NEW MEXICO REPEALS HELMET LAW Okay, we all know New Mexico doesn't have a helmet law,
right? Wrong. Or at least they had one up until the town of Sunland Park repealed their
city helmet ordinance recently under heavy pressure from the motorcycling community.

Sunland Park is a border town located at the corner of old Mexico, Texas, and New Mexico,
and it's one of the most scenic roads in the state. The city boasts a casino and horse
track, and until recently, a helmet law, despite the fact that New Mexico doesn't have a
mandatory helmet law. It's a popular riding destination, particularly for Texas
motorcyclists before their state repealed the helmet law.

Sunland Park was the only remaining municipality in any state to enact and maintain a
mandatory helmet requirement for all riders and passengers, despite state law that allows
adult freedom of choice. The statewide helmet law only pertains to riders under age 18,
but because of "Home Rule" provisions in New Mexico, cities can pass laws that contradict
those of the state.

"Enticed by state grant money which provided police equipment and payroll to staff one
police officer for three years, Sunland Park, during tough times, found the offer too
good to resist," explained Eugene Heathman, Chairman of the New Mexico Confederation of
Clubs and a member of the Bandidos Motorcycle Club. "Since that time, the helmet
ordinance ruffled some feathers as being selectively enforced and arbitrary."

On March 19th, 2002; through the collective efforts of the New Mexico Confederation of
Clubs, New Mexico Motorcyclists Rights Organization, ABATE of New Mexico, West Texas
Confederation of Clubs, and the Texas Motorcycle Rights Association (TMRA2), the Sunland
Park City Council voted unanimously to repeal the current language of the ordinance.

With support from Mayor Jesus Segura and several council members, new language to the
ordinance was adopted mirroring current New Mexico State regulations, with the amendment
that "all persons under the age of twenty-one, whether operating or riding as a passenger
on a motorcycle, shall at all times wear a helmet."

"We had lobbied the city council since January of this year," says Revvv, of ABATE. "It
was the last universal mandatory helmet law in the entire Southwest. The State of Texas,
City of Edmonton (OK), and the Navajo Nation (approximately the size of West Virginia)
all repealed or modified their?s in the past five years."

A well-deserved celebration is planned to honor Sunland Park's decision to respect
rider's freedom and in appreciation for the city's past support of charity motorcycle
events.

 

MOTORCYCLE AWARENESS NEEDED, NOT HELMETS In one of the more positive, and factual,
newspaper articles to come out of Daytona Bike Week, Greg Martin had this to say about
helmets and motorcycle safety, excerpted from his article "Helmets, Drivers, Factors In
Bike Wrecks," which appeared in the March 18, 2002 edition of the Charlotte Sun-Herald.

Ever since the Florida Legislature repealed a state law that required motorcyclists to
wear helmets, news reports of motorcycle crashes inevitably report on whether the rider
was wearing a helmet.

That's true also in the recent motorcycle wreck that claimed the life of Timothy G.
Spieldenner, 41, of Port Charlotte, who was not wearing a helmet, according to reports.

But statistics gathered since July 2000, when the helmet law was repealed, are unclear
whether helmets are safer. That may be because motorcycle crashes are dangerous with or
without helmets.

The statistics also show that in 80 percent of motorcycle crashes, the drivers of other
vehicles, such as cars and trucks, were issued the citations.

Some 86 percent of motorcycle wrecks result in rider injuries and 4 percent in death,
according to state highway department statistics for 2000.

To members of the American Bikers Aiming Toward Education, a biker organization known as
ABATE that Spieldenner had recently joined, the statistics point to the need to educate
other drivers to watch out for motorcycles.

"Doc" Reichenbach, state legislative affairs director for ABATE of Florida, said he met
with Governor Jeb Bush last week to discuss the need to improve motorist awareness. The
meeting came after Reichenbach lost two friends to motorcycle wrecks. In one wreck in
Fort Myers last year, the driver of a car that struck the motorcyclist was issued a $62
citation, Reichenbach said. "The governor told us he would work with us on motorcycle
safety."

