Bad legislation

[jeepinjp]

All,

All,
I am posting a new bill, very similar to 2 others we already beat, also find link to Senate Transportation Committee......LET THEM KNOW WE DONT LIKE IT.....Click link to committee and go to transportation, call/write every member and tell them to vote against the bill unless it provides atleast 2 new riding areas similtanious to effect of bill...




http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2006/Bills/S1500/1278_I1.HTM


http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/committees/Senate.asp







--------------------

911 NEVER FORGET !!!
J.P.
semper fi
"W"
"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." --Edmund Burke (1729-97)
NOHVCC State Rep.
JORVA Founder
XTREME
AMA
Tread Lightly Master Trainer
NJOHVA
Blue Ribbon Coalition
ATVA

WELCOME TO THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF NJ....ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK

 

[Ben Ruset]

So, did you even read this bill? Because it only talks about using ATV's or Snowmobiles on public roads, where they have never been allowed. People shouldn't be riding those things on the street.

1. (New section) a. A snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle operated on any public street, highway or right-of-way in violation of section 17 of P.L.1973, c.307 (C.39:3C-17) shall be impounded by the law enforcing agency and subject to a fee and costs as hereinafter provided

39:3C-17. Operational limitations
a. No person shall operate a snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle upon limited access highways or within the right-of-way limits thereof.

b. No person shall operate a snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle upon the main traveled portion or the plowed snowbanks of any public street or highway or within the right-of-way limits thereof except as follows:

(1) Properly registered snowmobiles or all-terrain vehicles may cross, as directly as possible, public streets or highways, except limited access highways, provided that such crossing can be made in safety and that it does not interfere with the free movement of vehicular traffic approaching from either direction on such public street or highway. Prior to making any such crossing, the operator shall bring the snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle to a complete stop. It shall be the responsibility of the operator of a snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle to yield the right-of-way to all vehicular traffic upon any public street or highway before crossing same.

(2) Whenever it is impracticable to gain immediate access to an area adjacent to a public highway where a snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle is to be operated, it may be operated adjacent and parallel to such public highway for the purpose of gaining access to the area of operation. This subsection shall apply to the operation of a snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle from the point where it is unloaded from a motorized conveyance to the area where it is to be operated, or from the area where operated to a motorized conveyance, when such loading or unloading cannot be effected in the immediate vicinity of the area of operation without causing a hazard to vehicular traffic approaching from either direction on said public highway. Such loading or unloading must be accomplished with due regard to safety, at the nearest possible point to the area of operation.

L. 1973, c. 307, s. 17, eff. Dec. 14, 1973. Amended by L. 1985, c. 375, s. 17.

So... I'm not really seeing any problems with this bill.

 

[jeepinjp]

So, did you even read this bill? Because it only talks about using ATV's or Snowmobiles on public roads, where they have never been allowed. People shouldn't be riding those things on the street.





So... I'm not really seeing any problems with this bill.

bruset,

Yes, I read this bill and many others...

The problems with this bill are as follows:

First most of whats in this bill is a duplication of current law with higher fines and confiscation, I do agree the should not be on the road. But be careful with words like right of way= fire roads/cuts , utility dirt roads,logging/mining roads etc very wide definition

next laws are not that strict for cars , so why should they be for ATV/snowmobiles

no new laws should be passed until the State & DEP fulfill there 2002 promise of providing at least 2 new areas for off road vehicle by 2005 which still has not happened...

and lastly for now, there is a bill coming from Assemblyman Gusciora with similar fines and confiscationm but also with increased registration fees to $ 35 with all the $$ going to enforcement and none going where it should be into trails and safety training and to a degree to enforcement but only after there are a few legal areas...

any other questions...

 

[Ben Ruset]

First most of whats in this bill is a duplication of current law with higher fines and confiscation, I do agree the should not be on the road. But be careful with words like right of way= fire roads/cuts , utility dirt roads,logging/mining roads etc very wide definition

The law is very clear. Title 39 covers any public road. Title 39 covers utility/mining roads as those would be private property.

