Quantcast
Channel: Bikers Of America, Know Your Rights!
Viewing all 6498 articles
Browse latest View live

Five Tips for Spotting an Undercover Cop.......

$
0
0
OFF THE WIRE

Five Tips for Spotting an Undercover Cop

unmarked car
are you
cop car
undercover
Please forgive us if our short term memory is a little lacking, but we could swear we looked at the calendar this morning and noticed that today is 4/20. Also, we could swear we looked at the calendar this morning and noticed that today is 4/20.
Weed smokers of the world rejoice, it’s a celebration! As you bask in the glow of copious amounts of weed consumption today, as always, make sure to do so responsibly. We don’t mean “responsibly” in the “drink too much booze and you’ll wind up in a coma” sense. That’s not really a problem with the weed. Smoke too much and the worst that will happen is you’ll devour an entire large pizza and fall asleep for the night by 8pm. What we’re referring to, of course, are police.
Nothing kills a good buzz like an undercover cop with too much time on their hands striking up a conversation with you out of the blue about what you’re smoking. So keep your glassy eyes peeled, and use these handy tips for spotting an undercover cop while you celebrate 4/20 today.
Check Out the Car
In a perfect world, all police would be required to drive around in 1992 Crown Victorias with gigantic antennas and a visible gun rack in the back seat. Unfortunately, it’s not that easy. These days, undercover cops are tooling around in anything from minivans to Mustangs. So how do you spot a car that’s outfitted for the sole purpose of harshing your mellow?
Fortunately, police need lots of special equipment in their cruisers to do their jobs effectively. If you look hard enough, you can see it. AOL, of all places, has a great guide to spotting undercover cop cars on their auto blog. Here are some highlights:
On unmarked cars, lights are often placed in the grill, front windshield and exterior mirrors. Even if they aren’t turned on, you should be able to see them provided there is a sufficient amount of light.
car2
Look for stubby police antennas on the trunk lid and more lights in the rear windshield.
car3
Each state has special license plates that are issued to government workers. Learn yours. If you see it on the car that’s pulling up to the spot where you’re lighting up, swallow that weed like a professional.
Pay Attention to Details
Here’s the thing about undercover cops…they’re really good at blending in with the environment they’re in. Anyone who’s ever been enjoying a joint on a park bench only to have a guy in flip-flops and a Hawaiian shirt flashing a badge in their face out of the blue will surely attest to that.
But everybody makes mistakes, police are no different. Does that shady weed dealer at your local park with the three day facial hair growth, unkempt hair and filthy clothes also have impeccably manicured fingernails? Is he wearing a beat to shit army jacket and four hundred dollar Armani jeans? If so, you probably shouldn’t buy your weed from him.
Actually, you shouldn’t just walk up to anyone you don’t know and try to buy drugs from them. But if it’s come to that, at least watch for those little inconsistencies that might indicate that they aren’t who they say they are.
Don’t Bother Asking
There’s a popular myth that claims if you ask an undercover cop if they’re a cop, they have to tell you if they are. Not true, says Barry Cooper, a former undercover cop who came around to the good side and now gets paid to tell people how to spot and avoid being busted by undercover cops.
In fact, he says this misconception actually helps law enforcement:
Many times as an undercover, suspects would ask if I were a cop and explain I must tell if I were. I would respond, “No. I’m not a cop and you are correct. I would have to tell you if I were.” The suspects were always comfortable with this answer and would sometimes comment on how cool the “must tell” law was.
So that’s a bummer. But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t mention the police at all if you think an undercover is in your midst…
Did You Hear the News?
large_Marijuana-bust-Cleveland
Did the police make a significant bust in your area recently? If so, mention it. Undercover cops are trained to stay relaxed in high pressure situations, but by bringing up some especially noteworthy piece of police news, you’ve just entered something into the mix that normally isn’t present…their ego. Try mentioning that you don’t see what the big deal is about the bust that was all over the news last week and then, just like in poker, wait for the tell.
Nobody likes to have their pride injured, and that’s exactly what you’re doing. If the guy hoping to sell you a pound of kush suddenly snaps at you about how that bust was a HUGE deal, you’re probably dealing with a cop. Watch for any reaction that strikes you as out of the ordinary. If your gut is telling you to flee the scene, do it.
Hits From the Bong
bong
This tidbit is especially for the dealers out there, and once again, it comes from former undercover agent Barry Cooper. If you suspect that the person you’re selling to is a cop, offer them a bong hit. Not a joint, not a blunt, not a hitter…a bong hit.
Why? Because undercover cops are strictly prohibited from actually partaking in drugs while in the field. Some are even tested immediately after returning from their crime fighting missions. That said, they are trained to hit a joint or some other lightweight toking apparatus without taking any smoke into their lungs. They just pass it through their nose and back out into the air. What a waste!
But anyone who knows anything knows that hitting a bong without using your lungs is literally impossible. No respectable drug purchaser is going to pass on the opportunity to sample what you’re selling prior to paying for it, be it in a joint, a bong or a hollowed out apple. If you offer up your intricately handcrafted, dragon shaped bong and they refuse, something is amiss. Tell them to kick rocks and live to sell the good stuff another day.

California Law makes helmet violations "fix-it" tickets (correctable).

$
0
0
OFF THE WIRE
California Law makes helmet violations "fix-it" tickets (correctable).California Vehicle Code
     Division 17
Notice to Correct Violation for Specified Infractions40303.5.    Whenever any person is arrested for any of the following offenses, the arresting officer shall permit the arrested person to execute a notice containing a promise to correct the violation in
accordance with the provisions of Section
40610 unless the arresting officer finds that any of the
disqualifying conditions specified in subdivision (b) of Section
40610 exist:

(a) Any registration infraction set forth in Division 3 (commencing with Section 4000).
(b) Any driver's license infraction set forth in Division 6 (commencing with Section 12500), and
subdivision (a) of Section 12951, relating to possession of driver's license.
(c) Section 21201, relating to bicycle equipment.
(d) Any infraction involving equipment set forth in Division 12 (commencing with Section 24000                  (Where the helmet law is found.)),Division 13 (commencing with Section 29000), Division 14.8 (commencing with Section 34500),
Division 16 (commencing with Section 36000), Division 16.5 (commencing with Section 38000), and
Division 16.7 (commencing with Section 39000).

Amended Ch. 258, Stats. 1992. Effective January 1, 1993.
Notice to Correct Violation40610.   (a) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), if, after an arrest, accident investigation, or other
law enforcement action, it appears that
a violation has occurred involving a registration, license, all-
terrain vehicle safety certificate, or mechanical requirement of this code,
and none of the disqualifying
conditions set forth in subdivision (b) exist
and the investigating officer decides to take enforcement
action,
the officer shall prepare, in triplicate, and the violator shall sign, a written notice containing the
violator’s
promise to correct the alleged violation and to deliver proof of correction of the violation to
the issuing agency.

(2) If any person is arrested for a violation of Section 4454, and none of the disqualifying conditions
set forth in subdivision (b) exist, the arresting officer shall prepare, in triplicate, and the violator shall
sign, a written notice containing the violator's promise to correct the alleged violation and to deliver
proof of correction of the violation to the issuing agency. In lieu of issuing a notice to correct violation
pursuant to this section, the officer may issue a notice to appear, as specified in Section 40522.

(b) Pursuant to subdivision (a), a notice to correct violation shall be issued as provided in this section
or a notice to appear
shall be issued as provided in Section 40522, unless the officer finds any of the
following:

(1) Evidence of fraud or persistent neglect.

(2
) The violation presents an immediate safety hazard.

(3
) The violator does not agree to, or cannot, promptly correct the violation.

(c) If any of the conditions set forth in subdivision (b) exist, the procedures specified in this section or
Section 40522 are inapplicable, and the officer may take other appropriate enforcement action.

(d) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (a), the notice to correct violation shall be on a form
approved by the Judicial Council and, in addition to the owner’s or operator’s address and identifying
information, shall contain an estimate of the reasonable time required for correction and proof of
correction of the particular defect, not to exceed 30 days, or 90 days for the all-terrain vehicle safety
certificate.
Amended Sec. 27, Ch. 908, Stats. 2004. Effective January 1, 2005.

