Dirt Bikes Seized by Boston Police

[Garandman]

Last night two dudes were out shooting guns when spotted by BPD anti-gang squad. 0n - Bowdoin St.

[breakdirt916]

Police clear hundreds of dirt bikers from Druid Hill Park - Baltimore Sun

#bikelife

[GingahNinjah]

Police clear hundreds of dirt bikers from Druid Hill Park - Baltimore Sun

#bikelife

Funny that I dont even see any dirt bikes in the photos that are posted in the story lol

[Garandman]

Mayor Walsh Files Ordinance Addressing Disruptive Use of Recreational Vehicles | City of Boston

OSTON - Tuesday, August 11, 2015 - Mayor Martin J. Walsh has filed an ordinance to address the hazardous operation and storage of recreational vehicles and motorized conveyances.
"We are committed to creating safer streets for our officers and for our residents and visitors," said Mayor Walsh. "I look forward to working with the City Council to pass this ordinance, and end the inappropriate and dangerous use of recreational vehicles to better protect our communities."

If approved by the Boston City Council, these regulations would take effect immediately. The ordinance prohibits a person from engaging in hazardous operation of a motorized conveyance, including recreational vehicles, upon any public space in the City of Boston. Prohibited stunt or truck riding includes, but is not limited to, riding with the front, side or rear wheels raised from the surface of the road or ground, riding with a passenger's feet or knees planted on the seat, and operating a vehicle with a passenger riding on the handle bars. According to this ordinance, officers are allowed to issue immediate fines for a violation and to impound the vehicle pending compliance.

"Recreational vehicles have become both a nuisance on our neighborhoods disrupting the quality of life and genuine public safety hazard," said Boston City Councilor Stephen Murphy. "This ordinance, filed by Mayor Walsh, will go a long way to giving the Boston Police Department the necessary tools to keep the public safe and streets peaceful in the City of Boston."

The ordinance also addresses instances when groups of riders congregate on a property without the property owner's knowledge or approval or cause a disruption to nearby tenants, by requiring written permission to operate, maintain or possess a recreational vehicle on someone else's property. Additionally, the ordinance bans a person from placing or storing more than one unregistered recreational vehicle upon public or private land.

A recreational vehicle includes, but is not limited to, all-terrain vehicles, off-highway motorcycles, dirt bikes and recreation utility vehicles. Any person found in violation would be fined $250 for the first offense and $300 for a second or subsequent offense.

[Pittenger5]

I have 3 dirt bikes, guess Im not allowed to store them in my garage anymore?

[Kurlon]

I have 3 dirt bikes, guess Im not allowed to store them in my garage anymore?

If two are registered you're ok, sucks for people with race only machines though...

[TheIglu]

What exactly does that ban on more than one vehicle intend to do?


Last time I checked, you can only ride one at a time anyways.

[Garandman]

I'm trying to figure out what part of this isn't already illegal.

[Kurlon]

What exactly does that ban on more than one vehicle intend to do?


Last time I checked, you can only ride one at a time anyways.

It's an excuse to go into garages and look for reg stickers.

[number9]

If you guys don't like it, write Mayor Walsh to say why. I will be doing so today, and am glad to post my letter as a template.

[Pittenger5]

If two are registered you're ok, sucks for people with race only machines though...

I have my RMZ450 (not registered), my pit bike KLX110 (not registered), my CRF250 (not registered), hell, my CBR600 (not registered), all in the garage. None have, or ever will, see time on public streets. (other than late night drunken tomfoolery).

[breakdirt916]

you're a criminal!!

[Ductard]

The scooters and mopeds were tied to one shooting death, two nonfatal shootings, six assault and batteries, three robberies, and one carjacking, said Boston police Sergeant Dan Humphreys, who heads the department’s Auto Theft Unit. About half of those off-road vehicles — 152 — were stolen.

That reminds me of the time I was in Medellin, Colombia in the mid-2000's....you know Pablo Escobar's hometown....