The number of motorcycles in the state climbed from 185,000 in 1993 to 250,000 in 2000.
Most of the increase came in the past three years.

The state's current helmet law allows riders who are at least 21 and possess $10,000 in
health insurance to ride without helmets. The law became effective in July 2000.

The department's statistics for 2000 show the number of motorcycle crashes declined 8
percent in the six months after the helmet law was repealed, but the number of fatalities
rose by 4.5 percent.

Reichenbach is quick to point to other numbers. For example, fatal motorcycle wrecks at
Bike Week peaked in 2000 at 15 -- before the helmet law was repealed. Seven were killed
at the event in 2001, and nine in 2002.

But for motorcyclists, it's not about the numbers -- it's about freedom of choice. "I
still feel it's our God-given right under the Constitution of the United States and the
Declaration of Independence to ride without a helmet," Reichenbach said.

NOTE: In addition to his duties as President and Lobbyist for ABATE of Florida, Inc.,
"Doc" Reichenbach also serves as the Chairman of the Board for the National Coalition of
Motorcyclists (NCOM).

This lengthy article was condensed for the sake of space. For a copy of the complete
article, including numerous statistics appearing therein, please e-mail Bill Bish at
NCOM, at bish@aimncom.com, or call the NCOM office at (800) 525-5355.

 

WASHINGTON ENJOINED FROM HARASSING BIKERS After being stopped numerous times by police
for bogus reasons, masking for intelligence gathering on local motorcycle clubs, a
Washington biker turned to A.I.M. (Aid to Injured Motorcyclists) Attorney Martin Fox,
legal counsel for the Confederation of Clubs of Washington, for advice and legal
assistance. Following is Marty's report on this situation;

To the Motorcycle Community:
I am sending this to update you on what is happening with our lawsuit against the
Washington State Patrol, the Washington Department of Licensing, and Trooper Kenneth
DePretto. We sued the State and officer DePretto for a number of claims including
injunctive relief, a violation of the national Civil Rights Act section 1983, a violation
of the Washington State Constitution Article One Section 7, and common-law claims of
false imprisonment and false arrest. The case was scheduled to go to trial on April 15,
2002. The State made a motion for dismissal of all claims by summary judgment scheduled
for hearing on March 29, 2002.

At the hearing the court made a number of rulings and struck the trial date to be
continued to a later time. The court granted our motion for injunctive relief and
enjoined the State of Washington and Trooper DePretto from using "Biker 101" in stopping
motorcyclists and in particular motorcycle club members. The court found that any fair
reading of the document indicated that the procedures recommended in the outline were for
intelligence purposes and harassment of bikers. The court dismissed the civil rights
claims under section 1983 and under the Washington State Constitution. The 1983 civil
rights claims were dismissed because of a case called Whren vs. United States which found
that pretextual stops were permitted as long as the arresting officer had some traffic
violation or other reason to stop the motorists that he could fall back on. 

Pretextual stops are not permitted in the State of Washington under the Ladson case as a
violation of the Washington State Constitution. However, a recent December 24, 2001 case
called Blinka vs. W.S.B.A. found that a claim for damages is not authorized for a
violation of rights granted under the Washington State Constitution. The tort claims for
false arrest and imprisonment were dismissed because the judge determined that a biker
could be stopped for a helmet, exhaust, or handlebar violation and that those arrests
allowed the officer to check our client's driving record for violations. In our case,
after the biker was stopped, the officer determined from a license check that the
computer records demonstrated that his license was suspended because of violations in
Oregon which, according to the court, allowed him to be arrested. The court found that
the officer does not have to go beyond the computer records to verify them.

The action against the Washington State Department of licensing is still moving forward.
The issue of whether or not our client's license was suspended when he was arrested
still may go to trial. I am going to attempt to get a ruling from the court which will
determine whether or not Oregon can impose motorcycle insurance on Washington residents
as a result of a violation of Oregon law.

