Biker Republic: BIKERnews Sept 21, 3007

Date: September 21st 2007

Biker Republics, E-news for bikers
Home to The Extreme Activists of the Biker Rights Movement!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contents:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Quig
2. NTSB RECOMMENDS LEGLISLATION
3. Federal Agencies Step on the Toes of State Legislatures
4. NTSB Call to Action
5. Motorcyclist BEWARE
6. Take action on Alice 105.9
7. Alice 105.9 and their advertisers
8. Biker Republic TEA Party - Oct 12-13, 2007
9. Maryland Residents Have To Release Medical Records To Buy Guns
10.
11. HERO AND DORK of the week
12. Show your support for the fight.
http://www.bikerrepublic.org

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Quig
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday, September 16, 2007 1:18 PM
.."Mark Temple, being a long time personal friend of Richard Quigley, has asked that these information be posted to the ABATE membership.
One our brightest and persistent freedom fighters; has passed away. Mr. Quigley succumbed to his long battle with cancer last night at 9:00 PM."
Ride SAFE and Free
Linda/Moxxsie

Richard Quigley (1943-2007): Biker fought the law and often won
By TOM RAGAN
SENTINEL STAFF WRITER

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2007/September/18/local/stories/01local.htm

SANTA CRUZ — Richard James Quigley, a biker who became a local folk hero by wearing a baseball cap in defiance of the state's motorcycle helmet law, died over the weekend from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. He was 63.


A Santa Cruz County resident for more than three decades, Quigley ran unsuccessfully for county sheriff and the 17th Congressional District in the mid-'90s, but it was his reputation as a protector of the First Amendment that often preceded him.

He tried to sue the county Board of Supervisors more than a decade ago for raising and lowering the U.S. flag disrespectfully by stuffing it into a trash bag at the end of each day.

View and sign a condolence book in memory of Richard Quigley.

A self-described "freedom fighter" long before freedom ever became a buzzword, Quigley's greatest passion, perhaps, was his relentless and unapologetic pursuit of repealing California's helmet law so that bikers across the state could ride with their hair blowing in the wind again.

Studious in nature and self-taught in law, Quigley, with his long beard and thin frame, became a fixture in local courts, where he'd passionately argue his own cases, pulling out tape recordings of CHP officers who had stopped him on his bike and cited him for not wearing a motorcycle helmet.

"The wind doesn't care what you're wearing, why should the state?" Quigley was often fond of saying. "It's all about personal freedom. It should be our right to choose"

Said Kate Wells, a close friend and local civil rights attorney: "To the very end, he wanted to change the law for everybody. And he just might yet. The thing about Quigley was that he didn't think the government had a place telling him what he could and could not do, and he had a lot of followers and a lot of friends after a while who believed in his cause"

Hordes of them, in fact, even showed up for his "living wake," which he held for himself weeks after his doctor told him he didn't have much longer to live, his reasoning being that he didn't want people to kick themselves after he was gone, saying, "I should have told him this or I should have told him that," he later remarked.

Even a few CHP officers were on hand, having come to known Quigley over the years after issuing him so many citations. Although the officers still enforce the helmet law, many of them were saddened to hear of Quigley's death, said Grant Boles, a spokesman with the CHP.

"I always got along with him," said Boles. "We could always have a civil conversation, but I quit arguing with him a long time ago. He knew the helmet law and the circumstances and the statutes in great detail. He knew about it more than I did. I'll admit that. Our policy is simple: We enforce motorcyclists not wearing their helmets or not wearing an obvious helmet. That's how we're trained"

It was Quigley's long-held contention that the helmet law was unconstitutional because there was ambiguity about what constituted a safe helmet. According to CHP policy manuals, only helmets that have been approved by the Department of Transportation are legal to wear, but the problem with that scenario is that the DOT isn't in the business of approving helmets and set no specific standards for manufacturers.

Such an argument earned Quigley a win in Santa Cruz County Superior Court last year. Judge Michael Barton, declaring the helmet law "vague" and "unconstitutional," dismissed more than a dozen of Quigley's citations.

But the ramifications of the ruling only applied to Quigley, not the entire state, something Quigley had been pressing for — even more desperately after being diagnosed with cancer in November 2005.

With more plaintiffs in tow, Quigley took his case back to the Superior Court, in hopes of winning statewide — in what is called a "declatory and injunctive relief" The case could be heard soon, noted Wells.

As he lay dying, lawyers with the state Attorney General's Office, on behalf of the California Highway Patrol, took his deposition while he was bed-ridden in his home above Aptos Village, she said.

