Wheelies Will Soon Be Illegal

[ghaverkamp]

Maybe a lawyer type could chime in on this one, but since there is a proposed law to outlaw the matter, that implies that the action is legal at the moment. Couldn't someone in TN go out and wheelie all they want until the law is passed and a good lawyer could pretty much get the rider off scott-free?

 

"It wasn't illegal at the time because the law hadn't been enacted. Had the action (wheelie) been illegal, there would have been no need for the additional legislation."

 

Just curious how that works.

 

The problem is, pending legislation doesn't offer much in the way of the sense of the legislature. The legislature as a whole doesn't propose legislation, individual legislators do.

[Bud]

Maybe a lawyer type could chime in on this one, but since there is a proposed law to outlaw the matter, that implies that the action is legal at the moment. Couldn't someone in TN go out and wheelie all they want until the law is passed and a good lawyer could pretty much get the rider off scott-free?

 

"It wasn't illegal at the time because the law hadn't been enacted. Had the action (wheelie) been illegal, there would have been no need for the additional legislation."

 

Just curious how that works.

 

Trouble maker.

[GoGo Gadget]

Give me a break! Of course wheelies in traffic should be illegal.

Agreed. The point is they already are. It is called "reckless driving". The question under discussion is whether we need yet another law aimed specifically at wheelies. Personally, I would prefer to see driving while-under-the-influence-of-a-cell-phone classified as reckless driving.

Sorry, that's a hijack.

 

While a new law (or modification to an old one) might seem unneccessary, there is a possible valid reason. Having testified in many a traffic hearing, I can tell you that a "catch-all" type law like reckless driving is often vague enough to let some things that should be no-brainers slip through the cracks depending on the competence of the defending attourney and/or the lack thereof on the part of the judge. Specifying what is prohibited behavior helps fill in those cracks. Whether explicitly illegal or not, I am against wheelies on public roadways. That sort of thing belongs on a closed course in a controlled environment.

 

Yep, usually a "reckless driving" law states that the behaviour endangers apersons life or limb. One can argue that the rider is sufficiently skilled that his life was not in danger. So the law gets tweaked a bit.

 

That is why many states now have laws regarding cell phone useage. It was already illegal to not pay attention and drive into something. But now they have to be more specific.

[ericfoerster]

The problem is that most officers are not articulate enough to convey the proper message. To build a strong enough case for reckless driving you must be able to write a report that has the elements to the offense. This is where most officers fail. The average police report is written on a 4th grade level.

 

§ 545.401. RECKLESS[0] DRIVING[0]; OFFENSE. (a) A person

commits an offense if the person drives a vehicle in wilful or

wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.

[Foot]

David

 

If they actually pass this law, it will enforce just like all the other recent traffic laws. They will do nothing for 5 years then start the crack down. When challenged in court the state will say "The law has been on the books for 5 years, why are you just now protesting it!"

 

They passed the law 2 years ago that outlawed talking of a cell phone, without a earbud, while driving. I have not seen the first person pulled over for it, but just wait a few more years.

 

Here is the real funny part, it's legal to ride a motorcycle in TN with a bicycle helmet!

 

Alan

[russell_bynum]

The average police report is written on a 4th grade level.

 

[DaveTheAffable]

The problem is that most officers elbows are not articulate enough to convey the proper massage. To build a strong enough forearm for reckless driving you must be able to write a report that has a chart of the scientific elements to be offensive. This is where most officers flail. The average police report is written on a 4th generation dunkin donuts napkin that wasn't level.

 

§ 545.401. RECKLESS[0] MISQUOTING[0]; OFFENSE. (a) A person commits an offense if the person misquotes another poster in wilful or wanton disregard for the sanctity of the other persons post.

 

I'm GUILTY!

[KMG_365]

The problem is that most officers elbows are not articulate enough to convey the proper massage. To build a strong enough forearm for reckless driving you must be able to write a report that has a chart of the scientific elements to be offensive. This is where most officers flail. The average police report is written on a 4th generation dunkin donuts napkin that wasn't level.

 

§ 545.401. RECKLESS[0] MISQUOTING[0]; OFFENSE. (a) A person commits an offense if the person misquotes another poster in wilful or wanton disregard for the sanctity of the other persons post.

 

I'm GUILTY!

Damn you Dave!

 

"Bailiff!! Whack his peepee!"

[ELP_JC]

I, for one, don't think a wheelie (at any speed) belongs on the streets, so don't have any problem with them getting banned. In fact, I'd vote to ban it in all states. Unfortunately, that's what it takes to avoid sneaky lawyers getting thier squidly clients off the hook: 'front wheel off the ground' is not subject to interpretation.

 

By the way, it wouldn't be bad to ban straight exhausts (no mufflers) and riding without a helmet. Due to public nuisance and health care costs, I bet they're coming sooner or later. And I wouldn't oppose them either.