PERFECTION

CA - Lane Splitting General Guidelines

$
0
0
Lane splitting in a safe and prudent manner is not illegal in the state of California.
The term lane splitting, sometimes known as lane sharing, filtering or white-lining, refers to the process of a motorcyclist riding between lanes of stopped or slower moving traffic or moving between lanes to the front of traffic stopped at a traffic light.
Motorcyclists who are competent enough riders to lane split, should follow these general guidelines if choosing to lane split:
1) Travel at a speed that is no more than 10 MPH faster than other traffic – danger increases at higher speed differentials.
- A speed differential of 10 miles per hour or less allows an alert, competent rider enough time to identify and react to most dangerous situations that can occur.
- The greater the speed differential, the less time a rider has to identify and react to a hazard.
2) It is not advisable to lane split when traffic flow is at 30 mph or faster --- danger increases as overall speed increases.
- At just 20 mph, in the 1 or 2 seconds it takes a rider to identify a hazard, that rider will travel approximately 30 to 60 feet before even starting to take evasive action. Actual reaction (braking or swerving) will take additional time and distance.
- Braking and stopping distance varies greatly based on a multitude of factors (rider, machine and environment).
- As speed increases, crash severity increases.
3) Typically, it is safer to split between the #1 and #2 lanes than between other lanes.
- Other road users are more accustomed to motorcycles splitting between the #1 and #2 (furthest left) lanes.
- Avoid splitting in lanes near freeway on-ramps and exits.
- Avoid splitting lanes when another motorcycle rider is splitting between other nearby lanes as cars may make additional room for one rider and accidentally reduce space for another.
4) Consider the total environment in which you are splitting, including the width of the lanes, size of surrounding vehicles, as well as roadway, weather, and lighting conditions.
- Some lanes are narrower than others, leaving little room to pass safely. If you can't fit, don't split.
- Some vehicles are wider than others -- it is not advisable to split near wide trucks. If you can't fit, don't split.
- Know the limitations of your motorcycle --- wide bars, fairing and bags require more space between vehicles. If you can't fit, don't split.
- Avoid splitting on unfamiliar roads to avoid surprises such as poor road surfaces.
- Seams in the pavement or concrete between lanes can be hazardous if they are wide or uneven.
- Poor visibility, due to darkness or weather conditions, makes it difficult for riders to see road hazards and makes it more difficult for drivers to see you.
- Help drivers see you by wearing brightly colored protective gear and using high beams during daylight.
5) Be alert and anticipate possible movements by other road users.
- Be very aware of what the cars around you are doing. If a space, or gap, opens up next to your lane, be prepared react accordingly.
- Always be prepared to take evasive action if a vehicle changes lanes.
- Account for inattentive or distracted drivers.
- Riders should not weave back and forth between lanes or ride on top of the line.
- Riders should avoid lingering in blind spots.
- Never ride while impaired by drugs, alcohol or fatigue.
- Constantly scan for changing conditions.


The Four R's or “Be-Attitudes” of Lane Splitting:
Be Reasonable, be Responsible, be Respectful, be aware of all Roadway and traffic conditions.
- Be Reasonable means not more than 10 MPH faster than traffic flow and not over 39 MPH.


- Be Responsible for your own safety and decisions.

        Don't put yourself in dangerous positions.
        If you can't fit, don't split.
- Be Respectful --- sharing the road goes both ways.
  • Don't rely on loud pipes to keep you safe, loud pipes often startle people and poison the attitude of car drivers toward motorcyclists.
  • Other vehicles are not required to make space for motorcycles to lane split.
- Be aware Roadways and traffic can be hazardous.
  • uneven pavement
  • wide trucks
  • distracted drivers
  • weather conditions
  • curves
  • etc.
Disclaimers:

These general guidelines are not guaranteed to keep you safe.
Lane splitting should not be performed by inexperienced riders. These guidelines assume a high level of riding competency and experience.
The recommendations contained here are only general guidelines and cannot cover all possible combinations of situations and variables.
Personal Safety: Every rider has ultimate responsibility for his or her own decision making and safety. Riders must be conscious of reducing crash risk at all times. California law requires all motorcycle riders and passengers wear a helmet that complies with the DOT FMVSS 218 standard.
Risk of getting a ticket: Motorcyclists who lane split are not relieved of the responsibility to obey all existing traffic laws. With respect to possible law enforcement action, keep in mind that it will be up to the discretion of the Law Enforcement Officer to determine if riding behavior while lane splitting is or was safe and prudent.

When is it NOT OK to split?
You should NOT lane split:
- If you can't fit.
- At a toll booth.
- If traffic is moving too fast or unpredictably.
- If dangerous road conditions exist --- examples include water or grit on the road, slippery road markings, road construction, uneven pavement, metal grates, etc.
- If you cannot clearly see a way out of the space you're going into (for example, if a van or SUV is blocking your view).
- Between trucks, buses, RVs, and other wide vehicles.
- Around or through curves.
- If you are not fully alert and aware of your surroundings.
- If you are unable to react to changing conditions instantaneously.
- If you don't feel comfortable with the situation.
 Messages for Other Vehicle Drivers
1) Lane splitting by motorcycles is not illegal in California when done in a safe and prudent manner.

2) Motorists should not take it upon themselves to discourage motorcyclists from lane splitting.

3) Intentionally blocking or impeding a motorcyclist in a way that could cause harm to the rider is illegal (CVC 22400).

4) Opening a vehicle door to impede a motorcycle is illegal (CVC 22517).

5) Never drive while distracted.

6) You can help keep motorcyclists and all road users safe by



  • Checking mirrors and blind spots, especially before changing lanes or turning
  • Signaling your intentions before changing lanes or merging with traffic
  • Allowing more following distance, three or four seconds, when behind a motorcycle so the motorcyclist has enough time to maneuver or stop in an emergency
  • Secrets Police Don't Want You To Know

    $
    0
    0
    OFF THE WIRE
    http://youtu.be/B3nok7Cby28
    Eddie is an Air Force veteran that began realizing that the government was lying to the people at virtually every turn. He earnestly begin his research into government rules and statutes in the mid 90's after he witnessed his mother breakdown into tears of hopeless frustration over a property tax bill that threatened to take away her property and home.

    Angry at the malicious and callous demeanor of those that supposedly worked for the greater good of the People Eddie began to carefully research and document the relationships between the various statutes and the legislative enactments that created them, especially the "ad valorem" property tax, and eventually the federal income tax. He has since spent the past eleven years researching the various Texas Codes such as the Transportation Code. Much to the dismay of many municipalities, police officers, and prosecutors he has thrown a very large monkey wrench into the gears of their money machine, using their own laws! With Randy Kelton's passed down knowledge about due process and criminal actions Eddie's research has become even more dangerous to them.

    Vigorous study and research revealed the truth, most government employees know even less about the language and application of the law than the general public! Angered by the cavalier attitudes of public servants acting as if their ignorance was of no consequence, Eddie sought out other like minded people to exchange ideas and find a remedy, which led him to Rule of Law Radio.

    Eddie has now dedicated himself to "fighting the good fight" against the total willful ignorance that consumes our public servants at every level of government, an ignorance in which too many people share by way of an apathetic attitude about our rights and liberties. The biggest problem with being apathetic is that it is a word comprised mostly of the word "pathetic".
    http://ruleoflawradio.com/

    [.

    Exposed: Your Right that Cops want Secret - Money

    $
    0
    0
    OFF THE WIRE
    http://youtu.be/qAyRqVeFpvg
    nowing your Constitutional and other Legal Rights is the key to protection of the innocent. There are other rights, in dealing with police, that are little known.

    Your display of these rights may help or harm your dealings with police....

    Cops may have no duty to Protect you from Harm: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/pol... .....

