motorcycle Clubs Are Not A Protected Class" - page 4) and have been intentionally ignoring this bill. There are other issues that are actually important to mobilize and make noise on.

An excerpt:
"Never mind that in an abstract sense, you cannot simultaneously dress up in the trappings of badassery and then cry foul when people focus on the bad part of your ass.

It’s disappointing to see supposed freedom fighters, those that used to employ slogans like “education not legislation,” some of whom pulled out that old “no new laws” standby as their sole reason for opposing a law codifying lane splitting, disingenuously pushing for new laws to prohibit the supposedly widespread problem of motorcyclist profiling.

Motorcyclists may occasionally encounter someone who doesn’t like motorcycles, or beards, or tattoos, or maybe just stupid-loud pipes, but they don’t experience systematic profiling. What motorcyclists experience is something that sociologists refer to as “people being dicks.”

Profiling happens to clubs, when it happens. But neither clubs, nor motorcyclists are a protected class under the rule of law, nor should they be.

We reject the notion of pursuing legislation on this matter; as they say, “existing laws are enough.” We also reject the notion that club profiling is an issue of concern to motorcyclists at large—it’s not. It’s an issue for organizations that identify themselves with patches and colors and insignia, whether those organizations are built around the motorcycling or scrapbooking lifestyle."
 
rsrider

rsrider

47% parasite 53% ahole
27612581298_ec3a4027b5_o.jpg
 
M

MysterYvil

Mr. Bad Example
Anna Caballero was a councilmember then mayor here in Salinas. If her hand is in this bill there is some kind of angle. She does nothing unless there's something in it for her.

She was also a defense attorney, so any law that would hinder police and/or get evidence thrown out is wonderful in her book.
 
clutchslip

clutchslip

Not as fast as I look.
Some are living in the past. I get profiled because I dress like Ricky Racer, and ride a Ricky Racer bike. I swear CHP wants us to run so they can prove how badass they can ride. :laughing

It would be great to not always be the primary target for traffic enforcement. The same thing happens to sports cars. That's why they are usually the slowest damn thing on the road. :ride
 
J

jwb

Well-known member
You can not be "profiled" based on your overt actions, like riding a motorcycle. Profiling is a problem when based on inherent features like race. It is not a problem when it's based on your free choices. Examples:

Bad profiling: let's pull over that black guy, black guys are all assholes.

This is bad, because nobody can help being born black.

Good profiling: let's pull over that Dodge Charger; only an asshole would drive one.

This is OK because only an asshole drives a Charger.
 
Blankpage

Blankpage

alien
clutchslip said:
Some are living in the past. I get profiled because I dress like Ricky Racer, and ride a Ricky Racer bike. I swear CHP wants us to run so they can prove how badass they can ride. :laughing

It would be great to not always be the primary target for traffic enforcement. The same thing happens to sports cars. That's why they are usually the slowest damn thing on the road. :ride
Click to expand...

And hot chicks.


No I'm not a hot chick
 
295566

295566

Numbers McGee
jwb said:
You can not be "profiled" based on your overt actions, like riding a motorcycle. Profiling is a problem when based on inherent features like race. It is not a problem when it's based on your free choices. Examples:

Bad profiling: let's pull over that black guy, black guys are all assholes.

This is bad, because nobody can help being born black.

Good profiling: let's pull over that Dodge Charger; only an asshole would drive one.

This is OK because only an asshole drives a Charger.
Click to expand...

Surely this is sarcasm?
 
Jalopyshoppe

Jalopyshoppe

idiot
jwb said:
You can not be "profiled" based on your overt actions, like riding a motorcycle. Profiling is a problem when based on inherent features like race. It is not a problem when it's based on your free choices. Examples:

Bad profiling: let's pull over that black guy, black guys are all assholes.

This is bad, because nobody can help being born black.

Good profiling: let's pull over that Dodge Charger; only an asshole would drive one.

This is OK because only an asshole drives a Charger.
Click to expand...

Substitute Challenger or Camaro, and you have my vote.
 
Surj

Surj

Uneasy Rider
moto-rama said:
I have seen the CHP setup "Pullover" sites alongside Highway 92, pull over Just Motos.

I suppose they must think they are within their rights.
Click to expand...

No, you haven't. If you look at the data from those operations, they pull over a lot of cars, too.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top