HB2470 / HB3838 "Malories Law" - Foot Pegs and Grab Handles

innominate said:

i gonna send the below to my senator. and something simular to the lt gov and the committee chair. do yall see anything incorrect/not factual before i send these on their way?

Sir, I have recently become aware of HB 2470. And while I empathize with Malorie's family for their loss. The bill, as written, is disciminatory toward "sport bikes". I am a rider and I am for motorcycle safety. But I do not see that this bill would promote safety or education. It simply singles out a certain class of motorcycle. Texas already requires a MSF, motorcycle safety foundation, approved course to obtain a class M license. This course has a section concerning riding with passengers. This bill does not add to the education requirement. It only adds an age requirement of 18, a time requirement of 2 years for the driver OR the passenger is 18 and has a class M. This in no way ensures that the driver is actually an experienced rider. Or experienced in carrying a passenger. And these stipulations only apply to "sport bike" riders. While a rider with no experience, other than the safety course, may purchase a new "cruiser" and carry a passenger. Even though they are no more experienced than the sport bike rider. They simply chose to purchase a different style of motorcycle.

How will this law be enforced if it does pass? An officer has no means to verify how long a rider has had their class M. Will the system have to be modified or updated in order for this information to be collected and then disseminated. And if so, at what cost?

What effect does this have on motorcycles that are considered sport bikes, that are already in the hands of owners, but were not manufactured with hand holds as required in this bill? Or current motorcycles that are being sold in this state and sitting on showroom floors. And reguarding these hand holds. Does the author of this bill think these would be of any help to a passenger in an accident? I mean that rhetorically. Noone has the strength to hold onto a motorcycle once it is traveling. Even at a relatively slow speed. And noone would want to either. Safety dictates that you should try to seperate yourself from the motorcycle. Because if the motorcycle hits something and high sides, goes flipping through the air, if you are still connected to it you greatly increase your chance of serious injury. And a nice shiny metal motorcycle slides farther than a person. That is another reason you would not want to continue to hold on, even if you could.

If this bill makes it out of committee and to the senate for a vote I hope that you can look past the emotional pleas of the family and supporters. And see this bill for what is it, and is not.

Thank you for your time

Click to expand...

M38A1 said:

Folks....
With this last bit of information above, if correct in our understanding, we have successfully address all four major points of the proposed legislation. I'll be working on a draft of the bill and our collective assessment/affects and have it for review maybe tomorrow.

Nice job everyone.


.

Click to expand...

Brotha J said:

As a teacher I have to tell you that this letter has quite a few grammatical errors.

Click to expand...

innominate said:

i never won any spellin bee's. i'll go over it with spell check

Click to expand...

Brotha J said:

AND you started a few sentences with "and".

Click to expand...

innominate said:

i actually cut out some of the ands. and that's just poor sentence structure right? not just poor grammar? i always hated english. i felt like that character getting his high school diploma in the shawshank redemption when it came to english. too many rules to remember. thx for pointin out the errors.

Click to expand...

Brotha J said:

AND you started a few sentences with "and".

Click to expand...

perterra said:

You got a point, but I think we are giving them way too much credit on their feelings. Tim said deep down they know they are wrong. I dont think they care that they might be wrong. They just want to look in the mirror and say, we did something. That it may be right or wrong doesnt enter in to their mind,

Click to expand...

bmcdonau said:

Have you seen our Texas reps? They'll never know the errors exist.

Click to expand...

M38A1 said:

The problem with the proposed legislation is that there is no grandfather clause or allowance for racks or farkles. It's black and white in that ANY bike, regardless of manufacture, year etc is in violation if the pegs/handholds have been removed.

Where is the part of advanced training reducing the waiting period? I do not recall seeing that anywhere in the proposed legislation that has cleared the Texas House. Please quote/direct me to your source.

Click to expand...

Dahveed said:

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. This thread moves faster than I do.

There was a post that suggested the advanced MSF course would reduce the waiting period. I don't think it was part of the current legislation, but something that was discussed to improve the legislation between another poster here and their representative. I cannot find that posting now, so it was either nuked or back far enough that I didn't see it. I also could have misread the post too. Or imagined it entirely...

Click to expand...

M38A1 said:

So Google is your friend.....

The proposed law regarding foot pegs and handles:

The addition of requisite 'safety' equipment to include:
Sec. 547.803. SPORT BIKE SAFETY EQUIPMENT. If a sport bike
is designed to carry more than one person, the sport bike must be
equipped with foot pegs and handholds for use by a passenger on the
sport bike.


THE IMPORTANT STUFF:
The net effect of the proposed legislation is a $10 administrative fine if the offender remedies the defect before the first court appearance. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but did I just interpret this correctly that the penalty is TEN BUCKS? I'm betting heavy money again that the proposed law will have ZERO impact on the equipment restrictions. Kids will take their chances with this one and if they get busted (assuming this passes) they'll put the pegs and such back on and be done with it to remove it after the court appearance.

Source:
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/TN/htm/TN.547.htm


TRANSPORTATION CODE
TITLE 7. VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC
SUBTITLE C. RULES OF THE ROAD
CHAPTER 547. VEHICLE EQUIPMENT
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 547.004. GENERAL OFFENSES. (a) A person commits an offense that is a misdemeanor if the person operates or moves or, as an owner, knowingly permits another to operate or move, a vehicle that:

(1) is unsafe so as to endanger a person;

(2) is not equipped in a manner that complies with the vehicle equipment standards and requirements established by this chapter; or

(3) is equipped in a manner prohibited by this chapter.

(b) A person commits an offense that is a misdemeanor if the person operates a vehicle equipped with an item of vehicle equipment that the person knows has been determined in a compliance proceeding under Section 547.206 to not comply with a department standard.

(c) A court may dismiss a charge brought under this section if the defendant:

(1) remedies the defect before the defendant's first court appearance; and

(2) pays an administrative fee not to exceed $10.

(d) Subsection (c) does not apply to an offense involving a commercial motor vehicle.

Click to expand...

Alex Buruian If you would like to protect passengers on motorcycles how come this bill is not aimed at motorcycles with 30% more mortality then supersports? IIHS reports more injuries and fatalities for cruisers and standard motorcycles then supersport bikes, are they not worthy of your 'protection'?
35 minutes ago

Malorie's Law We have over 600 comments with 601 ideas.and your smart a** comment just made you "worthy" of being last in line.............next

Danny Lazourievsky That's not ignorant at all.

Alex Buruian Lol u mad? Just because you play on everyones emotions, doesn't mean that you can sneak discrimination in there.

Click to expand...

M38A1 said:

OK, thanks to Troy J, the proposed legislation has moved to the Senate and currently sits in the Transportation and Homeland Security Committee.

Status:
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB2470


The contacts for this include:
Chair -Tommy Williams
Vice-Chair - Kirk Watson
Members:
Wendy Davis
Rodney Ellis
Chris Harris
Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa
Robert Nichols
Florence Shapiro
Jeff Wentworth

Clerk: Tulsi Reddy
Tel: (512) 463-0067 Sam Houston Building
Room 450

Let's hit these folks hard with the FACTS about this poorly written legislation. I'm still working on the summary/talking points, but there's enough detail in this thread to give you plenty to work with if you feel the need to get something out asap. I'll try to have it ready Tuesday.

Agian, we must try to kill this in Committee so EVERYONE, we need your support.

Click to expand...