How many people here are a members of the AMA?

[skinny_tom (aka boney)]

I find the posts complaining that the AMA doesn't support helmet laws, doesn't support tiered licensing, isn't specific enough about noise limits, etc. to be interesting. What are we looking for... an organization that will be efficient in increasing the number of regulations/restrictions on motorcyclists?

 

 

Well now that you ask. It is my opinion that we're going to get stuck with more legislation whether we want it or not. Those well paid legistalors have to do something, and frequently, making us safe from oursleves is on their lists.

 

Why not get the legislation enacted that might actually help us, rather than spending our time fighting inevitable intrusions into our sport that we do not want. We can fight the good fight and end up with a watered down bill that no one likes, or we can propose useful legislation that has the possibility to favorably promote our sport in the future.

[Kraynak]

By attempting to be a big-tent organization, by trying to accommodate the needs of off-road riders along with road riders, by putting helmets and noise in battles against access, they come off as unfocused, ineffectual, and quite possibly more harm than good.

 

Your opinion in which I respectfully disagree with. Thanks.

 

I was simply answering rmurwin's question.

 

My bad I missed that.

[smiller]

It is my opinion that we're going to get stuck with more legislation whether we want it or not.

That's actually a rather common view from what I read here, but personally I don't agree with it. If regulation isn't required (i.e. no clear benefit can be demonstrated and proven) then the regulation should be resisted, period. Dancing with the devil doesn't get you anywhere.

[stubble!]

I find the posts complaining that the AMA doesn't support helmet laws, doesn't support tiered licensing, isn't specific enough about noise limits, etc. to be interesting. What are we looking for... an organization that will be efficient in increasing the number of regulations/restrictions on motorcyclists?

 

Yes and no.

 

There are those certain issues that tend to get the non-motorcycling public fired up. With enough catalytic momentum, I fear the "wrong" laws will end up getting passed if we, the MC community, don't do enough to get the "right" regulations in place first.

 

Those issues mentioned are good examples. How many unskilled 18 year-olds dying on literbikes does it take before the public in a given community (over)reacts? How many Mr. SPS Straightpipes setting off car alarms at midnight before my community tries to ban custom exhaust? (and get it enforced?)

 

I'm all for rights, in general fanatically so. I just worry we stand to lose more by not moderating ourselves. We can do this by intentionally setting the path, supporting regulations that we can live with. We can't just cover our ears and hope it goes away.

 

As for the AMA, I'm not necessarily arguing for, or against, joining. Personally, I remain on the fence. While I agree with the concept of supporting what we have, even if it's not 100% in line with each of our desires, I also haven't yet felt that that actual percentage has been high enough for this particular ATGATT-wearin' conservative-land-use-supportin' quiet-pipe-revvin' motorcyclist.

[rmurwin]

So you are comparing an Automobile club to a motorcycle club? You can't be serious.

 

I was simply answering rmurwin's question.

 

Hey! Those were Matts_VSTROM's questions. He's a different Florida wiseacre altogether...

 

[Kraynak]

So far the poll is almost 50/50 with members and non members. I find that interesting to say the least.

[leikam]

There was nothing sarcastic about my comment above. I would love to see someone start an organization. Do you think this is a impossible thing to do?

 

There was nothing sarcastic about my membership offer, but if you want to treat it as a joke then perhaps you'll indulge others when they decline to join the organizations that work for your goals.

[Bud]

I am also a member of the Comedian association, and Bud and Michael are nominated for board members. This entitles you guys to automatically hijack any thread on this or any other board when you have nothing to really say.

 

Thanks.

 

I guess you are the charter member since you also hijacked the thread to let us know of our nominations?

 

However, I must respectfully decline. I can not accept membership into any organization that would have me as a member.

 

I do, however, laugh a lot and find humor in many things, your post included.

[Bud]

It's unlikely that any us will agree with everything the AMA does 100%, but we can recognize the ways in which they serve the overall good of motorcycling.

 

[Merging several responses together...]