Obviously, this case would have been appealed sooner or later. However, it seems as if
it will be appealed sooner depending on the wishes of my clients. I think we have an
excellent record to go up on appeal, perhaps, even a superior record to a trial because
there are no extraneous issues that could obfuscate the constitutional questions here.
This is simply a case of a motorcyclist wearing club identification who is consistently
stopped by the State patrol for bogus helmet, exhaust, and handlebar violations because
the officer is gathering intelligence and wants to harass clubs. The court in its oral
ruling declared that he knew this was the case destined for the Washington State Supreme
Court up the street from his courtroom. I believe given the current climate in the state
and the fiscal issues existing in Olympia, the judge probably took the easiest way out
and made a ruling that would save the state money, but he still gave us our injunction
because I believe he realized how terrible Ed was treated and wanted to stop the
practice. To be continued?

 

VIRGINIA GETS TOUGH WITH DRIVERS WHO KILL BIKERS What?s A Mother To Do? If you are a
Virginia mom named Jody Patterson, you get really MAD!! Ms. Patterson got mad when her
son, Adam Svihla, was killed by a motorist who turned in front of Adam?s motorcycle last
September.

To make matters worse, in January at the trial of the other driver, for negligently
killing a biker he was fined $200 plus court costs for failing to yield right of way.
Bet that really hurt his pocketbook. He will have to skip a day trip to a theme park
to pay for killing another human being. See anything wrong with this picture?

Jim Spencer of the Daily Press in Newport News, where the crash occurred, was also hacked
off. "Whenever violations of traffic laws take human lives, justice demands that the
people responsible forfeit their driving privileges at least temporarily. If the law
doesn't allow for that in all fatal accidents, then the law should be changed," wrote
Spencer.

Ms. Patterson proceeded to lobby Virginia's legislature for a law that would allow judges
to suspend a motorist's driver's license for up to a year for causing a fatal crash.
Virginia State lawmakers have now approved such a bill.

Jody Patterson knows first hand what we've been saying for years, "Your ONE VOTE counts!"
In this case, her vote was her voice and action. She put down the TV remote long enough
to take action, promote her agenda, and she prevailed. We should all learn from her
lesson. Put down the remote! Get out and VOTE!

And we're Not Alone in the never-ending quest for our rights. In Washington State, the
Washington Road Riders Association is supporting a bill that would make it a felony
offense, vehicular assault, if a car driver operates his/her car with disregard for the
safety of others and causes substantial bodily harm to another. Similar political
actions are occurring in New Jersey, New York, Missouri, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

Be comforted in the knowledge that we are not the only ones working toward our common
goals. Be invigorated knowing that we all are having successes in our efforts. Keep up
the Good Work!

A Message From SPUTNIK,
Founder, TMRA-II and Member of the National Coalition of Motorcyclists Legislative Task
Force (NCOM-LTF)

 

WEIRD NEWS OF THE MONTH: WHAT?S YOUR SIGN? A new survey of Australian accident insurance
claims suggests Geminis are the most likely to have a crash. The survey of Australian
accident insurance claims shows drivers born under the Zodiac sign of Taurus and Pisces
come in second and third.

Suncorp Metway's survey shows Capricorns are least likely to have accidents.

"Geminis, typically described as restless, easily bored and frustrated by things moving
slowly, had more car accidents than any other sign," Warren Duke, Suncorp's national
manager of personal insurance, told The Courier-Mail.

Taureans are thought to be stubborn and inflexible, Pisceans are risk-takers and
dare-devils, while Capricorns are generally thought of as patient, he added. The study
is based on 160,000 car accident insurance claims over the last three years. The full
list, starting with the most accident-prone star sign, is as follows: Gemini, Taurus,
Pisces, Virgo, Cancer, Aquarius, Aries, Leo, Libra, Sagittarius, Scorpio, and Capricorn.

The company isn't planning to base its premiums on people's star sign. 

 

QUOTABLE QUOTES: "All progress has resulted from people who took unpopular positions."
ADLAI STEVENSON (1900-1965)
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations 1961-65
Democratic Presidential candidate in 1952 and 1956