proposed motorcycle legislation in NH

A slightly ammended version of dontpanic's letter to the state:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Composed by my frined, Chuck (NHFZ1)

Dear Representatives,

I strongly urge you to reconsider the proposed House Bill 95 relative to motorcycle equipment and noise levels. The unintended impact to the state economy is likely to be far more significant than you might have imagined.

1. The immediate impact is likely to be a significant reduction of income to the state's economy. The requirement for tachometers in particular is in contravention of Federal standards, and will preclude the sales of many, many motorcycles in the state. Motorcycle dealers will be impacted. They are your constituents, and voters.

2. The greater impact is likely to be derived from a major decline in attendance at motorcycle week events. You are aware, no doubt, of the economic benefit that this event has on the state, but I suggest that a 50% decline in attendance due to the proposed regulations would have another, major impact on the incomes of your constituents, your voters.

3. As an aside, I find it puzzling that motorcycles are singled out in the proposal. If noise is truly the issue, I suggest the following: amend the proposal to apply the same standards to passenger cars, commercial vehicles, and construction equipment.

4. The proposed legislation would require law enforcement to be familiar with all years, makes and models of motorcycles to determine, by roadside inspection, if there had been any modification to the stock exhaust. I believe this would be difficult to implement, time consuming, cumbersome, and very difficult to enforce.

5. The current laws, RSA 266:59 and RSA 266:59a, are in place to handle the issue of excessive noise. I believe these current laws adequate, fair and merely need to be enforced.

---

Nice! Good to have the citations to the actual statutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dontpanic

Nice! Good to have the citations to the actual statutes.

---

Chuck does his homework.

bump as a reminder of tomorrows public hearing

Hearing date & time:
01/21/2009 at 11:30 AM in the Legislative Office Building, Room 203

howd it go? i couldnt get the day off

I think it went very well.
There were a good sized group of bikers who gave very good reasons why the bill is a mistake.

There were a few dealers
there were a few bikers rights groups
we certainly have a few Reps on our side

Sully749 kicked some ass, the rep that wrote the bill ran crying from the building. Well not really but she would have had she decided to stick around to hear the full hearing.

I think most of the people who were there For the bill did not understand what they were proposing, after hearing everyone I think they now know how tough this topic really is.

I didn't make is either, but from what I understand the transportation committee is going to recommend "inexpedient to legislate"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyO

"inexpedient to legislate"

---

That's great news, I hadn't heard. When we showed up we found that the text of the submitted bill had been amended. They had deleted the tach requirement and the prohibition against aftermarket exhaust but the prohibition against exhaust modification was still there. So if a part on your exhaust breaks and is no longer available, rather than ad lib a fix, you'd be required to buy a new exhaust. :scratchhead:

They also added a couple ways the decibel could be measured, including under 45 miles, at a distance of 50 feet, the decibels had to be 82 (I think that was the level - I don't have the bill in front of me right now). Can you just picture it? An officer has to judge the distance at exactly 50 feet (didn't specify in front or in back of, or at what angle from, the bike) and hold a radar gun in one hand to measure mph and a decibel meter in the other . . . just crazy. Oh, and they increased the max fine to $1000.

Finally, the new version of the bill added a commission to study the problem. Soooo, let's pass all these requirements, and THEN study the issue at no small expense to the taxpayers? :deathslap: And all this without any explanation of why the existing statute on the books is insufficient to deal with the problem (they should be amending that law if it isn't working, not creating a new one).

Anyway, I'm sure the sponsors had somewhere very pressing to be that afternoon :rolleyes: . . . but I was dismayed they didn't stick around to hear some very interesting points made by the people who testified - the sponsors really owe it to themselves and to all of us to get educated on the subject BEFORE they start drafting legislation.

OK, rant over!! :rant:

the prime sponsor is also the author of a moronic bill that I am following with regard to wetland application submissions and a list of others that I am not following, seems she is trying to be the ultimate do-gooder

impression I got is that HB95 with amendments is gettin even further away from anything that is even posible to uniformly enforce

measure sound levels of a bike travelling up to 45mph from a distance of 50 feet :rolleyes: the transporttation committee is not as dumb as she thinks

we still have to keep our eyes on this

they may sent it to study committee too which would delay any action till next legislative session but that means another amended form could pop up with virtually no notice

at this point, the bill is still in committee and rather than contact your representatives it is more effective to contat members of the transportation committee,

here's a list

if one of your representatives happens to be on the committee, make it a point to contact them

There was a half page follow up article in the Laconia Sun I think on 1/22 (they have archives online) Sounds like the whole thing was shot down but they will form a committee to improve the LEO's field test to go after the 10%'s with straight pipes.

I hope you guys win your fight , That topic seems to rising more in more in the biking community no matter where @ , Here in Canada in my part of the woods anyways been alot of talk about " db readers " being in the police cars nothing concrete here yet but like they say "where there's smoke there's fire "
and I think as soon as one State or In my case One province starts they all will

View the video of the hearing...

http://mefeedia.com/entry/nh-house-t...-hb95/13863633

...nice job Sully!!!


???REPOST???

tuff...missed it myself...maybe someone else did too...

http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2009/Jan/090126ws.htm

http://roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=35425

Title of article
New Hampshire Goes Crazy: Run A Tach Or Go To Jail?

Live free or Die

as long as you do it quiet, and with a tach

These are the good old days