 

Actually, I have a difficult time recognizing any such thing. When you get right down to it, the only major incursion into these so-called rights have been closed off roads. Those can be almost entirely tied to noise. The AMA's mealy-mouthed position regarding motorcycle noise is well documented and inexcusable, and it leaves them fighting access rights that are a direct result.

 

By attempting to be a big-tent organization, by trying to accommodate the needs of off-road riders along with road riders, by putting helmets and noise in battles against access, they come off as unfocused, ineffectual, and quite possibly more harm than good.

 

In contrast to Stephen's position, I don't feel that I gain a voice by joining an organization. Instead, I lose my voice at the expense of the voices of others. I don't particularly want to lend my tones to the convoluted, contradictory positions. I don't see any reason to blindly support them. What's more, because I can't see any reason to support them non-blindly, I don't have any intention of becoming a member.

 

Is it going to help anything for me to write about what I see as the failings on this discussion board? Well, if there are people who agree with me, there certainly may be a benefit. In actuality, probably not much of one. Does that mean I should either ignore all of this or go join another organization? Of course not, and such a position is ridiculous.

 

+1

[Kraynak]

I do, however, laugh a lot and find humor in many things, your post included.

Glad I can help. Thats what the Comedian club is all about. Still waiting for you to make a point though. Other then

+1 on what someone elses post.

[Bud]

I think that you'll find that we are all very serious about our rights. Those riders that aren't most likely would not be on a forum such as this one.

 

As I see it, the main problem that you'd face if you were to start your own organization comes right down to what has to be done to enroll as many members as possible, to make your organization a "respectable" voice, while simultaneously not being seen as "selling out" on the issues that matter most to each one of your members. This is a huge order to fill.

 

Sounds like the AMA ain't doing too bad a job, if you ask me. That's how I justify being a member.

 

But, I do love me some sarcasm and heck, the AMA is just as good a mule as anyone else.

 

Interesting. What "rights" do we as riders have?

 

The license to ride a bike is a "privilege" granted by the state and can be rescinded for a variety of reasons. There is no "right" to ride a motorcycle.

 

Denver has recently shown there is no "right" to piss off most of the public with loud pipes.

 

There is no legal "right" to ride w/o a helmet. There are just no requirement (in most states)that you have to do so.

 

Lawyers, please feel free to jump in here and give us your take on our "rights" as motorcycle riders.

 

This make you feel better Kranky

[dmk]

Actually, I have a difficult time recognizing any such thing. When you get right down to it, the only major incursion into these so-called rights have been closed off roads.

 

Perhaps the only major successful incursion, but if not for the AMA's efforts, there would have been far more I think.

 

Those can be almost entirely tied to noise.

 

Perhaps in CA, but not so much in the Northeast. In NY and MA for example, closures been more about erosion and other environmental impacts.

 

By attempting to be a big-tent organization, by trying to accommodate the needs of off-road riders along with road riders, by putting helmets and noise in battles against access, they come off as unfocused, ineffectual, and quite possibly more harm than good.

 

On some issues, you're probably right. Their effectiveness is probably greater on issues where there is a consensus in the motorcycling community.

 

In contrast to Stephen's position, I don't feel that I gain a voice by joining an organization. Instead, I lose my voice at the expense of the voices of others.

 

That seems idealistic to me. At the higher levels of government (state and federal) lobbies tend to have a lot more influence than individuals. If you're concerned that the AMA looks unfocused, consider what millions of individual motorcyclists with different agendas look like.

[dmk]

Interesting. What "rights" do we as riders have?

 

The license to ride a bike is a "privilege" granted by the state and can be rescinded for a variety of reasons. There is no "right" to ride a motorcycle.

 

Denver has recently shown there is no "right" to piss off most of the public with loud pipes.

 

There is no legal "right" to ride w/o a helmet. There are just no requirement (in most states)that you have to do so.

 

Lawyers, please feel free to jump in here and give us your take on our "rights" as motorcycle riders.

 

This make you feel better Kranky

 

P.S. Kraynak, ^^^ that's what a real hijack looks like.

