[96aspencade]

imported post

I received this from the GWRRA this morning, altho is presently an Ontario issue, these things tend to spread. :action::action:



Hello everyone,
I am collecting names of people who oppose the Ontario Bill M117. Please pass this on to anyone who might help our cause. Remember snowmobiles and ATVs could be next on the list.

This amendment will include all motorcycles, sidecar bikes, trikes, Bombardier Spyders and any other vehicle that presently requires a class M license to operate. Highway means any assumed road in Ontario and "on" can mean on the back seat or on the seat in a sidecar. Do not be miss guided by terminology. Some riders I have spoke with already think they are not affected because of this wording. They will be affected!
This private members bill was introduced by MPP Ms. Dr. Helena Jaczek:

The bill amends the Highway Traffic Act to: prohibit driving or operating a motorcycle on a highway while a person under the age of 14 is a passenger on the motorcycle with a view to promoting safety on Ontario's roads and protecting youth from preventable injuries.


I am opposed to Bill M117 on the grounds that it prevents families from enjoying motorcycling together.
This bill does notrecognize that motorcycling is an enjoyablepastime andan efficient means of transportation for many families.
This bill does not take into consideration that our children and grandchildren are with us spending quality time learning values that we asCanadians hold in high regard.
This bill does not acknowledge that motorcycling is a major factor to the health and well being of the families who are involved in it.
I ask that my elected MPPs oppose this bill on these grounds.

If you send a letter to your MPP, please send it as an individual motorcyclist and concerned resident in Ontario. Do not forward this as a member of GWRRA or on its behalf. Various organizations have been circulating the info amongst its members; note it’s our grand kids that will not be able to ride moto cross ATV or other’s.
These folks are our future motorcyclist.

 

[RoundmanFabrications]

imported post

That's just BS.

That kind of logic will lead to legistation outlawing bikes altogether.

Left"wing" liberal politics......
....kind of an oxymoron, no?

 

[English Bob]

imported post

RoundmanFabrications wrote:

That kind of logic will lead to legistation outlawing bikes altogether

Isn't that the point?

 

[AZgl1800]

imported post

I think they should outlaw the use of cars on highways because the death rate per 1,000 population is "way too high".

Same logic, just a different view.

 

[rcmatt007]

imported post

geeze.... why don't they keep to important things, like legislating what consenting adults do in the bedroom

 

[morram]

imported post

Meanwhile, it's still ok to have a child in the alley with your pants halfway down if you're an author of this sort of legislation

 

[Flyone]

imported post

Absolutely bizarre..............:shock:

 

[SpiderBob]

imported post

:shock:I assume your looking for Cannadian repsonses to the government or will ours (South of the border) help too.

 

[fatwing chris]

imported post

This country is getting "redder" by the minute.A lot of these bills get pumped through before we even hear about them.

 

[ob1quixote]

imported post

North Carolina has already banned youth dirtbiking, dont recall the age cutoff.

 

[Popeye]

imported post

What next?

Gun Control for law-abiding citizens? :stumped:

 

[corventure]

imported post

The old Red is the new Blue!!!:?:?:?

Here in California... seems all of the motorcycle limitations and restrictions are a bright color of blue!:shockretty sad.

:baffled::baffled::baffled:

 

[dean]

imported post

well, I've seen a lot of sport bikes with an attractive young lady barely "hanging on for dear life" while some nimrod weaves along the highway at about seventy miles an hour...how about some legislation to get rid of those idiots first?

 

[MDKramer]

imported post

To play the devil's advocate a bit:

Could this possibly be a way of trying to cause a little common sense?

Generally most of us will not take a passenger who's feet cannot sit squarely on both pegs while seated.

That tends to be persons age 14 and up.

What about the nimrod flying up the interstate with a 4 year old on the back because said nimrod is SURE that the kid can sit still, against the backrest, and hold on to daddy and not be distracted by the pretty butterflies over in that field?

 

[WingedNut]

imported post

Look - it's just BIG BROTHER doing his best to protect us from ourselves. The most safe we can be is when we are dead, so will everyone please report to a BIG BROTHER approved safety site within the next week so everyone can be made completely safe.

 

[96aspencade]

imported post

Any chance of getting the politicians to show us how :baffled::baffled:

 

[English Bob]

imported post

I think the thought process of legislators goes something like this.

1) I need to pass a law with my name on it.

2) It has to target a group with negligible impact on my votes.

3) It should target safety, environment or minority rights for best hope of success.

4) It should be simple enough that we can put it together without too much work, and therefore too much risk of affected parties getting wind of it in time to take action.

Then it becomes a think tank exercise.

Now lets see, we could hit smokers, naw, they've been done to death, not much meat there.

Hunters, good one, but might affect the rural vote, leave it alone for now.

Motorcyclists, hmmmm! They haven't been explored fully, I wonder what we can come up with? They are not the kind of people who'd vote for me anyway, so no loss there.

How about "No dirt biking under 14" Hmmmm, there's that big Yamaha dealership in my constituency, better leave that alone.

Oh yes, no kids on bikes under 14, perfect, unassailable logic, and the parents won't likely vote for me anyway, the kids will forget by the time they are 18.

Whoopee, we've got a law. Now lets slip it in while no-one is watching.

I just wish I were joking.

 

[nobbie]

imported post

English Bob wrote:

I think the thought process of legislators goes something like this.

1) I need to pass a law with my name on it.

2) It has to target a group with negligible impact on my votes.

3) It should target safety, environment or minority rights for best hope of success.

4) It should be simple enough that we can put it together without too much work, and therefore too much risk of affected parties getting wind of it in time to take action.

Then it becomes a think tank exercise.

Now lets see, we could hit smokers, naw, they've been done to death, not much meat there.

Hunters, good one, but might affect the rural vote, leave it alone for now.

Motorcyclists, hmmmm! They haven't been explored fully, I wonder what we can come up with? They are not the kind of people who'd vote for me anyway, so no loss there.

How about "No dirt biking under 14" Hmmmm, there's that big Yamaha dealership in my constituency, better leave that alone.

Oh yes, no kids on bikes under 14, perfect, unassailable logic, and the parents won't likely vote for me anyway, the kids will forget by the time they are 18.

Whoopee, we've got a law. Now lets slip it in while no-one is watching.

I just wish I were joking.

You do know the system. It's all about getting your name in Hansard or whatever the book of "Who said what in parliament " is.

Thenthey can print up letters to their constituents saying "Look, I wasn't sleeping all the time."

The best protest would not be a motorcycle one but one of support. Have a big rally at Ms. Jaczek's office showing support for her idea. Ban kids on bikes, ban kids swimming, ban kids playing hockey, ban kids playing soccer, football, baseball, water skiing, fishing, going to amusement parks.

Then let her explain her logic to the press.

 

[96aspencade]

imported post

What about the kids who get killed in cars, maybe they (cars) are next. :baffled::baffled:

 

[Goldwings 4 ever]

imported post

Popeye wrote:

What next?

Gun Control for law-abiding citizens? :stumped:

Too late. We already got that in Canada.


As for motorcycles, we already have laws stating that passengers must be able to reach the foot rests to be able to ride (this almost eliminates my wife), along with helmet and eye protection. This is bull and I will be visiting my MPP and dropping off my letter personally. Although the offer of help is appreciated, I don't think any letters from residents outside of Ontario would help. They would just get shredded.