I noticed that every street bike rider & passenger had a big florescent vest on with a number on it. Seemed odd because otherwise it was obvious that ATGATT wasn't the reigning philosophy.

I later found out that when the cartels were bad ('80's and 90's), they had a ton of drive up / drive by shootings committed by people on motorcycles. I guess they either weren't plated or the plates were too hard for witnesses to see. The strategy apparently cut down on the crimes.

[Ductard]

None have, or ever will, see time on public streets. (other than late night drunken tomfoolery).

I'd probably cut that out in general, but especially while hooligans on unregistered vehicles is a hot-button subject.

Also, I'm guessing/hoping that this only applies to Boston proper, instead of including Somerville and, you know, Austin (guessing your profile is out of date?)

It's an excuse to go into garages and look for reg stickers.

If two are registered you're ok, sucks for people with race only machines though...

Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but I'm guessing they only go in and search garages where they suspect these hooligans are keeping their rides. I think they'd also need probable cause to believe that you have more than 1 unregistered vehicle - which in practice would probably come from multiple people reporting hooliganish behavior to the cops (sure, if they can see in your garage from public land, they *could* count the bikes, then probably pull your registrations and compare, blah blah blah). The upshot is, don't piss off multiple neighbors, especially with anything directly bike related.

Then *if* they do search your garage and run your VIN's, there are more filters - if you seem upstanding I suspect the cop finds out nothing is stolen, then leaves you alone. If he does write you up, there's a chance the judge/magistrate would drop the charges (I know, court = PITA but still better than court + fine).
I know it won't sit well with a lot of people to have to rely on the good graces of a LEO or a judge...I'm not necessarily agreeing with the law, and I might write the mayor to voice my disagreement with parts of it.
I'm just saying that if you have a stable of unregistered dirt / race bikes, I wouldn't start to panic quite yet.

Even looks like they tried to carve out for the average non-street rider by allowing 1 unregistered vehicle. Your average Boston bureaucrat probably can't fathom stables as well stocked as your average NESR member's.

Dare I say, I actually see the 1 registered vehicle / written permission things as a positive to combat bike thefts. It is probably just a way to lower the burden of proof for the cops to check VIN's and find stolen property. It's a lot harder to reason that "there are so many bikes in that garage, some of them have to be stolen" than it is "there are so many bikes in that garage, but not a single one registered to the owner of that building - we need to check for written permission and registrations" - but the second one lets them run the VIN's anyways.

It sucks that the more you make your average citizen secure in their right against unreasonable search/seizure, the easier you make it for bad dudes to do bad things then play a cat and mouse game with law enforcement.

[keeena]

If you guys don't like it, write Mayor Walsh to say why. I will be doing so today, and am glad to post my letter as a template.

Please post your template. This ordinance is ridiculous. Riding unregistered vehicles is already illegal. And it seems to go further by disallowing "stunt" riding in a private lot if it bothers other people.

[number9]

Please post your template. This ordinance is ridiculous. Riding unregistered vehicles is already illegal. And it seems to go further by disallowing "stunt" riding in a private lot if it bothers other people.

I'm working on it now, I'll post it up as soon as I'm done writing the draft. I am pretty particular about my writing so it may take a while before I've got a finished product that I'm happy with.

I'll mail the letter and CC it to my neighborhood liaison for the Mayor's Office and also to my City Councilor. Boston residents, you can find out who yours are by going to the My Neighborhood section of the City's website.

[Ductard]

I'm working on it now, I'll post it up as soon as I'm done writing the draft. I am pretty particular about my writing so it may take a while before I've got a finished product that I'm happy with.

Please post your template. This ordinance is ridiculous. Riding unregistered vehicles is already illegal. And it seems to go further by disallowing "stunt" riding in a private lot if it bothers other people.

I just read the actual ordinance, I wasn't too put off by it until I got to e5-8, when they started dropping "in a public place" ...Oh, and e4 - if you put your knee on the seat to pull your quad up a foot (in a public place) it's illegal.

Nothing particularly wrong with the city ordinances duplicating state law, but am I correct that the MA law uses a more general "operating negligently or recklessly" potentially putting the public in danger - whereas the Boston law calls out very specific acts?