[Bud]

Interesting. What "rights" do we as riders have?

 

The license to ride a bike is a "privilege" granted by the state and can be rescinded for a variety of reasons. There is no "right" to ride a motorcycle.

 

Denver has recently shown there is no "right" to piss off most of the public with loud pipes.

 

There is no legal "right" to ride w/o a helmet. There are just no requirement (in most states)that you have to do so.

 

Lawyers, please feel free to jump in here and give us your take on our "rights" as motorcycle riders.

 

This make you feel better Kranky

 

P.S. Kraynak, ^^^ that's what a real hijack looks like.

 

Busted.

[rmurwin]

I think that you'll find that we are all very serious about standing up for what should be our rights...

 

Interesting. What "rights" do we as riders have?

 

The license to ride a bike is a "privilege" granted by the state and can be rescinded for a variety of reasons. There is no "right" to ride a motorcycle.

 

Denver has recently shown there is no "right" to piss off most of the public with loud pipes.

 

There is no legal "right" to ride w/o a helmet. There are just no requirement (in most states)that you have to do so.

 

Lawyers, please feel free to jump in here and give us your take on our "rights" as motorcycle riders.

 

This make you feel better Kranky

 

Fixed it for you, and also I have been advised by counsel not to respond to thread-jacks.

[skinny_tom (aka boney)]

So you are comparing an Automobile club to a motorcycle club? You can't be serious.

 

I was simply answering rmurwin's question.

 

Hey! Those were Matts_VSTROM's questions. He's a different Florida wiseacre altogether...

 

 

I apologize for the mistake.

[Matts_12GS]

The AMA does not support any kind of mandatory training and/or tiered licensing.

 

Hey Boney,

What is the benefit, and let's quantify it if at all possible, that you see in imposing a tiered licensing system?

 

Less dead teenagers and middle life crisis-ers.

 

You got some good empirical numbers on that?

Again, inquiring minds want to know because blanket statements like that can lead to a whole lot of restrictions that I'm not really sure any of us want to deal with.

 

Sort of like the old bumper sticker says "When guns are outlawed, I'll become an outlaw."

[Dances_With_Wiener_Dogs]

I had been a member for around 15 years. I stopped my membership when I learned about the Washington Road Riders Assoc, a state lobby group. WRRA works harder for me at the state level. I have a finite amount of money budgeted for these things and I felt the WRRA was a better fit.

[Deadboy]

I had been a member for around 15 years. I stopped my membership when I learned about the Washington Road Riders Assoc, a state lobby group. WRRA works harder for me at the state level. I have a finite amount of money budgeted for these things and I felt the WRRA was a better fit.

 

WRRA is a great group of folks and I am happy to see them getting the support they deserve. I have had the opportunity to meet a number of their leaders over the past few years and have nothing but praise for their efforts in WA state.

 

It was truly a sad day when we lost Karen Bolin.......

[skinny_tom (aka boney)]

Sorry Matt, I don't have time to do the homework right now.

 

My point is that anybody can go down to the store and buy a GSXR1000 or a Harley EVO. Anybody.

 

That's all fine and dandy in a free world. Except that they're unleashing these beasts-of-a-motorcycle on us, on the non-riding public, and on themselves.

 

Look, not one person here would go buy a parachute and jump out of a plane without proper training. Most of us probably wouldn't pick up some SCUBA tanks and jump in the ocean either, but we're all peaches and cream when someone wants to unleash a deadly projectile in public. Not only one that can kill them (pretty much the only thing skydiving and SCUBA have in common with motorcycling) but one that can take out others as well.

 

I don't know what your abilities are, and I'm not gonna say mine are better, but I've been riding for a long time (as a percentage of age all you sMarty's) and I can get in over my head in less than seconds on my 50 HP thumper.

 

AT LEAST with some training and maybe some time on a smaller bike, new riders would have a chance to build their skills and knowledge without having to completely wreck their lives first.

 

Of course the alternative that is probably coming down the pipe:

Engine size and horsepower limits on motorcycles. That's right, if the new inexperienced rider can't handle the power, then no-one can! At least that's how the gov'ment works around here...