Sure, this bill just ups the penalties for driving an ATV/Quad in violation of Title 39. I don't see what the problem is. There is a kid in my neighborhood that, when it snows, tears around the neighborhood in his quad. Nobody is expecting someone on a quad to come flying around a corner. It's a risk to both the ATV rider and people in cars. Would I want my pregnant wife to be hit by an ATV rider? No.

next laws are not that strict for cars , so why should they be for ATV/snowmobiles

What are you talking about? Title 39 is all about automobiles. Do you think that you wouldn't get your car impounded if you were driving without registration or insurance, like most quads and ATVs are?

no new laws should be passed until the State & DEP fulfill there 2002 promise of providing at least 2 new areas for off road vehicle by 2005 which still has not happened...

Well, see this is about two different things. I am all about making more areas to ride, and for the most part I think that the 2002 bill is unfair. However adding stiffer penalties to something that is blatently illegal and highly unsafe? I have no problem with that at all.

And before you get some wrong opinion of me, I have lobbied VERY hard against the DEP for the 2002 bill. Ask anyone on this site, or do a search. I think that ATV owners for the most part have gotten the short end of the stick and are being punished for the misdeeds that a few ATV riders do.

and lastly for now, there is a bill coming from Assemblyman Gusciora with similar fines and confiscationm but also with increased registration fees to $ 35 with all the $$ going to enforcement and none going where it should be into trails and safety training and to a degree to enforcement but only after there are a few legal areas...

any other questions...

Oh my god. $35 to register your quad? How will you ever be able to afford that and the $100/yr insurance? They should make registering/insuring quads and ATV's mandatory. I bet you if every quad had a tag on it, there would be FAR less need for enforcement.

 

[swwit]

Bruset, your right on about the subject. And if the amount to insure the atv would be around $100 that's a deal. I pay over $2000 to insure four motorcycles so that would be a deal.

 

[Ben Ruset]

Bruset, your right on about the subject. And if the amount to insure the atv would be around $100 that's a deal. I pay over $2000 to insure four motorcycles so that would be a deal.

$2000 for four motorcycles? I think my friend paid something like $200/yr for his brand new Harley Lowrider.

 

[swwit]

$2000 for four motorcycles? I think my friend paid something like $200/yr for his brand new Harley Lowrider.

It all depends on where you live. Rider Ins. Co. is the biggest and about the cheapest but it depends on where you live within the state and the bike type. Two are sport bikes and they are the most expensive to insure averaging about $800 each.

 

[entropysedge]

It all depends on where you live. Rider Ins. Co. is the biggest and about the cheapest but it depends on where you live within the state and the bike type. Two are sport bikes and they are the most expensive to insure averaging about $800 each.

I'm paying $650 a year for two bikes: SV650S and XT225... I switched from Rider to Foremost because Rider reclassified the SV as a supersport which tripled my insurance.

 

[swwit]

I'm paying $650 a year for two bikes: SV650S and XT225... I switched from Rider to Foremost because Rider reclassified the SV as a supersport which tripled my insurance.

That's good to know. I need to look into Foremost. Thanks.

 

[woodjin]

I have Rider. I insure an xr440 for less than $100/yr. I can't remember exactly how much.

Jeff

 

[foofoo]

you guys dont know the half of it! when MCGREEDY took over the first thing he did was raise all the registrations. i have two old snowmobiles that i get to use one or 2 days out of the year in this state. he raised the registration from 5$ to 15$. i have to have insurance to ride the few state parks that are listed as snowmobile riding parks.foremost insurance charged me 240$ FOR EACH SNOWMOBILE. they have a monopoly it seems. there are no other companies i could find in this state for recreational snowmobile insurance. for a couple days out of the year what a rip off. if i go to another state like maine or new york i have to re- register them there. were talking like another 70$ each sled. at least in those states they groom the trails. in new jersey they took lebanon(brendon byrne state park) off the list for snowmobile riding. this was probably the best place to ride because its nice and flat. in this state you pay and pay . its enough already!

 

[Ben Ruset]

Insurance may be $240 per snowmobile, but it's a lot cheaper than paying out a lawsuit out of pocket.

The reason why you have insurance is to protect yourself. Heaven forbid you kill someone or damage property while on your snowmobile... the insurance company pays -- not you.

I spoke with my attorney about this a while ago. He represented a kid who was injured by someone who rode an uninsured quad. The kid had medical bills in the tens of thousands of dollars. They were left holding the bill. Sure they got a criminal judgement against the parents of the kid who rode the quad. The parents declared bankruptcy and that judgement was wiped out.

Frankly, insurance should be viewed to be as critical an item as a helmet or any other safety device. At least that's how I see it.