    But you do have the right to know the salary of public servants

    Utah: www.utahsright.com

    Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone..
    By LINDA GREENHOUSE
    Published: June 28, 2005
    WASHINGTON, June 27 - The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.
    The decision, with an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia and dissents from Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, overturned a ruling by a federal appeals court in Colorado. The appeals court had permitted a lawsuit to proceed against a Colorado town, Castle Rock, for the failure of the police to respond to a woman's pleas for help after her estranged husband violated a protective order by kidnapping their three young daughters, whom he eventually killed.
    For hours on the night of June 22, 1999, Jessica Gonzales tried to get the Castle Rock police to find and arrest her estranged husband, Simon Gonzales, who was under a court order to stay 100 yards away from the house. He had taken the children, ages 7, 9 and 10, as they played outside, and he later called his wife to tell her that he had the girls at an amusement park in Denver.
    Ms. Gonzales conveyed the information to the police, but they failed to act before Mr. Gonzales arrived at the police station hours later, firing a gun, with the bodies of the girls in the back of his truck. The police killed him at the scene.
    The theory of the lawsuit Ms. Gonzales filed in federal district court in Denver was that Colorado law had given her an enforceable right to protection by instructing the police, on the court order, that "you shall arrest" or issue a warrant for the arrest of a violator. She argued that the order gave her a "property interest" within the meaning of the 14th Amendment's due process guarantee, which prohibits the deprivation of property without due process.
    The district court and a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit dismissed the suit, but the full appeals court reinstated it and the town appealed. The Supreme Court's precedents made the appellate ruling a challenging one for Ms. Gonzales and her lawyers to sustain.
    A 1989 decision, DeShaney v. Winnebago County, held that the failure by county social service workers to protect a young boy from a beating by his father did not breach any substantive constitutional duty. By framing her case as one of process rather than substance, Ms. Gonzales and her lawyers hoped to find a way around that precedent.
    But the majority on Monday saw little difference between the earlier case and this one, Castle Rock v. Gonzales, No. 04-278. Ms. Gonzales did not have a "property interest" in enforcing the restraining order, Justice Scalia said, adding that "such a right would not, of course, resemble any traditional conception of property."
    Although the protective order did mandate an arrest, or an arrest warrant, in so many words, Justice Scalia said, "a well-established tradition of police discretion has long coexisted with apparently mandatory arrest statutes."
    But Justices Stevens and Ginsburg, in their dissenting opinion, said "it is clear that the elimination of police discretion was integral to Colorado and its fellow states' solution to the problem of underenforcement in domestic violence cases." Colorado was one of two dozen states that, in response to increased attention to the problem of domestic violence during the 1990's, made arrest mandatory for violating protective orders.
    "The court fails to come to terms with the wave of domestic violence statutes that provides the crucial context for understanding Colorado's law," the dissenting justices said.
    Organizations concerned with domestic violence had watched the case closely and expressed disappointment at the outcome. Fernando LaGuarda, counsel for the National Network to End Domestic Violence, said in a statement that Congress and the states should now act to give greater protection.
    In another ruling on Monday, the court rebuked the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati, for having reopened a death penalty appeal, on the basis of newly discovered evidence, after the ruling had become final.
    The 5-to-4 decision, Bell v. Thompson, No. 04-514, came in response to an appeal by the State of Tennessee after the Sixth Circuit removed a convicted murderer, Gregory Thompson, from the state's death row.
    After his conviction and the failure of his appeals in state court, Mr. Thompson, with new lawyers, had gone to federal district court seeking a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that his initial lawyers had been constitutionally inadequate. The new lawyers obtained a consultation with a psychologist, who diagnosed Mr. Thompson as schizophrenic.
    But the psychologist's report was not included in the file of the habeas corpus petition in district court, which denied the petition. It was not until the Sixth Circuit and then the Supreme Court had also denied his petition, making the case final, that the Sixth Circuit reopened the case, finding that the report was crucial evidence that should have been considered.
    In overturning that ruling in an opinion by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, the majority said the appeals court had abused its discretion in an "extraordinary departure from standard appellate procedures." Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Sandra Day O'Connor joined the opinion.
    In a dissenting opinion, Justice Stephen G. Breyer said the majority had relied on rules to the exclusion of justice. Judges need a "degree of discretion, thereby providing oil for the rule-based gears," he said. Justices Stevens, Ginsburg and David H. Souter joined the dissent.

    Teamster Horsemen, benefitting victims of Alzheimer’s

    $
    0
    0
    This is a motorcycle ride and event sponsored by the Teamster Horsemen, benefitting victims of Alzheimer’s; Riders will roar off from Glendale Harley-Davidson at 11 AM and will end at Local 848 in Long Beach.

    Glendale Harley- Davidson is located at 3717 San Fernando Rd and doors will open at 9 AM for riders. At Local 848 (located at 3888 Cherry Ave., Long Beach) activities begin at 11 AM with a band, food and over 20 different vendors. There will also be entertainment for the kids. Your $20 donation includes participants’ food.

    $5 raffle tickets are also being sold for cash prizes ($3,000 – $500)! Get yours now!!

    FLYER - http://www.teamsters572.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/062913flyer.pdf

    For more information or to purchase raffle tickets, pleace contact Steve Badger at 310-515-0601 x 230.

    Source: http://www.teamsters572.org/ride-for-alzheimers-june-29-2013/
     

    USA - When Dealing With The Police - a helpful cheat sheet


    What Are My Rights When I'm Pulled Over By a Cop?

    $
    0
    0
    OFF THE WIRE




    Officer Identification

    • You have the right to ask for the officer to identify himself and show his badge and identification. This information is important for two reasons: first, you want to ensure that you aren't about to become the victim of a criminal impersonating a police officer. Second, you will need this information if you feel that you were ill treated by the officer and want to file a complaint.

    Do Not Answer Questions

    • When you are pulled over, be very careful of what you say. Besides providing your name, drivers license, vehicle registration and proof of insurance, you do not have to answer questions the officer directs at you. You are allowed to answer questions questions like "Do you know why I pulled you over" or "Do you know how fast you were going" with a simple "yes" or "no." You can also choose not to give an answer. Silence is not an admission of guilt, but the officer can use anything you say to write a ticket.

    Vehicle Search

    • If you are pulled over by the police, they do not automatically have the right to search your car. However, if the officers have probable cause then they can. Probable cause can be established by the officers seeing something in your car through the windows, or by your actions. For example, if they see you throwing something out of your car as you are pulling over or if your actions create suspicion after they pull you over.

    Admission of Guilt

    • When a police officer gives you a ticket for a driving infraction, it is not a summary judgment. Rather, the citation is a charge from the officer to which you can either plead "no-contest" and pay or challenge in court. As this is the case, you do not have to admit anything to the officer when you are pulled over. If he informs you that you were speeding, you can say "I see" or some other non-committal comment. You only have to acknowledge that you are being given a ticket, not that you deserve it.

    Citizen’s Right to Video-Record Police Activity

    $
    0
    0
    Karen from NY sent me a link to what the AELE has to say for themselves as a result of research on the topic of

    Officer Privacy and a Citizen’s Right to Video-Record Police Activity
    http://www.aele.org/law/2009all05/2009-05MLJ201.pdf

    Conclusions the AELE arrived at:
    While no citizen has a right to impede police actions or to expose an officer to danger, the First Amendment generally protects the right to photograph or video-record the activities of law enforcement personnel while engaged in their duties.
    ...
    Although First Amendment rights are always subject to reasonable time, manner and place restrictions, a uniformed police officer does not have a right to privacy while performing his duties.

    Also, see the COPWATCH Handbook
    http://www.berkeleycopwatch.org/resources/Handbook_06.pdf
    COPWATCH is a group of community residents and students who have become outraged by the escalation of police misconduct, harassment and brutality in recent years. We have joined together to fight for our rights and the rights of our community by taking on the task of directly monitoring police conduct.
    The home page of COPWATCH is http://www.berkeleycopwatch.org/

    Another information source is the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press:
    A Practical Guide to Taping Phone Calls and In-Person Conversations in the 50 States and DC.
    http://www.rcfp.org/taping/index.html

    Tape recording laws at a glance:
    http://www.rcfp.org/taping/quick.html

    State by state summaries:
    http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states.html

    Babe`s of the DAY..... This is 18 and older. Rest assured I will offend you and rest assured I don't give a fuck! If you don't like crude hum or and think you will report me don't like my page. For those with the ability to laugh and take a joke welcome.