[Matts_12GS]

Tom,

I am not disagreeing with what you are saying in principle, I am disagreeing with what I am inferring is that tiered licensing is a panacea to solve the societal ills of the unprepared and underskilled.

 

I would support some type of legislation like this IF and only IF there were a similar path taken for automobiles. There's no reason for a 16 year old to be able without skills and training to buy a 6000lb SUV or large 4x4 and go ripping down the highways. But, until we here in the USA start importing more lower horsepower options in both cars and motorcycles, there's no way this can be a reasonable expectation.

 

This I place squarely in the hands of the marketplace. If people want smaller cars/bikes those that build them will likely bring them to a large market. However, we seem nationally obsessed with "mine is bigger." Thus 1500cc cruisers are now "middleweights" 12-1400cc motorcycles are now "sport" machines and 6-7 liter car engines are becoming more common.

 

That is much like the fight I have with helmet laws. While I personally think that it's a lifestyle issue, I don't think that the state should be able to tell me I have to wear a seat belt but not a helmet. Minors, yes to both, and I encourage people to use both (sometimes together!), but I don't want to compell them to do one and not the other.

 

Sadly, I think that the coming death of our free society and the American experience is being hastened along by such desire to protect us from ourselves.

[Kraynak]

I would support some type of legislation like this IF and only IF there were a similar path taken for automobiles. There's no reason for a 16 year old to be able without skills and training to buy a 6000lb SUV or large 4x4 and go ripping down the highways. But, until we here in the USA start importing more lower horsepower options in both cars and motorcycles, there's no way this can be a reasonable expectation.

Exactly, whether people believe it or not the public does not like motorcycles, governments act on it cause of the public complaining about them.

You don't see people bitching about these people riding around in their big a** SUV (I like to call them Urban Tanks) with no more training, then their driving test they took when they where 16 in that little compact car.

Although these soccer moms that drive tanks are more careless IMHO then anyone on the road. What to talk about danger for Christ sake. Where is all the laws against these type vehicles? There isn't any, because they make a lot more money then our little niche of a Motorcycle industry.

The Government is constantly making the Motorcycle industry make their bikes have cleaner emissions. Are they serious? You have to be kidding me. I bet you can take the worse emission producing bike out there and it would not come close to the amount produced by a one of those Urban Tanks. This is just another method the government is using to rid the country of Motorcycles. That’s why we need more organizations to stop these actions, or at least tell them we are aware of what you are doing.

Ok I need to think happy thoughts now.

[MrHondamatic]

I'm working on year 5 of my current membership right now. I had about 5 years under my belt back in the early 80's, but let it lapse while I was between bikes.

[Bud]

The Government is constantly making the Motorcycle industry make their bikes have cleaner emissions. Are they serious? You have to be kidding me. I bet you can take the worse emission producing bike out there and it would not come close to the amount produced by a one of those Urban Tanks. This is just another method the government is using to rid the country of Motorcycles.

 

I like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next person, but.....

 

Reduced emissions for motorcycles are a result of European standards. I doubt the American Motorcycle Association has much leverage with the EU.

 

However, operating a gas-powered lawnmower for one hour emits as much air pollution as driving a car for 13 hours, according to the California Air Resources Board. You don't see may folks clambering about the government taking away their lawnmower "rights" when new standards for mowers were introduced to reduce emissions.

 

The motorcycle industry has lobbyist working full time for them to insure that the government doesn't make it harder to sell or ride motorcycles. Do you honestly think that Harley Davidson isn't on top of any legislation which would hurt their sales of 350,000+ HD's next year?

 

AMA? When you try to be everything to everyone, you are nothing to anyone. Their nebulous stands on noise and safety gear for example.

[Kraynak]

AMA? When you try to be everything to everyone, you are nothing to anyone. Their nebulous stands on noise and safety gear for example.

As with any organization you are a member of, you can write and tell them what is important to you, thus the reason their stand on the helmet issue.