 

I don't mind laws that can actually make our sport safer to ourselves and others. What's wrong with that? Later.

[russell_bynum]

I don't mind laws that can actually make our sport safer to ourselves and others. What's wrong with that? Later.

 

Might as well ban any motorcycle capable of exceeding the speed limit.

 

Now that I think about it, better just ban all moving vehicles. Anything in the name of safety.

 

 

Driving/Riding in a reckless manner is already against the law.

[DiggerJim]

By the way, it wouldn't be bad to ban straight exhausts (no mufflers) and riding without a helmet. Due to public nuisance and health care costs, I bet they're coming sooner or later. And I wouldn't oppose them either.

And therein lies the slippery slope. Motorcycle accidents have higher rates of serious injury than do auto accidents. Thus, if you are willing to sacrifice freedome of choice for something like helmets on the grounds they reduce health care costs, then you need to be willing to follow the logical conclusion that motorcycle riding itself be illegal on the same grounds.

 

I spent a dozen years picking bodies off the pavement as an EMT and in a sick way we were dissapointed with the effect of seatbelt laws -- trauma went down (and that's really the only thing a pre-hospital emergency care worker can impact positively). Have yet to see motorcycles with seatbelts and we always had something we could work on - broken bones, crushed chests, head injuries, etc. on bike accidents. Heck, even got to ride the evac helicopter a few times bringing cyclists into the hospital.

 

Jim

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin, attr.

[wrestleantares]

Is the goal of the legislation to protect the biker doing the wheelie from harm (in which case I'll line up in the ACLU line) or to protect the other motoring public from the danger the biker doing the wheelie causes? In which case, if there are already laws on the books for careless and wreckless driving, enforce those!

 

Here's the problem (not necessarily same for all states/jurisdictions):

 

There are laws that deal with reckless driving. They usually leave it up to the officer's discretion whether to give a reckless driving ticket - or some other violation. Reckless driving is usually not defined. As our society gets stupider and less able to make logical decisions (like arguing that 118 MPH in the dark on an unfamiliar rode when you are 17 is not reckless), then the law has to catch up with stupidity and spell things out.

[David]

The funny thing is that the new law has an examption: you can do wheelies in a parade at less than 30 mph.

 

No kidding, and that struck me as one of those laws we'll read about 100 years from now and scratch our heads at what it even means.

[rfc1992]

The funny thing is that the new law has an examption: you can do wheelies in a parade at less than 30 mph.

 

I guess you can wheelie as fast as you want so long as the parade you are in is going <= 30 MPH.

 

No kidding, and that struck me as one of those laws we'll read about 100 years from now and scratch our heads at what it even means.

 

Hey, I am scratching now (sorry, that sounded so much better prior to seeing it in print).

 

This is like Alabama making pi = 3, Ohio selling fireworks for use out of state, or Thumb making another rule - pointless.

 

Since it is limited to front wheels, stoppies are fine.

[outpost22]

So when one does this wheelie, does he have to have "intent" to commit this crime, or does inadvertent wheel raising count as a crime too? Or does "intent" only apply to "criminal" activity as opposed to "citations".

Lawyers, please advise.

[Ken H.]

Reckless driving is usually not defined. <snip> the law has to catch up with stupidity and spell things out.

And unfortunately that's the point that Russell (and others) are missing. It's not that wheelies weren't already illegal, they were (reckless driving) it's that the law as is could at times be unenforceable as too broad. Spelling it out is not to make wheelies double illegal, it is to make it enforceable in court that they are illegal.

[russell_bynum]

Reckless driving is usually not defined. <snip> the law has to catch up with stupidity and spell things out.

And unfortunately that's the point that Russell (and others) are missing. It's not that wheelies weren't already illegal, they were (reckless driving) it's that the law as is could at times be unenforceable as too broad. Spelling it out is not to make wheelies double illegal, it is to make it enforceable in court that they are illegal.

 

Actually, I'm very much NOT missing that point.

 

It is good that the law does not specifically list out every little thing that is reckless. There are times when a wheelie isn't a big deal. There are times when it is.

 

This would be the same as if they decided that anything over 100mph is reckless driving. There are plenty of times/places, where it isn't even close to reckless to go 100mph. And there are times when 35mph is reckless.

 

Let the law be fuzzy. Let human beings with actual brains work it out on a case by case basis. If I'm doing something that's not reckless I shouldn't get a ticket for being reckless.

 

Unfortunately, that means that sometimes some people who were being reckless will get off because they found a good enough lawyer. So be it.

[hANNAbONE]

Well said......did I miss that ACLU resignation....

My hero - founder of the American Frontwheel Lifters

 

Long live the front wheel lifter

 

 

...wHO'S dAT...Red Fox..??