Got pulled over by a LEO...

[BCKRider]

Thought I was going to get my first speeding ticket on a bike - and very likely was over the limit. With shaking hands, finally got the the helmet off my head then the earplugs out of my ears.

Turns out, when I could hear him, this wasn't a speed trap after all. All he wanted was to see my license so he could verify that I really do have a license which allows me to legally ride a motorcycle. (Apparently something like 20% of all riders are not legally qualified and I have read that their accident statistics are many times higher than licensed riders.)

Even though it is never pleasant to get pulled over, I applaud this use of law enforcement, and they were pulling over every bike. 10 minutes of my time versus getting some unlicensed (and statistically more dangerous) riders off the road seemed to me a good thing.

"Loud pipes" are mercifully not a big problem in my area. I live on a popular "motorcycle road." Most of the bikes which pass are Harleys but only a few are offensively loud.

There are very definite laws about how loud any vehicle can be in most areas and scientific equipment to measure that noise. So why not combine a license check with a noise check?

"Sir, you vehicle exceeds the noise standard XYX789. That will be a $200 fine. A tow vehicicle is now on its way to transport your bike to your destination of choice, and of course, you will have to pay the towing bill unless you would prefer that we sell the vehicle at auction. If you chose to retain said vehicle, you have one month to reduce the noise level to X db and bring the vehicle into a police station for testing. Have a good day."

Guess Walter Mitty isn't dead.

 

[GHUHN136119]

Getting pulled over for no apparent violation is wrong in so many ways. Not to flame ya'll north of the border, but that doesn't fly here.
Sure, LEO's run into all kinds of statistics like that while futilely trying to enforce the many different laws out there. But we are better served when they are looking for moving violations, instead of paperwork.
A person without proper licensing (or inspection, registration, etc) is much more likely to be an offender than others. They get caught and hosed every day anyway.
Loud pipes? Test and then ticket them, don't tow them. Too many yahoos couldn't tow a bike properly.
Third, if safety is such a big concern, how about a united front against cell phones and driving? Everyone seems to think that they are special and have the attention span to be able to multi-task while driving a 5000 lb. vehicle. It is just way beyond most folks abilities to chat and drive safely.
Pull me over randomly to check my paperwork and you are going to get an earful, a call to your boss and possibly a letter of complaint. I live in the land of the U turn, I could give out tickets all day every day for something much more dangerous than loud pipes.

Something to chew on.

 

[Visian]

Getting pulled over for no apparent violation is wrong in so many ways. Not to flame ya'll north of the border, but that doesn't fly here.

a little something called the 4th amendment to our constitution protects us against unwarranted search and seizure.

this tactic mentioned by the OP is what they do here in the n. georgia mountains when too many idjits from downtown atlanta kill themselves up in the hills (or otherwise piss of the locals).

they'll have a stop where cars are waived through and all motorcycles get the 3rd degree. lots of citations are issued for minor safety issues that are simply unjustified.

the same thing, under the guise of a "safety check" was done in NY, and fortunately, the AMA was there to resist it.

personally, i'd rather see our law enforcement people nail the obvious law breakers (at a minimum) that cause the most danger or disturbance to the rest of the citizenry.

true, riding with no mc endorsement is breaking the law, and statistically it increases the chances of an accident. but that does not justify unwarranted stops to check paperwork.

ian

ps => mod hat on: while i am not the mod of this forum, this discussion could easily trend toward politics, and i call myself out as the first one getting near to the slippery slope. if we discuss this here, we should focus on the tactics and priorities of law enforcement, not the things oriented toward more political issues. mod hat off.

 

[Holly]

You can't do a roadside noise check. Too many variables. It would be thrown out of court.

Holly

 

[BMW_Rogue]

Agree with much of what you said about noise, cellphones, licensing ... however, the "earful, a call to your boss and possibly a letter of complaint" is probably gonna result in nothing other than getting you on someone's "watchlist" ... unofficially, of course.

About the licensing issue: what other means do they have to solve this problem aside from random checks? With a 20-percent violation rate, perhaps when the word gets out about random checks the non-licensed riders will take the hint and make things right ... or stay off the road. Other solutions? Dunno. Maybe even dealers could make it a policy to not sell a bike to anyone who doesn't have at least a permit to ride. And then there're the private sellers.