I think there are a lot of Harley riders that belong to the AMA and those with the biggest #s speak the loudest.

I would never ride without a helmet, but it's my head not anyone else’s.

 

However, operating a gas-powered lawnmower for one hour emits as much air pollution as driving a car for 13 hours,

I love these statistics. They are so broad, what type of car?

[UberXY]

The Government is constantly making the Motorcycle industry make their bikes have cleaner emissions. Are they serious? You have to be kidding me. I bet you can take the worse emission producing bike out there and it would not come close to the amount produced by a one of those Urban Tanks. This is just another method the government is using to rid the country of Motorcycles.

 

The government started imposing emissions standards on cars 40 years ago in 1967. As a method to rid the country of cars, it has failed miserably, so it may be a bit premature to predict the end of motorcycling.

 

I think that BMW has been equipping various models with catalytic convertors for almost 20 years now. It does not seem to have had a serious negative effect on performance or sales.

[Bud]

As with any organization you are a member of, you can write and tell them what is important to you, thus the reason their stand on the helmet issue.

I think there are a lot of Harley riders that belong to the AMA and those with the biggest #s speak the loudest.

I would never ride without a helmet, but it's my head not anyone else’s.

 

Hmmm... how many Harley owners vs how many BMW owners in the US? Don't think if every BMW owner joined the AMA that it would make a bit of difference.

 

I don't join organizations to try to change them. I join organizations that have positions that I support.

 

Would it make any sense to join the IRA to try to get them to support gun control?

 

 

 

 

 

I love these statistics. They are so broad, what type of car?

 

What difference does it make what type of car? Pollution is harmful to everyone's health. So it makes sense, when the industry won't take action to reduce pollution from their lawnmowers, for the government does something to address the issue. Voluntary compliance doesn't work because profit motives require the lowest cost to generate the highest profit.

 

One more example. W/O laws requiring drivers to wear seat belts, how many drivers would wear them? Yet there is no national drivers organization lobbying congress to repeal laws requiring their use. What about drivers "rights" to drive W/O being required to use them?

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

The Government is constantly making the Motorcycle industry make their bikes have cleaner emissions. Are they serious? You have to be kidding me. I bet you can take the worse emission producing bike out there and it would not come close to the amount produced by a one of those Urban Tanks.

 

The cleanest-running bikes will still be far worse than any current-model car or SUV one cars to compare against it. Closed-loop fuel injection and a 3-way cat helps the Beemers, but there's still no EGR; in spite of the cat, NOx emissions will still be pretty bad. And even with the cat, BMW will have sized it so that the hydrocarbon and CO emissions come in just under the limit for bikes, which is quite a bit more relaxed than for other vehicles.

 

Whether the attention toward bikes is justified is a separate matter. The number of aggregate annual miles ridden by all bikes is a very small number compared to the aggregate miles driven by all cars/SUV's and all OTR trucks, so the total emissions contribution from bikes is only a small part of the big picture.

[Kraynak]

Hmmm... how many Harley owners vs how many BMW owners in the US? Don't think if every BMW owner joined the AMA that it would make a bit of difference.

Yeah, keep that in mind when voting on the next president. My vote doesn't count?

 

What difference does it make what type of car?

Cause different cars produce different amounts of pollution. The static is garbage.

 

One more example. W/O laws requiring drivers to wear seat belts, how many drivers would wear them? Yet there is no national drivers organization lobbying congress to repeal laws requiring their use. What about drivers "rights" to drive W/O being required to use them?

I don't like this law either. You should be allowed to not wear a seal belt if you’re an adult. My kid doesn't on a Public School bus, when someone besides me is driving him that I don't know. No sense to me sorry. This is another subject all together.

[Kraynak]

Whether the attention toward bikes is justified is a separate matter. The number of aggregate annual miles ridden by all bikes is a very small number compared to the aggregate miles driven by all cars/SUV's and all OTR trucks, so the total emissions contribution from bikes is only a small part of the big picture.

That was my point.

[Bud]

My kid doesn't on a Public School bus, when someone besides me is driving him that I don't know. No sense to me sorry. This is another subject all together.