Lyle Fleming, president of the Ghost Mountain Riders Motorcycle Club in Felton, said the fight to repeal the helmet law is by no means over.

"I'm going to continue his fight for freedom and justice for bikers," Fleming said. "It doesn't make us safer. There are times when we should be able to take helmets off, like when it's too hot or when your hearing or vision is impaired. That's when they can be dangerous"

Richard James Quigley

BORN: Dec. 25, 1943.

DIED: Sept. 15, 2007.

RESIDENCE: Santa Cruz County for more than three decades.

JOBS: Horse wrangler, stage coach driver, corporate marketing executive, private investigator and radio talk show host.

QUOTABLES:

'If you ain't havin' fun, you just ain't doin' it right.'

'Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming, "Wow, what a ride!"'

SERVICES: To be announced.

As for Quigley's future court dates, Wells will carry on her good friend's work. It's the least she can do, she said.

"He led each of us who knew him to a safer landing than we ever could have found for ourselves," Wells wrote in an obituary of Quigley. "How lucky we are that this great spirit turned out not to have been tethered to his wonderful being but flew even closer than before into our hearts, where it may now with some long-earned certainty, expect to find rest and welcome"

Contact Tom Ragan at tragan@santacruzsentinel.com.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. NTSB RECOMMENDS LEGLISLATION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NTSB RECOMMENDS LEGLISLATION TO MANDATE ALL MOTORCYCLISTS USE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FMVSS 218-COMPLIANT HELMETS

************************************************************
NTSB PRESS RELEASE
************************************************************

National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 11, 2007

SB-07-44


************************************************************

NTSB RECOMMENDS LEGLISLATION TO MANDATE ALL MOTORCYCLISTS
USE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FMVSS 218-COMPLIANT HELMETS

************************************************************

Washington, DC-The National Transportation Safety Board
today issued recommendations to states to require all
motorcyclists and their passengers to wear Department of
Transportation Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
218-compliant helmets.

Currently, only 20 states, the District of Columbia, and 4
territories have universal helmet laws requiring all riders
to wear a helmet. Twenty-seven states and 1 territory have
partial laws that require minors and/or passengers to wear
such helmets. Three states have no helmet laws.

"The facts are very clear- head injuries are a leading cause
of deaths in motorcycle crashes," said NTSB Chairman Mark V.
Rosenker. "The most important step riders can take in terms
of protecting themselves and staying alive is to wear a DOT-
compliant helmet every time they ride."

FMVSS 218-compliant helmets are designed with a hard outer
shell, an impact-attenuating liner, and a retention system
to protect the head, especially the brain, in a variety of
impact scenarios.

"Universal helmet laws have proven effective in the
mitigation of injuries and the prevention of fatalities.
Implementing these recommendations will take strong
leadership in the States," Rosenker said. "I hope that the
Governors and legislative leaders in the States will act
promptly and decisively to implement the universal helmet
laws recommended today by the Board."

Since 1997, motorcycle fatalities have increased 127
percent. Last year, 4,810 motorcyclists died in crashes,
and accounted for more than 10 percent of all motor vehicle
crash fatalities.

Last September, the Safety Board held a public forum and
gathered information on ongoing motorcycle research and
initiatives, as well as countermeasures that may reduce the
likelihood of motorcycle accidents and fatalities. The
meeting included participants representing government,
motorcycle manufacturers, motorcyclist associations, state
motorcycle rights organizations, researchers, trauma
physicians, law enforcement, and insurance companies.

As a result of today's meeting, the National Transportation
Safety Board issued the following recommendations:

To the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:

Reprioritize the National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety
recommendations based on objective criteria, including
known safety outcomes.

Following completion of the reprioritization of the
National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety, implement an
action plan for states and others, such as federal
agencies, manufacturers, insurance organizations, and
advocacy groups, to carry out those recommendations
that are determined to be of high priority.

To the Federal Highway Administration:

Following the 2007 Motorcycle Travel Symposium,
develop guidelines for the states to use to gather
accurate motorcycle registrations and motorcycle
vehicle miles traveled data. The guidelines should
include information on the various methods to collect
registrations and vehicle miles traveled data and how
these methods can be put into practice.

To the three states with no motorcycle helmet laws:
Require that all persons shall wear a Department of
Transportation Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
218-compliant motorcycle helmet while riding
(operating), or as a passenger on any motorcycle.

To the 27 states and 1 territory with partial motorcycle
helmet laws:

Amend current laws to require that all persons shall
wear a Department of Transportation Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard 218-compliant motorcycle
helmet while riding (operating), or as a passenger on
any motorcycle.