    AMA CALL TO ACTION:

    $
    0
    0
    OFF THE WIRE



    Protect your privacy from event data recorders
    Urge your representative to support federal legislation!
    U.S. Reps. Mike Capuano (D-Mass.) and Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) will introduce the Black Box Privacy Protection Act soon and are currently seeking to add original cosponsors.
    The bill will protect motorcyclists’ rights by requiring dealers to prominently disclose to consumers if an event data recorder, known as a black box, is installed in their motorcycle, the data collection capabilities of such a device, and how such data may be used. The bill clarifies that the owner of the motorcycle owns the data and it may not be accessed without the permission of the owner. Furthermore, this bill requires that manufacturers provide consumers with the option of controlling the recording function in future automobiles or motorcycles that are equipped with black boxes. In other words, the ability to turn the black box on or off.
    Currently, no federal law exists that clarifies the rights of vehicle owners to ownership of the recorded data.
    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking requiring black boxes in all cars manufactured after Sept. 1, 2014. The NHTSA already has disclosure requirements, but the Black Box Privacy Protection Act would make the disclosure more prominent and give consumers even greater choice and privacy protections.
    The American Motorcyclist Association protects motorcyclists’ freedom to ride and we support this bipartisan bill. If you are worried that your insurer will use data from a black box to increase your rates or have the ability to record data that can be used against you in a civil or criminal proceeding, then you—the motorcyclist—should urge your representative to become an original cosponsor to the Black Box Privacy Protection Act. Just follow the "Take Action" option to send a pre-written email directly to your representative.
    Please become a member of the AMA to help us protect your freedom to ride. More members means more clout against our opponents, and your support will help the AMA fight for your rights – on the road, trail, racetrack, and in the halls of government. To join, go to AmericanMotorcyclist.com/membership/join.
    Be sure to forward this to your motorcycling friends!

    How to File a Complaint Against a Police Officer

    $
    0
    0
    OFF THE WIRE
    Never ... ever... walk into a police station by yourself and try to file a complaint against a police officer. Civilian testers have shown that you may be harassed or falsely arrested for doing so.
     Police complaints are allegations of misconduct and you as a citizen have the right to file a police complaint. When someone files a police complaint against a police officer an incident report is placed in the officer's record, so as to hopefully keep the officer from continuing to abuse his or her authority. It also makes the officers superiors aware that there might be a problem with an individual police officer that needs to be addressed. Filing a police complaint and reporting police misconduct is a step towards ending this abuse of power by police.
      Examples of police misconduct:
     Rudeness
     Excessive force
     Soliciting or accepting bribes
     Drinking on duty
     Harassment
     Making a false report (good for alleging in the case of traffic tickets)
     Use of narcotics (on or off duty)
     Discrimination
     Altering information on an official document
     Careless driving (driving rapidly and/or aggressively to a minor call
     Racial or ethnic intimidation
     Malicious threats or assault
     Sexual harassment 
     Police complaints will not get a victim compensated for police abuse. Police complaints are not law suits. If you file a complaint against a police officer and the police clear themselves as they often do, the only recourse you may have is a civil law suit. A civil law suit you may receive compensation if you and your attorney can prove damages or civil rights violations.  Contact a competent civil rights attorney if you need more information about filing a law suit for civil rights violations.  
     To file a complaint on a police officer "one of a less serious nature," you need to send a written complaint "certified mail with return receipt." You can send the police complaint to Internal Affairs. Certified mail gives you some type of proof that you actually filed a complaint against a police officer. If you don't send the complaint certified mail the letter sometimes gets lost or misplaced by someone at the police department.
     As soon as possible write down everything that happened. Don't worry about sending your complaint off right away. Wait a few days and go back over your written complaint and see what you might have forgotten the first time you wrote it. There's no need for "emotions" to be involved, when you write your complaint and the most important thing is to be truthful! If the police catch you in a lie, your complaint won't be credible nor will any other complaints you send in the future. You could even be charged for making a false report against a police officer and in some states be sued.
     The more information in your written complaint the better. Your compliant should include:
     Who is the officer you're filing a complaint against? Name or badge number?
     What the officer said or did? Was he rude, abusive or used excessive force?
     When did it happen? Date and time.
     Where did it occur? Location?
     How did the incident occur? 
     Do you have corroborating witnesses, whose story does not conflict with yours? If you have witnesses you should ask each of them to write a separate account of the incident.
     Do you have any type of evidence, like pictures or a video recording? If you do, don't send the "original" to the police, send only a copy. 
     Mail the complaint "certified mail with return receipt requested," to Internal Affairs at the police department or the sheriffs department where the officer works. The complaint will be investigated and you should receive a letter back from the police agency on the status of your complaint. Most police complaints will be in the favor of the police officer, but the good thing is the complaint will stay on the police officers record.
     The police may try and contact you by phone or mail to do a "follow up" about your complaint. Don't answer any questions and never go down to the police station for an interview. Tell them everything they need to know is in your letter you sent and then say good bye. Stick to what you said in your complaint letter and say nothing else!
     There is a time limit on how long you have to file a complaint against a police officer. For minor police misconduct you may have  only 60 days and up to 6 months for more serious allegations.
     If you're interested in knowing what complaints have been filed against police officers in your community, you may request a copy of that information be sent to you from that police agency. Send your request "certified mail with return receipt requested." Request a copy of complaints of police officers from that agency be mailed to you under the "Freedom of Information Act." DON'T ever walk into a police station and ask for this information! Police officers either start acting real stupid on the subject or they get mad and start threatening you.
     Never file a complaint directly with a police agency specially if the complaint is of a serious nature, see an attorney! If you do plan on hiring an attorney, get one who doesn't work in your area. Don't get a lawyer from your town, county or from the surrounding counties. Local lawyers work with same judges, prosecutors and police officers on a daily basis and may not want to win your case as bad as you do.
     You may also contact your State Attorney General. For serious incidents call the ACLU hot line 1-877-634-5454 or contact the Department of JusticeClick here for the (DOJ) site.

    Motor vehicle crashes: A little-known risk to returning veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan

    $
    0
    0
    OFF THE WIRE

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/motor-vehicle-crashes-a-little-known-risk-to-returning-veterans-of-iraq-and-afghanistan/2013/05/05/41da2f6c-a3b1-11e2-82bc-511538ae90a4_story.html Motor vehicle crashes: A little-known risk to returning veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan

    By David Brown, May 06, 2013

    The Washington Post Published: May 5 For men and women who have fought in the country’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, death behind the wheel is becoming another lethal aftereffect of combat.
    After they leave military service, veterans of the two wars have a 75 percent higher rate of fatal motor vehicle accidents than do civilians. Troops still in uniform have a higher risk of crashing their cars in the months immediately after returning from deployment than in the months immediately before. People who have had multiple tours in combat zones are at highest risk for traffic accidents.
    (Andy Manis/For The Washington Post) - Steven Acheson drives his car around Platteville, Wis., May 3, 2013.
    More health and science news
    Returning vets face a higher chance of dying behind the wheel
    Combat in Iraq and Afghanistan appears to increase a veteran’s risk of having traffic accidents back home.
    Industrious oysters could clean up Chesapeake, new study suggests
    Particulate-matter pollution from trucks contributes to poor health in port communities, critics say.
    The phenomenon has been revealed by various pieces of evidence — research as well as observations of service members, veterans and counselors.
    The most common explanation is that troops bring back driving habits that were lifesaving in war zones but are dangerous on America’s roads. They include racing through intersections, straddling lanes, swerving on bridges and, for some, not wearing seat belts because they hinder a rapid escape.
    That’s probably not the whole story, however. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), suffered by thousands of veterans, increases aggressive driving. Drunken driving and thrill-seeking also are more common after combat, according to a few studies and the testimony of many veterans.
    If further research supports the observations, motor vehicle crashes will join suicide and interpersonal violence as a fatal, if indirect, consequence of the war on terrorism.
    Motor vehicle crashes have long been a serious problem in the military. From 1999 through 2012, a period spanning peacetime and the two wars, as many active-duty military personnel died in noncombat motor vehicle crashes both on and off duty (4,423) as were killed in the Iraq war (4,409).
    “Before suicides became the leading cause of non-battle injuries, motor vehicle injuries were,” said Bruce H. Jones, a physician and epidemiologist who heads the Army’s injury prevention program at Aberdeen Proving Ground, in Maryland.
    War, however, worsens the problem.
    Men who served in the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan have a 76 percent higher rate of dying in vehicle crashes, and women a 43 percent higher rate, than people in the general population, according to an unpublished study by Han K. Kang, an epidemiologist with the Department of Veterans Affairs. The same phenomenon was seen in Persian Gulf War veterans and took five years to dissipate.
    Fatal motorcycle crashes in particular spiked during the wars. They accounted for 14 percent of military traffic deaths in 2001, but 38 percent in 2008. The absolute rate of motorcycle deaths also tripled over that period.
    “A lot of people come home and buy a motorcycle to have that adrenaline rush again,” said Steven Acheson, 27, a former forward observer in the Army and an engineering student in Wisconsin.
    He spent time at Fort Stewart in Georgia, where the post put vehicles from fatal crashes on display as a form of warning. “There was once six or seven completely mangled motorcycles out in front of the gate,” Acheson recalled.
    One of the best pieces of evidence that combat raises a person’s risk for car crashes comes from an in-house study by USAA, an insurance company in San Antonio that covers thousands of military personnel.
    The company offers a reduced-price insurance premium if vehicles are stored securely during deployment. Almost all of the company’s active-duty customers opt for it. As a consequence, USAA has before-and-after records for 171,000 deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.
    Combat in Iraq and Afghanistan appears to increase a veteran’s risk of having traffic accidents back home. Troops had more at-fault accidents in the six months after their return from deployment than in the six months before they left. The increase was highest for people in the Army (23 percent) and in the enlisted ranks (22 percent). Tellingly, there was a “dose­-response relationship” between deployment and risk. Troops with three deployments had 36 percent more accidents, compared with 27 percent more in the twice-deployed and 12 percent in people deployed only once.
    But the problem isn’t just a carry-over of habits.
    One-quarter of the Iraq and Afghanistan veterans enrolled in a 60-day residential treatment program for PTSD in California said they drove after drinking. One-fifth said they used seat belts “less than sometimes,” in part because they get in the way of a rapid escape from a vehicle.
    “Failure to adapt the unique combat driving behaviors used in the current conflicts cannot be the only explanation for deployment-related risky driving behavior and excess . . . mortality,” wrote Mark A. Zamorski, a Canadian military physician, and Amanda M. Kelley, a civilian U.S. Army psychologist, in a report to NATO on the subject.
    “All of the likely mechanisms . . . could be mediated by distress or mental disorders,” they wrote.
    ‘You’re scaring me’
    Todd Nelson was an Army logistician riding in the front seat of a Toyota Land Cruiser in Kabul in August 2007 when a car in an adjoining lane blew up. He lost his right eye, broke both jaws and had burns on 18 percent of his body surface. He’s had 43 operations under general anesthesia.
    When he was finally well enough to get back on the road, he drove for several months before his wife “made a comment about how aggressive I was being. She said, ‘You’re scaring me,’ ” Nelson, 40, recalled recently.
    He sped. He hated letting cars get in front of him. He swerved whenever he saw a vehicle with a low-hanging rear end suggesting a heavy load. “Hey, I drove much worse than this over there and nothing happened,” he says he told himself.
    In hindsight, he says, he’s embarrassed at how unaware he was. Of his wife, he says, “It was very patient of her to wait that long to tell me.”
    Nelson, who works in the recruiting department of USAA, broke the habit on his own.
    He timed how long it took him to drive to college each day in San Antonio and proved to himself that going the speed limit added little time to the trip. He made a game of counting the number of cars he would let merge on the way in and the way back. After a month, he said, he was back to driving pretty normally. He now goes out of his way to talk about it to other veterans.
    I think we probably suffer with this more than we like to admit.”
    Acheson, the Wisconsin veteran, agrees.
    Afghanistan appears to increase a veteran’s risk of having traffic accidents back home. He spent 11 months driving a colonel around the Sadr City district of Baghdad in an ­up- armored Humvee in 2006. He drove courteously. “It was kind of our colonel’s motto when we were out there — ‘Show people respect,’ ” he said. He escaped injury. But he developed a habit of merciless attention to the road — noticing every curb line repainted or jersey barrier moved — that he’s never really lost.
    “When I see a vehicle on the side of the road, it puts me on edge,” said Acheson, a senior at the University of Wisconsin at Platteville. “I am constantly scanning. If I see a bag blow across the road a mile up, I say, ‘What is that?’ ”
    He has occasional — and unaccountable — moments of panic behind the wheel.
    Three years ago, he went to Long Island to visit an Army friend whose father was dying in hospice care. He helped carry the man’s body out of the house. Driving home, he was overcome by dread and anxiety. Somewhere in Indiana, in the middle of the day, he stopped, rented a motel room, called his mother and spent a sleepless night.
    He thinks drinking and driving is a largely unacknowledged part of the car-accident problem.
    “It’s just everywhere,” he said. “You just survived the war, so what do you mean I can’t drive drunk? If I can drive and shoot out my window, I can drive drunk. It’s that kind of mentality I saw a lot of soldiers taking.”
    Training materials
    The military is beginning to pay attention to the particular risks facing — and needs of — Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who resume driving when they get home.
    The Army gives out a brochure called “Post-Combat Driving: The American Road” that includes data from a survey that an occupational therapist at the University of Minnesota, Erica B. Stern, conducted with deployed and non-deployed reservists. (Forty-nine percent of returning troops said they were anxious when cars approached quickly; 25 percent said they had driven through stop signs in the previous month.) The publication has tips on how to increase self-control; one is to tape a drawing by one’s child to the dashboard.
    VA has new training materials for clinicians advising them to talk about driving with veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, some of whom are enrolling in the department’s driver-rehabilitation programs offered at 40 VA medical centers across the country, which have traditionally been used by people with physical disabilities.
    The VA hospital in Palo Alto, Calif., is conducting a study aimed at identifying the best techniques for relieving driving anxiety while on the road.
    Veterans drive hour-long trips near the medical center that incorporate their “triggers” — underpasses, bridges, construction sites, busy intersections. Their pulse and breathing are monitored.
    When they feel panic, they pull over and try various self-calming techniques.
    “We’ve had a lot more trouble recruiting participants than we expected,” said Steven Woodward, a VA psychologist running the study. “Why? I wish we knew.”
    Getting permission for the study from scientific review boards wasn’t easy. There haven’t been any disasters so far. Woodward hopes one day to extend it to an even more overlooked group — returning veterans who aren’t yet confident enough to resume driving.


    What Is Jury Nullification?