 

Then by your reasoning, join the School Bus Manufacture organization and vote in those who would support mandatory seat belts and their use on school buses. It's a lobby that keeps them from being required and used by children.

[UberXY]

[Bud]

 

Pimp my bus Daddy.

[leikam]

However, operating a gas-powered lawnmower for one hour emits as much air pollution as driving a car for 13 hours

I love these statistics. They are so broad, what type of car?

 

This is all public information. You might start at CARB resources for Small Off-Road Engines and Equipment. Enjoy!

[Bud]

"By 2010, California's small engine regulations will

reduce air pollutants by 20.5 tons a day more than

required by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's

rules. This reduction is equivalent to eliminating air

pollution from 275,000 automobiles."

 

Snip from CARB report.

[Bud]

Whether the attention toward bikes is justified is a separate matter. The number of aggregate annual miles ridden by all bikes is a very small number compared to the aggregate miles driven by all cars/SUV's and all OTR trucks, so the total emissions contribution from bikes is only a small part of the big picture.

That was my point.

 

Sorry, that wasn't your point.

 

The Government is constantly making the Motorcycle industry make their bikes have cleaner emissions. Are they serious? You have to be kidding me. I bet you can take the worse emission producing bike out there and it would not come close to the amount produced by a one of those Urban Tanks.

 

Your point was the worst bike would come close to the SUV. Since the standards are so much higher for the SUV, I doubt it would be close.

 

 

But, in your defense, the total from lawnmowers is much greater. And were aren't even talking about chainsaws.

 

Using a commercial chain saw—powered by a two-stroke

engine—for two hours produces the same amount of smogforming

hydrocarbon emissions as driving ten 1995 cars about

250 miles each.

CARB report.

 

But I reject the argument of we should be let off the hook because there are fewer of us. Increases in air quality have already been impacted about as much as possible in autos. Therefor the remaining gains have to come from reducing pollution from other sources. So if HD sells 350,000 motorcycles a year and each one pollutes less, it will make a difference in the overall pollution levels.

 

And, if a few BMW's (10,000 each year) get added to the mix, it is still another gain.

 

But then again, I'm in favor of clean air.

 

History has shown that clean air does not come from voluntary compliance.

[Ken H.]

Not now, and until they take a strong pro-helmet, anti-loud pipes stance, I never will.

[russell_bynum]

But then again, I'm in favor of clean air.

 

And yet, you participate in a passtime that is dangerous, impractical, expensive, burns fossil fuels, and pollutes the air for absolutely no reason other than your own personal enjoyment.

[wrestleantares]

But then again, I'm in favor of clean air.

 

And yet, you participate in a passtime that is dangerous, impractical, expensive, burns fossil fuels, and pollutes the air for absolutely no reason other than your own personal enjoyment.

 

An inconvenient truth...

[Ken H.]

I find the posts complaining that the AMA doesn't support helmet laws, doesn't support tiered licensing, isn't specific enough about noise limits, etc. to be interesting. What are we looking for... an organization that will be efficient in increasing the number of regulations/restrictions on motorcyclists?

Actually - yes.

 

By increasing the regulations/restrictions on motorcyclist it will serve to make the sport safer and more mainstream acceptable. And in the long run that will benefit all riders. Lower cost, better social acceptance and increasing awareness of us on the roadways are but three.

[Ken H.]

By attempting to be a big-tent organization, by trying to accommodate the needs of off-road riders along with road riders, by putting helmets and noise in battles against access, they come off as unfocused, ineffectual, and quite possibly more harm than good.

I DO think they are doing more harm than good. They're basically fighting to keep the status-quo in motorcycling. While in the meantime more and more of society is saying the status-quo is no longer acceptable. And if we (as motorcyclist) don't do something about it, they (non-motorcyclist legislators) will. The AMA's positions and the millions they spend to defend them, are as a result more damaging to all of us than if they didn't exist at all.

[Bud]

But then again, I'm in favor of clean air.