There are gonna be random checks, whether we like it or not, for safety, noise and license (safety?) issues. Although I gotta say, I've never been stopped ... for anything ...

 

[sjbmw]

Leo: "Do you know why I pulled you over?"
Me: "Because you can?
Leo: "Step off the bike please"

It went down hill from there...since I had nothing to write up(that would hold up in court anyway) .... it turned into a scolding....

 

[hlothery]

The only way I think pulling over all motorcycles is OK is if they are pulling over all traffic. How many unlicensed, uninsured drivers do you think there are on the roadways? How many commercial haulers overloaded, with drivers not properly rested, and safety equipment not working? A license check for a violation is fine.....a license check when registering or getting safety inspected is great. Add noise checks and pollution checks to that if you will. Just don't pull me over without cause.

 

[greenwald]

a little something called the 4th amendment to our constitution protects us against unwarranted search and seizure.

this tactic mentioned by the OP is what they do here in the n. georgia mountains when too many idjits from downtown atlanta kill themselves up in the hills (or otherwise piss of the locals).

they'll have a stop where cars are waived through and all motorcycles get the 3rd degree. lots of citations are issued for minor safety issues that are simply unjustified.

the same thing, under the guise of a "safety check" was done in NY, and fortunately, the AMA was there to resist it.

personally, i'd rather see our law enforcement people nail the obvious law breakers (at a minimum) that cause the most danger or disturbance to the rest of the citizenry.

true, riding with no mc endorsement is breaking the law, and statistically it increases the chances of an accident. but that does not justify unwarranted stops to check paperwork.

ian

ps => mod hat on: while i am not the mod of this forum, this discussion could easily trend toward politics, and i call myself out as the first one getting near to the slippery slope. if we discuss this here, we should focus on the tactics and priorities of law enforcement, not the things oriented toward more political issues. mod hat off.

This is an interesting discussion. My hope is that it continues in a civil manner for some time to come.

Dear Visian: The Fourth Amendment does NOT protect you against unwarranted search and seizure; only unreasonable search and seizure..........an important distinction.

Courts have ruled that the random stopping of vehicles for safety inspections and general compliance is reasonable and widely permitted, given that your driver's license (and motorcycle endorsement) is a privilege, not a constitutional right. LEO's must be careful to exercise consistentcy in the act (i.e. checking all motorcycles, not just Harleys for example) and not to 'profile' by pre-selecting a particular race, gender or ethnic group.

Law enforcement agencies in many states initiate such screenings, and ultimately, remove many 'bad apples' from our roads. The Coast Guard as well routinely stops random boaters and conducts water safety checks, with stiff penalties for violations (don't ask how I know this!).

Cry foul if you wish, but I would gladly cooperate with such 'tactics,' given the payoff of safer traffic.

 

[xp8103]

Courts have ruled that the random stopping of vehicles for safety inspections and general compliance is reasonable and widely permitted, given that your driver's license (and motorcycle endorsement) is a privilege, not a constitutional right. LEO's must be careful to exercise consistentcy in the act (i.e. checking all motorcycles, not just Harleys for example) and not to 'profile' by pre-selecting a particular race, gender or ethnic group.

Cry foul if you wish, but I would gladly cooperate with such 'tactics,' given the payoff of safer traffic.

And of course the other well publicized edge of this sword occurs when LEO's and other security-type folk stop the 80 year old grandmother in line at the airport while letting young men of obvious middle eastern lineage right thru for fear of being accused of racial profiling.

 

[Visian]

This is an interesting discussion. My hope is that it continues in a civil manner for some time to come.

Dear Visian: The Fourth Amendment does NOT protect you against unwarranted search and seizure; only unreasonable search and seizure..........an important distinction.

...LEO's must be careful to exercise consistentcy in the act (i.e. checking all motorcycles, not just Harleys for example) and not to 'profile' by pre-selecting a particular race, gender or ethnic group.