To the 8 states, the District of Columbia, and the 4
territories with universal motorcycle helmet
laws/regulations not specifically requiring FMVSS 218-
compliant helmets:

Amend current laws to specify that all persons shall
wear a Department of Transportation Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard 218-compliant motorcycle
helmet while riding (operating), or as a passenger on
any motorcycle.

To all states:

Provide information to the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) on the effectiveness of
your motorcycle safety efforts to assist NHTSA with
its effort to reprioritize the National Agenda for
Motorcycle Safety recommendations.

Full copies of the recommendation letters will be available
in a few days on the NTSB website, www.ntsb.gov.
NTSB Media Contact: Terry N. Williams
(202) 314-6100
williat@ntsb.gov

This message is delivered to you as a free service from the
National Transportation Safety Board.

You may unsubscribe at any time at
http://www.ntsb.gov/registration/registration.htm

An archive of press releases is available at
http://www.ntsb.gov/pressrel/pressrel.htm

Current job opportunities with the NTSB are listed at
http://www.ntsb.gov/vacancies/listing.htm

For questions/problems, contact pubinq@ntsb.gov
Do you really mean the contents of the head? Is there another way to
say this?
I am not sure what this quote is trying to say. Wouldn't it be better
for him to
challenge the states and say Implementing these recommendations will
require strong
leadership in the states. "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Federal Agencies Step on the Toes of State Legislatures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

www.ncsl.org/programs/press/2007/pr070912preemption.htm

National Conference of State Legislatures
September 12, 2007

Federal Agencies Step on the Toes of State Legislatures
Preemptive regulations threaten regional and local self-government

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Federal preemption of state authority threatens state
lawmakers' ability to effectively represent those who elected them,
National Conference of State Legislatures President and Delaware
Representative Donna Stone told a panel of U.S. senators today.

"State legislators are troubled by the growing trend in Washington to
pass or promulgate preemptive measures that have a detrimental impact on
states," Stone said. "As a result, a large part of the policy
jurisdiction of state legislatures has been lost. States cannot
legislate in response to their citizens' needs when the federal
government has preempted the policy field."

The U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary heard testimony on federal
agencies usurping Congressional and state laws through the regulatory
process. The hearing was prompted by a series of regulations
promulgated by federal agencies such as the National Highway
Transportation Safety Administration and the Food and Drug
Administration that, without consultation or public comment, would
preempt state consumer protection and tort laws.

Representative Stone said Congress should codify provisions of an
executive order on federalism, which would protect state law from being
preempted by unelected bureaucrats. Additionally, Congress should
include the following principles in the new law:

1. Partnership and enhanced consultation. NCSL would support provisions
to provide for consultation with state and local elected officials or
their representative national associations prior to the consideration of
any legislation or federal regulations that would interfere with or
intrude upon historic and traditional state and local rights and
responsibilities.

2. Rule of Construction. NCSL would support provisions to ensure that,
absent any explicit statement of intent to preempt or absent any
irreconcilable conflicts with state law, any ambiguities would be
construed in favor of state law.

3. Enforcement. NCSL supports provisions to ensure congressional and
agency accountability and enforcement. The point of order in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) has made members of Congress
increasingly aware of potential impacts of federal laws and regulations
on state and local taxpayers. We believe that a mechanism to ensure
this recognition regarding preemption in both the legislative and the
regulatory arenas is critical.

4. Legislative Report. NCSL supports efforts to include a federalism
assessment in every committee and conference report. This will help
members appreciate the potential impact on our levels of government, our
taxpayers, and our programs.

5. Agency Impact Statement. Early in the rulemaking process, it is
essential to codify the provisions of the Federalism Executive Order to
ensure that every federal agency engages in a meaningful consultation
process with elected state and local officials or their national
associations, as well as with other impacted stakeholders. This will
help to determine the potential impact of final administrative rules on
our partnership.

"When Congress or a federal agency chooses to preempt state law, they
are turning their backs on public policy innovation and creativity,"

Representative Stone said. "State lawmakers are, without question, more
effective at addressing the individual needs of the communities they
represent. Washington's one-size-fits-all approach is not always the
answer to policy challenges."

NCSL is a bipartisan organization that serves the legislators and staffs
of the states, commonwealths and territories. It provides research,
technical assistance and opportunities for policymakers to exchange
ideas on the most pressing state issues and is an effective and
respected advocate for the interests of the states in the American
federal system.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. NTSB Call to action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below are 2 emails I have received with a perspective on the recent NTSB BS that you may not have seen.
I have donated to this cause to best of my ability for all the reasons expressed below, and I do not live in California. Consider donating also.

1st email subject heading: A dying man's last wish

FINALLY!