 

And yet, you participate in a passtime that is dangerous, impractical, expensive, burns fossil fuels, and pollutes the air for absolutely no reason other than your own personal enjoyment.

 

Yes, and the problem is? .........

 

I'm not a Luddite tree hugger who thinks we should walk everywhere. It's not all or nothing, is it?

 

But since I choose to participate in an activity that is dangerous, impractical, expensive, burns fossil fuels, and pollutes the air for absolutely no reason other than my own personal enjoyment, I try to do as little harm as possible. So I'm in favor of pollution controls on motorcycles and don't assume it is a government plot to take away my individual "rights". Nor do I insist that I'm somehow exempt because there are other vehicles that pollute more than the bike I ride.

 

I'm old enough to see shades of gray instead of only black and white.

 

Works for me. Your mileage will vary.

[Deadboy]

I like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next person, but.....

 

Reduced emissions for motorcycles are a result of European standards. I doubt the American Motorcycle Association has much leverage with the EU.

 

Actually they do.... http://www.ama-cycle.org/legisltn/releases/2002/G02038.asp

 

Other emissions info here: http://www.ama-cycle.org/legisltn/releases/2002/g02040.asp

 

But the fact is MC emission (on a per mile basis) are much worse than the average car....Cars are very clean these days and adding a few extra pounds of emissions equipment is not a big deal….then again I have always argued that if you can increase the average speed of the entire road vehicle population by increasing bike use you could see a substantial over all reduction in emissions. If the average car drivers commute is reduced by even a few minutes per day the effect would be considerable….

[russell_bynum]

I DO think they are doing more harm than good. They're basically fighting to keep the status-quo in motorcycling. While in the meantime more and more of society is saying the status-quo is no longer acceptable. And if we (as motorcyclist) don't do something about it, they (non-motorcyclist legislators) will. The AMA's positions and the millions they spend to defend them, are as a result more damaging to all of us than if they didn't exist at all.

 

Let's say they did take a strong stance on one of these big issues...say loud pipes.

 

If a majority of their members ride cruisers, sport bikes, and dirt bikes (Which is, I believe the majority of riders in the US.) and those people are generally the people who put loud pipes on their bikes (which I believe is also true), then they would likely lose most of their members.

 

Without the membership numbers, they don't have the strength to do anything.

 

How do you propose they go about accomplishing a goal that isn't supported by a majority of their members? (I'm not trying to be a smartass...I'm honestly curious about how you would suggest they solve this problem.)

[Bud]

I like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next person, but.....

 

Reduced emissions for motorcycles are a result of European standards. I doubt the American Motorcycle Association has much leverage with the EU.

 

Actually they do.... http://www.ama-cycle.org/legisltn/releases/2002/G02038.asp

 

Other emissions info here: http://www.ama-cycle.org/legisltn/releases/2002/g02040.asp

 

But the fact is MC emission (on a per mile basis) are much worse than the average car....Cars are very clean these days and adding a few extra pounds of emissions equipment is not a big deal….then again I have always argued that if you can increase the average speed of the entire road vehicle population by increasing bike use you could see a substantial over all reduction in emissions. If the average car drivers commute is reduced by even a few minutes per day the effect would be considerable….

 

Thanks Deadboy, I stand corrected.

 

But now that I've read it, I'm disturbed. From the article:

 

he AMA holds non-governmental-organization (NGO) status with the U.N., which allows the AMA to participate in the World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations, a U.N. group that is considering international motor-vehicle standards. The forum is charged with setting regulations in areas such as safety, emissions, energy efficiency and theft prevention. The United States is one of the countries that signed the agreement creating the forum, raising the possibility that standards set by the international agency could become law in America.

 

The article appears to be several years old as they mention working group reports that could be available as early as 2003.

 

None the less, letting the UN dictate US standards has some problems of it's own, don't ya think? How do standards set by international agencies become US law without US legislation?

 

Something to ponder.

[Ken H.]

...then they would likely lose most of their members. Without the membership numbers, they don't have the strength to do anything.