The Boston proposal reads like a bunch of crotchety old people got together and started listing everything that pisses them off.

Reading the MA law was a little eye opening though. It sounds like you could lose your license by drinking a 6 pack and jumping on a 50cc minibike on your own gated property. That may not be the smartest thing to do, but seems like overreach to treat that the same as drinking while operating a 2,000 lb. car on a public road. Not sure why doing something dangerous and stupid on something with a motor on it needs to be treated any different than doing something dangerous and stupid in general.

[MHenry600]

I'm trying to figure out what part of this isn't already illegal.

This is the part I'm stuck on...

What part of this isn't already illegal based on current laws? It seems like this is the typical government move when people don't understand what is already on the books. And I'll be one of the first to admit that I don't know them all either.

I do know there are definitely laws already stating you can't ride an unregistered vehicle on the street and on state/city property (and must have ohrv for trails), but sure lets throw a few more pieces of legislation out there to make sure it's even more confusing. The people they are trying to reign in don't give a damn what the law says anyway...

The only way they will fully stop it is to make all dirtbikes/quads illegal everywhere, and I think that is what some people want anyway.

[Ductard]

This is the part I'm stuck on...

What part of this isn't already illegal based on current laws? It seems like this is the typical government move when people don't understand what is already on the books. And I'll be one of the first to admit that I don't know them all either.

That's pretty normal. If you read the proposed Boston Regs, it refers to the various state laws that deal with the same issues - and even says something to the effect of "this is the same as these state laws, except where we're stricter, in that case the City Ordinance's stricter provision applies."

The duplication can serve several purposes:
1. Can make the law stricter or more clearly defined.
2. Can simply reinforce that something is illegal (to both aid in enforcement and so the politician can say to the complaining parties that they've done something about it).
3. Can remain in effect if the state law is repealed.
4. More paperwork = bureaucrat JOB SECURITY!

...to name a few...

The only way they will fully stop it is to make all dirtbikes/quads illegal everywhere, and I think that is what some people want anyway.

Not sure I agree with that, but in spirit it sounds like the activities they are targeting need to stop, they just have a solution that seems unacceptably far from perfect.

[curiouser]

I'm trying to figure out what part of this isn't already illegal.

I'm guessing the part banning someone from storing more than one unreg'd vehicle on private property. That sounds like a bit of an overreach of gov't power. But then again, it's for safety and the children, so how could you oppose that? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Ductard]

I'm guessing the part banning someone from storing more than one unreg'd vehicle on private property. That sounds like a bit of an overreach of gov't power. But then again, it's for safety and the children, so how could you oppose that? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Everybody can probably relax on that bit - That only applies to vehicles that are not stored in fully enclosed structures.

I doubt anybody on here that lives in the city of Boston is storing one, much less more than one, unregistered bike (dirty, racebike, or otherwise) under a carport or shed, for theft / weather reasons alone.

I don't think it's a law at the state level but a lot of cities have a similar law.

It seems to be aimed so that your neighbor doesn't start a de facto junkyard right next door. If you have one unregistered vehicle outside, you probably have a clunker you've been putting off fixing. If you have more than one you probably have a huge eyesorer for the whole neighborhood.

[Kurlon]

Mass state law says you can't have unregistered dirtbikes/atvs on your property, period. In a garage, in your bedroom, on the roof, doesn't matter they're all required to be registered. Even if they're just a twisted frame.

[Ductard]

Mass state law says you can't have unregistered dirtbikes/atvs on your property, period. In a garage, in your bedroom, on the roof, doesn't matter they're all required to be registered. Even if they're just a twisted frame.

You sure about that? Everything I've seen is about "operating" an unregistered vehicle, or storing them in public view (all city ordinances on that count).

[Kurlon]

Came into effect in the past couple of years along with the age restrictions/etc. NEDB had a good thread on it till it went poof.

[Garandman]

What if they are registered in NH? I don't both with MA ORV reg anymore.