Cry foul if you wish, but I would gladly cooperate with such 'tactics,' given the payoff of safer traffic.

i stand corrected, but it's pretty obvious to me that this distinction provides a fig leaf that's very hard to prove.

it has led to having motorcyclists singled out of the general driver population in NY and GA... two examples i am aware of. are you really ok with this?

and clearly, there are higher priorities.

ian

 

[88bmwjeff]

Third, if safety is such a big concern, how about a united front against cell phones and driving? Everyone seems to think that they are special and have the attention span to be able to multi-task while driving a 5000 lb. vehicle. It is just way beyond most folks abilities to chat and drive safely.

So now we should ban talking while driving? No more talking to the passenger!!! In appropriate cell phone use while driving is a symptom of poor driving skills. NOT a cause. Ban cell phone use and you still have an inattentive driver with poor driving skills. We, here in America, love to solve/cure symptoms not causes. Focus on the problem (poor driving skills), then you wont have to deal with other drivers cell phone use, shaving, reading, putting on make-up, etc. while driving.

 

[bob1100rtc]

I would be highly pissed if I got pulled over for no reason. Thats wrong. I don't think dui and seatbelt check points are right either.

 

[Sue]

A few years ago, Brian and I were burning up asphalt to get to Sturgis in a day. In eastern Minnesota, there was traffic stop with about 12 squads, stopping motorcycles. As we approached the turn-out area, they waved Brian and me to proceed on down the road .... apparently they were only pulling the Harleys.

At a gas-stop a short time later, we chatted with a few of the fellows who had gone through the "stop." They had been told that there had been an increase in Harley thefts, so they were checking VIN numbers.

Oh, the drug sniffing dogs just "happened" to be standing by too.

Although I [personally] was happy to NOT get stopped, I was also indignant for our brothers and sisters on the cruisers.

Civil liberties?

 

[ted]

The Fourth Amendment does NOT protect you against unwarranted search and seizure; only unreasonable search and seizure

Actually the current state of 4th Amendment Law does both - it requires a judicially sanctioned warrant unless one of the specific exceptions exists (s/a plain view, incident to arrest, open fields, etc.)

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

[535IS]

Cry foul if you wish, but I would gladly cooperate with such 'tactics,' given the payoff of safer traffic.

If I am not on a timetable, I have a lot less problem with this, but if it intrudes on my schedule (and any stop in Sheboygan County is likely to involve me getting to a bankruptcy meeting before a trustee at the courthouse or to a hearing before a federal judge in Milwaukee), you can bet I'll be pissy about it. I don't like being late, so if you stop me when I'm on time and make me late with no other articulable reason, you'll get an earful.

Besides, you know as well as I do that 'papers checks' on I-43 aren't for safety reasons; they're for drug interdiction reasons.

 

[deilenberger]

Actually the current state of 4th Amendment Law does both - it requires a judicially sanctioned warrant unless one of the specific exceptions exists (s/a plain view, incident to arrest, open fields, etc.)

The plain-view one is used with a lot of enthusiasm by one local police force (known for being somewhat militant in not a good way..) Seems anyone under the age of about 30 that they pull over has something "in-plain-view".. usually drugs of some sort.

Now this is NJ.. and we have some pretty stupid people here, and even stupider tourists driving around, but how stupid do you have to be when driving in a clapped out trashed up beater and you're under the age of 30 do you have to be to leave your baggie of weed laying on the seat next to you?

The same LEO's can't seem to spot and pull over cell-phone users (it's illegal in NJ - primary offense) even when THEY are the cell-phone user.

 

[lawman101]

How did this go from a temporary detention issue to a search and seizure issue?

 

[Visian]

How did this go from a temporary detention issue to a search and seizure issue?

by way of an unwarranted traffic stop.

 

[Visian]

You can't do a roadside noise check. Too many variables. It would be thrown out of court.

Holly

holly - this is beginning to change.

ian

 

[lawman101]

by way of an unwarranted traffic stop.

The traffic stop is a matter of temporary dentention and has nothing to do with search and seizure..The matter boils down to whether one believes it is reasonable or unreasonable to temporarily detain someone long enough to verify they have the required documents to be doing whatever it is they are doing whether it be driving or moving an oversized load or walking down the street carrying a 50 cal. machine gun..