And I think that's the core problem. They are more interested in keeping their membership, than doing anything good for motorcycling. I'd rather see an organization that doesn't have the strength to do anything, than one that has the strength to do (IMHO) more harm than good.

 

Given the AMA's (and ABATE BTW) current position on the two highest impact issues in motorcycling, helmets and noise, I think if they ceased to exist all together, the motorcycling community as a whole would be better off. Their basic position is they are trying to defend what (admittedly in my opinion) we are doing wrong. And that's wrong. They are free to defend what I think is indefensible for as long as the like, but I will continue to criticize, condemn even, them for it, and they will never get a dime of mine.

 

People talk about all the 'other' good things the AMA is doing for us, like what? I'd like to see a list.

[Deadboy]

I just called Imre and here are SOME of the UN WMTC (World Motorcycle Test Standards) info/documents...be warned there are a numerous of documents (some are not in English), you would need to actually check meeting agendas and other notes to find everything...they are now establishing the limits for MC emissions, as these are merely the agreed upon testing procedures...

 

Emissions: http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/wp29grpe/wmtc.html

 

Also of potential interest would be the following:

 

MC Sound: http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/wp29grb/R41-9th.html

 

Global Braking Standards: http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/wp29grrf/grrf-infmotobrake7.html

 

Enjoy!!

[Bud]

I won't join because they don't represent my interests as a motorcycle rider. But, obviously they have a lot of members, even on this forum, who feel that there is a benefit to membership.

 

Great to live in a free country, isn't it?

[russell_bynum]

...then they would likely lose most of their members. Without the membership numbers, they don't have the strength to do anything.

And I think that's the core problem. They are more interested in keeping their membership, than doing anything good for motorcycling. I'd rather see an organization that doesn't have the strength to do anything, than one that has the strength to do (IMHO) more harm than good.

 

Given the AMA's (and ABATE BTW) current position on the two highest impact issues in motorcycling, helmets and noise, I think if they ceased to exist all together, the motorcycling community as a whole would be better off. Their basic position is they are trying to defend what (admittedly in my opinion) we are doing wrong. And that's wrong. They are free to defend what I think is indefensible for as long as the like, but I will continue to criticize, condemn even, them for it, and they will never get a dime of mine.

 

Hmm.

 

How exactly does the helmet law issue impact the non-riding public? I understand the loud pipes argument, but helmets? How is my neighbor affected if I ride without a helmet?

 

To me, the helmet law issue isn't important. If a helmet law comes up for a vote, I'd likely vote against it, but it doesn't bother me to have a helmet law...it's jus tnot an issue for me.

 

I can see the loud pipes problem as an important one.

 

For off-roading, I see land access as an important issue.

 

I'd like to see some inward-focused efforts like working with local dragstrips to provide "bike nights" to help keep people from street racing. Along the same lines, I'd like to see efforts to improve the rider's awareness of various threats tha they face on the road, and also efforts to improve the rider training that's available.

 

I'd like someone to fight the a**holes who build houses next to a race track, then complain about the noise. (I'm OK if they complain if the track came after they did.)

 

I have no idea how much (if any) of this the AMA actually does, but that's what I'd like to see.

 

Also, I think they're doing a hideous job managing the AMA pro roadracing series' (Superbike, Supersport, Superstock, Formula Xtreme) There needs to be changes. Probably first and foremost, we need pressure on the track owners to improve safety. We should be able to have races in the rain at every track where rain is a real possibility (i.e. Miller probably doesn't matter...which is ironic since it's probably the safest track in the US right now.) I don't really know what the solution to this is, but I'd like to see rules that help the non-factory teams be more competitive.

[Kraynak]

Then by your reasoning, join the School Bus Manufacture organization and vote in those who would support mandatory seat belts and their use on school buses. It's a lobby that keeps them from being required and used by children.

Tell me where to sigh up.

 

Moderator's edit: Please stop using the "Code" function when you're quoting someone. "Code" makes the whole thing show up on one line, which makes the entire page really wide and forces people to scroll to read everything.

 

Insted, use the "quote" feature.

 

Thanks!