|
|||||||
| Register | Home | Forum | Active Topics | Gallery | Garage | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Motorcycle Escrow | Insurance |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
| Sponsored Links | |||
Advertisement | |||
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Kings Park N.Y.
Posts: 597
|
Gotta love NY. Take your money and freedoms and disguise it as a safety precaution.
__________________
![]() 2001 spirit 1100 , vance and hines long shots, , a few other small mods. Now also with a mustang seat
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
|
You can easily add NJ PA MA and Conn to that group......That said i have mixed feelings about these things.. I would be for checkpoints for all drivers on public roads IF it were shown that there is a need because of infractions Personally I have no issue being stopped if it takes a few drunk drivers off the roads that night. My little inconvenience to maybe save a life is well spent IMO.
__________________
Last edited by Hondaguy; 12-16-2012 at 09:00 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 675
|
Oh come on!!! First seatbelts. Then helmets. Next thing you know, we're all going to have to have health insurance. Wait...we what... he did...?? Oh...
Hell, I think it's a great idea. My bike is in order. My pipes aren't too loud for local ordinances. My helmet meets requirements and I wear it every time I ride. I'll make my way through a checkpoint and won't feel the need to sue anyone.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,795
|
"Courts then must balance whether the government need to enhance safety is greater than the interference with individual liberty. The appellate judges agreed with the lower court's analysis that it was."
"Applying this balancing test, we conclude that the well catalogued public interest in highway safety is well served by the safety checkpoint program and outweighs the interference with individual liberty in this case," the second circuit ruled in a brief, summary opinion. "Accordingly, the district court did not err in concluding that there was no constitutional violation."" So, what they're saying is, yes we are violating your constitutional rights, but it's okay because we have a really good reason.
__________________
Hey look, a covered bridge... ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: San Jacinto, Calif
Posts: 646
|
So why limit it to motorcycle safety? Lets not get permits when we build houses or office buildings, let us just do what we want and get away with anything that is unsafe because we have a right not to be told by the government what is right and what isn't!!
__________________
IF YOU ARE BORN ONCE YOU WILL DIE TWICE IF YOU ARE BORN TWICE YOU WILL DIE ONCE |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 (permalink) | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Holbrook, Mass.
Posts: 193
|
Quote:
Joe your analogy is invalid. If My having no helmet on, Might effect an unsuspecting family, or person 5, 10, or in fact years after I am gone, then it would be valid. Building code violations rarely have any effect on the person that did the work. In fact records show that the failures often occur years after the company that did the work is out of business. More often than not the owner of that company has also passed. It leaves the current owner holding the bag, or dead.
__________________
VT-1100C2 Vance & Hines Long Exhaust . K&N air filter |
|
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links | |
Advertisement | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|