We finally got the answer, but this time from a totally unexpected source the Director of the National Traffic Safety Board. They said we should be made to wear "D0T compliant" helmets.

After 15-plus years of systematically driving the government into having to tell us how to comply with California's helmet law, we have, during the past 3 years, managed to narrow the issue to just one, "what can we do to comply, with certainty, with California's helmet law?" Through all the efforts of those both directly and indirectly in the court litigation, it's come down to the CHP telling us to ask NHTSA against NHTSA telling us to ask CHP. Now the NTSB has apparently come to the rescue and provided an answer for, and to, both.
************************************
NTSB PRESS RELEASE
************************
National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594

********************************

NTSB RECOMMENDS LEGLISLATION TO MANDATE ALL MOTORCYCLISTS
USE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FMVSS 218-COMPLIANT HELMETS

*********************************

Washington, DC-The National Transportation Safety Board today issued recommendations to states to require all
motorcyclists and their passengers to wear Department of Transportation Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
218-compliant helmets.

When the NTSB simplified the issue to requesting that NHTSA pass a regulation requiring motorcyclists to wear a "DOT compliant" helmets, they forced the hand of the CHP, through NHTSA, to require consumers of motorcycle helmets in California to decide if their helmets are properly fabricated, a regulation that has already been deemed absurd by the California courts, which is the focus of the Quigley v. CHP case, (and side cases) currently before the California courts. All the set-up work is already done. This is a time for all motorcyclists, not just California bikers, to realize how far we have come. (Many believe it is the pressure from California against itself that resulted in this NTSB release. We like to take all the credit, but there have been some trailing cases in other parts of the U.S. seem to be helping.)

This may well be my last communication on the subject, so let me abbreviate and say that I have no idea where I have gotten the strength to comprehend the understand what a HUGE advantage this NTSB bulletin gives us, but on what a waste of time and money it would be for you folks not to raise every dollar available and get them into the ABATE court fund IMMEDIATELY and not let this effort die, or the focus fade. We've now got all the issues we need to raise (including a couple of legal decisions not made elsewhere) already in the courts in California.

Over the years, I've tried not to ask too much of you folks, but as a dying man's last wish, please send donations today to:

Judicial Fund
c/o ABATE of California
10240 Seventh Avenue
Hesperia, CA 92345

Please get serious, I mean really serious, and let these lawyers (who can only do so much with your show of support), take one major DONATION (or even send a pledge). If you don't clearly understand where we are, one more show of faith please.

Your long time friend and advocate,

quig

Please send a copy of this to everyone you know? (My web efforts have become as difficult as the rest).

2nd email. Subject heading: N.T.S.B.

Regarding the recent recommendations from NTSB that the Federal Government adopt a National Helmet law and force the States to accept it is in my opinion a " tempest in tea pot " and I hope that I don't see certain MROs using this as a way to garner support for themselves in the form of an organized effort to stop a National Helmet Law.
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly restricted Federal powers when it comes to " States traffic laws ", a position that is also backed up by the 9th circuit court of Appeals. " The Principals of Federalism " prohibit such an act as reflected in the old blackmail efforts of 20 years ago, they couldn't enforce a National Helmet law then so they tried to blackmail states by withholding through redirecting money from States that didn't have helmet laws. REMEMBER???????????
If you want to really to help kill the helmet monster the opportunity is in California.
The Courts in Calif. have all ready ruled in ways that make a national law in direct conflict with California Courts and existing U.S. Supreme Court rulings.
The real tip of the spear is Quigley et. al. v CHP, a case that is all ready winding its way through the courts.
The BS from NTSB vindicates this claim, as in " DOT compliant Helmets " they don't say "DOT approved" they say DOT compliant and this tells me that they are watching Calif. very closely, for we are the ones who stated the pissing contest over " DOT approved ".
If you want to help tear down their house of cards, you can start by helping us in Calif. fund our case.
Anybody who has been closely involved with us for the last 17 years knows that I am telling it the way it is.
NTSB doesn't know shit about what they are saying and it is another example of what happens when too many bureaucrats drink the kool aid.
When California takes out the helmet law it will establish a template for all the other States to challenge their law so you should be sending help to Calif.
Any Call to action to to help stop this perceived threat from Washington should direct people to send money to the address below otherwise that call to action should be ignored while you send your money to Calif.
Washington knows that we are so close they are getting nervous; the funny part is they don't realize there is nothing they can do
except try to get out of our way.
Anybody who wants to discuss this in more detail or has questions can feel free to direct them to me and I'll be glad to go into more detail. Bottom line about the NTSB garbage??? I see it as a compliment to us and nothing to get in a dither about.
California is the battle ground; has been for 17 years and will be until we win.