    $
    0
    0
    OFF THE WIRE
    From Station.6.Underground
    What is Jury Nullification? You won’t find it defined in your dictionary or described in your encyclopedia. You weren’t taught about it in school, and indeed it is even considered a crime to tell other people about it in some circumstances. Imagine that for a moment – it is a crime to inform a citizen as to their right, even the scope of their duty while serving on a jury.
    According to the Wikipedia entry:
    Jury nullification is a constitutional doctrine which allows juries to acquit criminal defendants who are technically guilty, but who do not deserve punishment. It occurs in a trial when a jury reaches a verdict contrary to the judge’s instructions as to the law. 
    A jury verdict contrary to the letter of the law pertains only to the particular case before it. If a pattern of acquittals develops, however, in response to repeated attempts to prosecute a statutory offence, this can have the de facto effect of invalidating the statute. A pattern of jury nullification may indicate public opposition to an unwanted legislative enactment…
    Most Americans have never even heard of such a doctrine. Thanks to numerous TV shows and real-life judges telling us that the only function of the jury is to render a decision based strictly upon the facts of the case, a key tenet of the justice system envisioned by the Founding Fathers has been lost. You see, it is not only the job of the jury to weigh guilt or innocence against the letter of the law, but also to judge the just nature of the statutes themselves. In this way, The People ultimately retain power over the government, rather than the government dictating to The People what is and what is not justice. This tenet is instrumental in protecting ourselves, as The People, from tyrannical laws and cronyism. This is why we have a jury system in the first place, not simply to act as a cog in the wheel of the justice system, but to be the justice in the system.
    Let us imagine for a moment, that you live in a city where the Mayor makes soda-pop illegal. So illegal that he actually signs into law a criminal statute that makes it a jailable offense to dispense soda-pop. He makes a public campaign to warn about the evils of soda-pop, how detrimental it is to your health, while being crowned king of national doughnut day, and holding a vast amount stock in the city’s number-one importer of iced-tea.
    Fascist Food and Nutrition Nazis
    Now let us imagine that you are sitting on the jury for a criminal trial of a single-mom arrested for selling soda-pop to her neighbor, which had been “smuggled” in from outside of the city limits, and that the transaction was captured on an audio-video recording by police. You see that she is plainly guilty of violating the law, technically, but can’t in good-conscience send her off to jail for a year. You, and other jury members voice that dilemma to the judge, who then instructs you to render a verdict based strictly on the facts of the case, the evidence presented, and that all other considerations have no bearing on your duty to render a verdict. What do you do? It appears that you have no choice, and you find her guilty.
    But if you had actually been a FULLY INFORMED JUROR, rather than just listening to the instructions of the judge who owed his career to the Mayor, you would have known that you did have an alternative. That it was not actually illegal for you to ignore the judge’s instructions, and that you could have rendered a verdict based on your conscience rather than a law in a book. You would have known that Jury Nullification not only gives you this right, but that it is your duty as a juror to render your verdict in such a manner. In this way, you see, not only have you protected the accused from overzealous and tyrannical prosecution, but you have also struck a blow against cronyism. Cronyism by the Mayor who stands to make a profit from the law he made, in relation to the company stocks he owns and the companies that own him. Cronyism by police and prosecutors who turn a profit on the backs of the taxpayers for every arrest and prosecution they make, maintaining their job security and giving the United States the largest prison population in the world in the process.
    Imagine how many ridiculous laws would be suddenly rendered obsolete. Imagine how many frivolous prosecutions would be avoided. Imagine how many people would not be sitting in prison today for victimless crimes. Imagine how much lower your taxes would be if you didn’t have to pay for all this nonsense. Imagine how powerless the government would suddenly find itself, in the face of a population that was no longer going to take any of their shit.
    Maybe that’s why the principle of Jury Nullification is the most taboo subject in our justice system today, and has been continually eroded in landmark decisions by the courts since 1895, as time has distanced us from the core principles of liberty on which this nation was founded.
    In 1794, the case of Georgia v. Brailsford was being heard before the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). The court’s first Chief Justice, John Jay, established precedent that the Common Law practice of Jury Nullification was valid in the United States. He wrote, in part…
    “It may not be amiss, here, Gentlemen, to remind you of the good old
    rule, that on questions of fact, it is the province of the jury, on
    questions of law, it is the province of the court to decide. But it must
    be observed that by the same law, which recognizes this reasonable
    distribution of jurisdiction, you have nevertheless a right to take upon
    yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy.
    On this, and on every other occasion, however, we
    have no doubt, you will pay that respect, which is due to the opinion of
    the court: For, as on the one hand, it is presumed, that juries are the
    best judges of facts; it is, on the other hand, presumbable, that the
    court are the best judges of the law. But still both objects are
    lawfully, within your power of decision.”
    That precedent held, unmolested, for 99 years. Prior to the Civil War, the Fugitive Slave Act made it a Federal Crime to help escaped slaves, but jury nullification was instrumental in undermining that law and bringing an end to slavery America. Jurors refused to render a guilty verdict against those who had helped escaped slaves. But in 1895, the Supreme Court of the United States struck it’s first blow against the Common Law principle of Jury Nullification. In Sparf v. United States, SCOTUS held in a 5-4 decision that federal judges were not required to inform jurors of their inherent right to judge the law in a case.
    In the 1969, the Fourth Circuit upheld in the case of U.S. v. Moylan that a court could refuse to allow instruction to a jury regarding nullification, yet hypocritically upheld the jurors inherent right to nullify. In other words, they were denying the right of the juror to be informed of their right, while still maintaining the validity of Jury Nullification stating,
    “If the jury feels the law is unjust, we recognize the undisputed power of
    the jury to acquit.”
    In the 1972 case of United States v Dougherty  the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit maintained that the courts could deny the defense a chance to instruct a jury on their right to nullify.
    In 1988, in U.S. v. Krzyske, the jury asked the judge about jury nullification. The judge responded “There is no such thing as valid jury nullification.” The jury convicted the defendant, and the judge’s answer was upheld on appeal. Another judge did dissent however, and cited United States v. Wilson, 629 F. 2d 439 – Court of Appeals, 6th Circuit 1980, that the panel had unanimously decided “In criminal cases, a jury is entitled to acquit the defendant because it has no sympathy for the government’s position.”
    In 1997, the Second Circuit ruled that jurors can be removed if there is evidence that they intend to nullify the law, under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 23(b). There have even been instances of jurors being removed and mistrials declared after informed-jury activists distributed literature near courthouses.
    Now here’s one final gut-check for the uninformed public. We often assume that it is the job of the defense attorney to defend their client to the best of their ability, with all of the knowledge at their disposal. This is not true, however. Attorneys, including defense attorneys, are an Officer of the Court. This means that their first duty is to the law, and not their client. With a sworn oath to uphold the law, they are forbidden from advocating jury nullification. Your lawyer works for the court, not you.
    If you ever sit on a jury, remember one important fact. You do not work for the court.
    Lawmall.com
    A History of Jury Nullification
    The Straight Dope
    stationsixunderground@gmail.com

    FROM 4409: How to fight a DISORDERLY CONDUCT Charge

    $
    0
    0
    OFF THE WIRE

    FROM 4409: How to fight a DISORDERLY CONDUCT Charge

    This video was uploaded to YouTube.com/RP4409 on May 14, 2013. In keeping with the decentralization of Cop Block, it’s shared here to help the free flow of this information so we can all be safer. For other such content see: CopBlock.org/Resources

    From Video Description

    4409 on twitter: https://twitter.com/tweet4409
    4409 Store: https://wepay.com/stores/4409-store
    AZ: 13-2904 a 1 Disorderly conduct; classification
    TX: TITLE 9 CHAPTER 42 Sec. 42.01.
    CAL. PEN. CODE § 647 : California Code – Section 647
    New York Penal – Article 240 – § 240.20 Disorderly Conduct
    Title 2C The New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice – 2C:33-2 Disorderly conduct
    Julio case: http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/…

    Annual Apology

    $
    0
    0
    Over the past few months I have forwarded some inappropriate pictures and jokes
    To friends who I thought shared my same sense of humor..
    Unfortunately this wasn't the case and I seem to have upset quite
    A few people who have accused me of being sexist and shallow..
    If you were one of these people, please accept my sincerest apologies.
    Looking to the rest of 2012 and onward, I will only post or send e-mails with cultural or educational content such as old monuments, nature and other interesting topics.
     Below is a picture of the Pont Neuf Bridge in Paris . It is the oldest bridge
     In Paris and took 26 years to build. It was completed in 1604..

    Ten Most Notorious Outlaw Biker Gangs

    $
    0
    0
    Ten Most Notorious Outlaw Biker Gangs.

    BY: William J. Felchner
    Source: factoidz.com
    US - The outlaw biker gang can trace its origins to the period after World War II where returning veterans and other roadies began to organize themselves in clubs, pining for the freedom, action and nonconformity that the motorcycle offered. One of the seminal events in outlaw biker history was "The Hollister Riot," which took place over the July Fourth 1947 holiday weekend in Hollister, California, where some 4,000 motorcycle enthusiasts invaded the small town. The ensuing ruckus was later sensationalized in the July 21, 1947, issue of Life magazine, marking a famous milestone in biker history.
    The Hollister Gypsy Tour, as the event was billed, included the Boozefighters, a South Central Los Angeles motorcycle club founded in 1946 by World War II vet William "Wino Willie" Forkner (1921-1997). Forkner reveled in his reputation as a biker hellraiser, and reportedly served as the inspiration for Lee Marvin's Chino character in Columbia Pictures' The Wild One (1953), which also starred Marlon Brando as bad boy Johnny Strabler, leader of the fictional Black Rebels.

    Here are ten notorious outlaw biker gangs that rule the road in biker history. These are the so-called "1%ers," the bikers who operate out of the mainstream as compared to the other 99% of motorcyclists who abide by the law and norms of society. Kick start your engines and show your colors…

    Hells Angels (1948-present)

    Unarguably the best-known outlaw biker gang in history, Hells Angels owes its name to World War II and possibly the 1930 Howard Hughes movie of the same name. During Big Two, there did exist the United States Army Air Forces 303rd Heavy Bombardment Group (H) of the U.S. 8th Air Force which billed itself as Hell's Angels, flying B-17 combat missions out of Molesworth, England, from 1942-45.

    Hells Angels was formed in the Fontana/San Bernardino, California, area on March 17, 1948 as an offshoot of the Pissed Off Bastards of Bloomington, a California motorcycle club founded in 1945 by American veterans of the air war. Other independent chapters of Hells Angels later sprouted up in Oakland, Gardena and San Francisco.

    Hells Angels eventually spread its wings, with the club now sporting charters in 29 countries, including Canada, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Portugal, Russia, Greece, Denmark, France, Turkey and the Dominican Republic.The Hells Angels insignia is the infamous "death's head," designed by Frank Sadilek, a former president of the San Francisco chapter.

    Both American and Canadian law enforcement have labeled the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club (HAMC) a crime syndicate, asserting that its members routinely engage in drug trafficking, extortion and violence. Hells Angels garnered notoriety at the Altamont Free Concert on December 6, 1969, when they were hired by the Rolling Stones to act as stage security. Mayhem ensued at the drug/alcohol fueled event that boasted of a crowd of 300,000, with four people losing their lives.

    Mongols (1969-present)

    The Mongols was founded on December 5, 1969 in Montebello, California, by Hispanic veterans of the Vietnam War. Reportedly denied membership in Hells Angels because of their race, the Mongols eventually branched out, currently boasting of chapters in 14 states and four foreign countries.

    Law enforcement has classified the Mongols as a criminal enterprise, engaging in loan sharking, drug trafficking, racketeering, theft and murder for hire. ATF agent William Queen, using the alias Billy St. John, successfully infiltrated the Mongols in 1998, resulting in 53 Mongol convictions.

    The Mongols and their hated rivals Hells Angels engaged in an infamous brawl and gunfight at Harrah's Casino in Laughlin, Nevada, in 2002. When the smoke had cleared, one Mongol and two Hells Angels lay dead on the casino floor.

    Pagans (1959-present)

    Lou Dobkins, a biochemist at the National Institute of Health, founded the Pagans in Prince George's County, Maryland, in 1959. By the late 1960s, the Pagans were the dominant biker club on the East Coast, riding British Triumph motorcycles (later traded in for Harley Davidsons) and sporting their distinctive patch depicting the Norse fire god Sutr wielding a flaming sword.

    The Pagans currently operate in eleven states, with Delaware County, Pennsylvania, serving as their Mother chapter. American law enforcement has classified the Pagans as a criminal enterprise, engaging in a host of illegal activities, including gun running, drug trafficking, arson, methamphetamine production and distribution, prostitution, racketeering and murder for hire.

    In 2002, the Pagans and Hells Angels clashed at the Hellraiser Ball in Long Island, New York, where ten people were wounded and one Pagan was allegedly shot and killed by a Hells Angels member. Three years later, the Vice President of the Hells Angels Philadelphia chapter was killed by gunfire while driving his truck on the Schuylkill Expressway, with the Pagans allegedly carrying out the hit.

    Outlaws (1935-present)

    The Outlaws can trace their history back to 1935 when the McCook Outlaws Motorcycle Club was formed out of Matilda's Bar on old Route 66 in McCook, Illinois. In the ensuing years, the club morphed into the McCook Outlaws, the Chicago Outlaws and the American Outlaws Association (A.O.A.). Their first out of state chapter came in Florida in 1967. In 1977, the Canadian biker gang Satan's Choice joined the Outlaws franchise, making it the first chapter outside of the United States. Today, the Outlaws are active in some 14 states, with international chapters in the United Kingdom, Australia, France, Germany, Sweden, Thailand, Norway, Poland, the Philippines, et al.

    The Outlaws sport a distinctive patch comprised of a skull and crossed pistons. Their official motto, adopted in 1969, is "God forgives, Outlaws don't."

    Law enforcement has categorized the Outlaws as an organized crime syndicate, engaging in drug trafficking, murder, extortion and prostitution. The Outlaws have had their run-ins with police and other biker gangs. In 2007, Outlaws member Frank Rego Vital was shot and killed outside the Crazy Horse Saloon in Forest Park, Georgia, by two Renegades motorcycle club members who had reportedly acted in self-defense.

    Bandidos (1966-present)

    The Bandidos was founded by Marine Corps and Vietnam War veteran Don Chambers in San Leon, Texas, in 1966. The club's official motto is "We are the people our parents warned us about," with a big Mexican in sombrero brandishing a machete and pistol adorning the club's distinctive patch. The Bandidos currently boast of 104 chapters in the United States, along with international chapters in Germany, Australia, Denmark, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Singapore, Costa Rica, Belgium and the Channel Islands.

    Law enforcement has classified the Bandidos as an organized crime syndicate, engaging in murder, drug trafficking, money laundering, extortion, gun running and witness tampering. From 1994 to 1997 the so-called "Great Nordic Biker War" was waged in Scandinavia pitting Bandidos versus Hells Angels in a bloody turf war that resulted in eleven murders. Vagos (1965-present)

    Originally called the Psychos, Vagos was formed in Temescal Valley, California, in 1965. The club's distinctive green/red patch pictures the Norse god Loki straddling a motorcycle. Vagos currently operates mainly in the southwestern United States and northern Mexico.

    Both the FBI and the ATF consider Vagos an outlaw biker gang, engaging in drug trafficking, gun running, auto theft, money laundering and murder. In 2002, however, Vagos members turned in the estranged wife of a Pomona, California, police detective who had attempted to hire a Vagos hit man to murder her husband.

    Law enforcement has successfully conducted several undercover investigations of Vagos and their illegal activities. In 2004, authorities arrested 26 Vagos members/associates and seized $125,000 in cash, drugs and weapons.

    Pennsylvania Warlocks (1967-present)/Florida Warlocks (1967-present)

    The Pennsylvania Warlocks was founded in Philadelphia in February 1967. The club's distinctive patch features the Harpy, the legendary winged beast from Greek mythology. The Pennsylvania Warlocks boast of chapters in New Jersey, Ohio, Illinois, Florida, Minnesota and Massachusetts. The Pennsylvania Warlocks have been linked to organized crime and methamphetamine production and distribution.

    The Florida Warlocks was founded by U.S. Navy veteran Tom "Grub" Freeland in Orlando, Florida, in 1967. The club's logo is a blazing eagle while their official motto is "To find us you must be good. To catch us…you must be fast. To beat us…you must be kidding!" The Florida Warlocks have chapters in South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, New York, the United Kingdom and Germany. The Florida Warlocks were successfully infiltrated by the ATF in 1991 and again in 2003, with convictions for drug and weapon charges resulting from the latter.

    Sons of Silence (1966-present)

    The Sons of Silence was founded in Niwot, Colorado, in 1966. The club sports a distinctive patch featuring the American Eagle superimposed over a large "A" – highly reminiscent of the Anheuser-Busch logo. The gang's official motto is "Donec mors non separat" – Latin for "Until death separates us."

    The Sons of Silence boast of chapters in Illinois, Wyoming, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, Kentucky, North Dakota, Mississippi and Germany. The Sons of Silence have been implicated in drug trafficking and weapons violations.

    Highwaymen (1954-present)

    The Highwaymen was established in Detroit, Michigan, in 1954. The club's distinctive patch features a winged skeleton sporting a leather jacket, motorcycle cap and the black and silver colors. "Highwaymen forever, forever Highwaymen" serves as the gang's official motto.

    The Highwaymen currently have chapters in Michigan, Tennessee, Florida, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana and Norway. The Highwaymen Motorcycle Club has been the subject of intense law enforcement scrutiny through the years. In 2007, the FBI arrested 40 Detroit Highwaymen members/associates on a variety of charges, including drug trafficking, theft, racketeering, insurance fraud, police corruption and murder for hire.

    Gypsy Joker (1956-present)

    The Gypsy Joker was founded in San Francisco, California, on April 1, 1956. The club's official patch features a grinning skull. Forced out of San Francisco by Hells Angels, the Gypsy Joker headed north to Oregon and Washington state in the late 1960s.

    The Gypsy Joker has some 35 chapters worldwide, including active clubs in Australia, Germany, South Africa and Norway. The club is especially high profile in Australia, where in 2009 five Gypsy Jokers engaged in a drug-related shootout with a rival "bikie" gang (as they are called Down Under) in Perth.

    Ten More Notorious Outlaw Biker Gangs

    Here are ten more infamous biker gangs, along with where established and years active.

    •Free Souls (Eugene, Oregon, 1968-present) •The Breed (Asbury Park, New Jersey, 1965-present) •Rebels (Brisbane, Australia, 1969-present) •Grim Reapers (Calgary, Canada, 1967-1997) •Iron Horsemen (Cincinnati, Ohio, mid-1960s-present) •The Finks (Adelaide, Australia, 1969-present) •Brother Speed (Boise, Idaho, 1969-present) •Devils Diciples (Fontana, California, 1967-present) •Solo Angeles (Tijuana, Mexico, 1959-present) •Diablos (San Bernardino, California, 1964-present) About William J. Felchner William J. Felchner's many feature articles have appeared in such periodicals as True West, Hot Rod, Movie Collector's World, Sports Collectors Digest, Persimmon Hill, Big Reel, Corvette Quarterly, Old West, Antiques & Auction News, Storyboard, Goldmine, Autograph Collector, Warman's Today's Collector, The Paper & Advertising Collectors'
    Frontier Times, Television History, Illinois and Military Trader.

    How to Beat a Photo-Enforced Speeding Ticket (or Red Light Ticket)

    $
    0
    0
    OFF THE WIRE
    by Nate Cox
    Last year I received a letter in the mail from the Washington D.C DMV claiming I was speeding. As you can see it was one of those Photo-Enforced Speeding Tickets and they had multiple pictures of my CAR. I knew better to just submit and pay a fine like the majority of people do in this country, unfortunately. I am in the habit of not taking “plea deals”, and I am always in the habit of fighting my tickets and NOT pre-paying them so I don’t have to go to court – like many folks do. I just about always record my interactions with the police, whether it’s a traffic stop or not, that way it keeps the entire situation objective, transparent and I can hold the public servant accountable if he/ she violates my rights.
    IMG 0002 1024x884 How to Beat a Photo Enforced Speeding Ticket (or Red Light Ticket)
    IMG 0003 1024x885 How to Beat a Photo Enforced Speeding Ticket (or Red Light Ticket)
    I can’t recall why I got the next letter, but I think it was because I didn’t respond promptly enough.
    Front: IMG 00011 786x1024 How to Beat a Photo Enforced Speeding Ticket (or Red Light Ticket)
    Back: BackPg2 793x1024 How to Beat a Photo Enforced Speeding Ticket (or Red Light Ticket)
    As you can see these criminals issuing these tickets are hoping that the people will just get scared and pay, or not want to waste their time with it. However the government has to provide evidence that it was actually ME driving, it’s their burden of proof. Just because they got pictures of my car doesn’t mean I was driving. So, in response to the first letter, I mailed them back the following letter (copied and pasted):
    To Whom it May Concern,
    I received a letter claiming I committed a violation of a speeding law in the District of Columbia on 04/21/2012. As per the instructions, I am writing to plead ‘not guilty’ to this charge. Although this option is said to result in this matter going to court; it is my suggestion that the charges simply be dropped. This suggestion comes out of respect for tax payers, and my request that their hard earned money not be wasted in such proceedings. As there is no evidence of my involvement with this alleged ‘crime’, as well as the fact that I am not granted my 4th amendment right to face my ‘accuser’ (a camera); I see no way the government could prove my guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I also see find no legal requirement for me to implicate someone else in this process, as it is the government’s responsibility to prove a person’s guilt. It is also my 5th amendment right to remain silent on the matter.
    If it is the government’s decision to move forward in this matter, I would request copies of any evidence the prosecution may have of my involvement in the “offense”; as well as, all maintenance records for the camera(s) involved.
    Sincerely,
    Nathan Cox
    United States Army Veteran
    HUGE thanks to super activist Meg McLain. I was slammed with work and was about to miss the deadline to mail the rebuttal letter in. She was my roommate at the time, I told her about how I needed it to read and she came up with a fantastic piece. I HIGHLY recommend Meg for any of your Graphic Design or Video Animation needs – She’s stellar!
    After sending that letter I received this post card:
    IMG 0004 1024x689 How to Beat a Photo Enforced Speeding Ticket (or Red Light Ticket)
    MANY months later (much more than six months), just the other day I get this post card showing that the ticket is DISMISSED.
    IMAG2481 1024x577 How to Beat a Photo Enforced Speeding Ticket (or Red Light Ticket)
    So PLEASE, NEVER EVER opt to pay these Photo Enforced Speeding AND Red Light tickets! You do NOT have to incriminate yourself OR implicate anyone else. It’s the government’s responsibility to provide evidence that YOU were the person driving, don’t help them in their “investigation”. ALWAYS go to court and fight your tickets, if there is NO VICTIM.. there is NO CRIME!
    This write-up wasfirst posted to VirginiaCopBlock.org by Nate Cox on May 10, 2013

    Existing As A Motorcycle Club!

    $
    0
    0
    by Lj James
    Existing As A Motorcycle Club!
    As the days go by, I see more and more injustice done to motorcycle club members. There are many who are always ready to stand and fight for their rights, while many others could give a shit less! I have had many laugh at me when I say motorcycle clubs need to unite in order to save themselves from a complete ban across the country. People tell me their is just too much hatred between a lot of the motorcycle clubs! The fights between the MC's are what the government is using to slowly destroy all MC's! There are real wars going on all over the world you never see on TV at all! Why is it that when two different MC members get into a fight it is on every news channel and in every paper? More often then not there is some TV docudrama made about it!
    I look at the MC's out there and there are some that I do not like, their values and beliefs are not the same as I believe a motorcycle club should be! I believe in the ole skool values of brotherhood, loyalty, freedom. If I have something, my brother too has that something! I believe if someone starts a fight with my brother they are starting a fight with us both! I do not believe in robbing and stealing to get what I want! I do not believe a motorcycle club member should use his MC membership to bully and extort people! Most MCs Share these beliefs but there are shades of grey in some areas and some times a small difference can mean a lot. The Value of Brotherhood is held the same by almost every MC out there! The love of the motorcycle and the feelings we feel while riding these motorcycles with our brothers as a motorcycle club are felt the same by just about all of us! Most of our core beliefs are very similar if not exactly the same! The point I am trying to make is that the MC's out there that you and I may not like is much closer to what we are then these out-of-control government agencies that are trying to destroy all of us!

    I am reminded of the scene in the Movie Braveheart where hundreds of different Scottish Clans come together. Some got along, others did not and yet others outright hated each other and would fight on sight to the death! If you or I where to take a look at two of these clans that hated each other, it would probably take a long time for us to figure out what their differences were. To us these clans would appear the same! There came a time for these clans when the grip of England that had slowly been growing tighter around the necks of all of them reached a point where the leaders of these clans realized they would rather live with people who may not agree with everything they do, but at least they could understand their values! I am sure this choice was easier to make when everyone knew the only other choice was to watch as they were are all slowly destroyed one by one and erased from history!

    This is the Point where American Motorcycle Clubs are now at! We do not need to like each other and we can even still hate each other! But we must work together before it is too late! There are countries around the world that have already banned motorcycle clubs all together! MC members who hated each other yesterday are finding respect for each other as they fight side by side for their simple right to just exist!!!

    We know what the road ahead of us holds. Do we just continue riding till we get there or do we begin preparing for the storm ahead?
    Viewing all 6498 articles
    Browse latest View live