Don Blanscet
one of the et. al. in Quigley V CHP
HLDL/BOLT/abate
donb51@earthlink.net



Judicial Fund
c/o Abate of California
10240 Seventh Avenue
Hesperia, CA 92345

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Motorcyclist BEWARE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


ABATE of Colorado
4725 Paris St, Suite #250
Denver, CO 80239
303-789-3264
www.abateofcolo.org


Motorcyclists BEWARE!




ABATE of Colorado is officially supporting the boycott of Denver based radio station Alice 105.9, and their advertisers. Comments made on the Alice radio station defeats all efforts the motorcycling community has made save lives and educate motorists to be more aware of motorcycles. We support the efforts of the Colorado Sportbike Club. (http://www.cosportbikeclub.org/noalice.html )

ABATE of Colorado is a nonprofit and the largest rider training school in Colorado as well as the largest grassroots motorcyclists rights organization. We advocate safety and education not only to motorcyclists, but also to the driving public with programs such as Operation Save A Life. Our membership is comprised of motorcyclists from all walks of life and we do not discriminate based on what type of motorcycle you ride. We work within the Colorado DOT Motorcycle Operator's Safety Training program as well. The networking available to the various groups within the motorcycling community is enormous and will resound thru out the state of Colorado as well as the Nation. Last summer ABATE advertised our Rider Education program on Alice. Our advertising funds will not go to Alice in the future.

To advocate negativity, discrimination, and potential violence against motorcyclists is not acceptable. We join the Colorado Sportbike Club in boycotting the advertisers of Alice, as well as the station itself. We urge all to support this boycott. We expect nothing less than an apology and a statement of non-tolerance for malicious comments directed at certain groups from Alice.


ABATE of Colorado
State Board of Directors


Alice contact information:
KALC 105.9 Fm (Alice)
4700 S Syracuse St Denver, CO 80237
To Call Alice Radio - (303) 967-2700

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. take action on Alice 105.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the Colorado Sportbike Club

September 12, 2007

As many of you know, the CSC recently started a boycott against local
radio station Alice 105.9 and their advertisers, based on the contents
of their morning show. This boycott reached nationwide levels within a
matter of hours thanks to the power of the Internet, and even resulted
in a story on 9News.

We are happy to report that ties have been mended with Alice, and much
has been discussed. The CSC is ending the boycott at this time to allow
us to move on, and we will be working with the show to promote safer
motorcycling, respect for bikers, and to show the public that most of us
just like to ride and try to do it as mutual inhabitants of the roads as
much as possible.

If you are one of the many who helped to distribute this boycott around
Colorado and the country, particularly to the many businesses who were
contacted, please feel free to print out this page and let those
establishments and other motorcyclists know that we feel the show in
question now understands the gravity of our concerns, and we understand
why they feel this was overstated in reference to their comments. This
is good in that we're able to turn this into a positive relationship,
and look forward to working with the Alice morning show in the coming
weeks.

This link (http://www.cosportbikeclub.org/forums/showthread.php?t=16335)
will take you to the update we posted to our members on our forum.

Thank you for your support!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Alice 105.9 and their advertisers
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Panera Bread http://www.panerabread.com HQ FAX#1-314-633-7200

Geico http://www.geico.com/contactus/email.php

Wendy's Media Relations http://www.wendys.com/contact.jsp FAX#1-614-764-6707

Foresters Financial Partners Sales & Marketing http://www.forestersfp.com/contact.php FAX# 1-208 955-0329

TLC Laser Eye Center http://www.tlcvision.com/ I called the 800# and got the CEO in St.Louis' FAX# 1-636-489-0206

Isle of Capri Casinos, Inc.,
Allan B. Solomon, Executive Vice President-561.995.6660
Donn Mitchell, Chief Financial Officer-314.813.9319
Jill Haynes, Senior Director of Corporate Communication-314.813.9368
http://www.isleofcapricasino.com/inforequest.php?p=&lg=en&aid=00

Jose Cuervo Tequila http://www.cuervo.com/extras/contact.html Cuervo@consumer-care.net


Hacienda of Colorado http://www.haciendacolorado.com/ Corporate Information jimh@haciendacolorado.com

Cinema Grill - E. Alameda http://www.cinemagrill.com/cgcontenido/contact.htm
(303) 344-3456

My Girlfriend's Kitchen www.mygirlfriendskitchen.com - 8555 W Belleview Ave
FAX# 1-720-981-1071

Water 2 Wine -8130 S. University Blvd http://denver.water2wine.us/
E-mail: denver@water2wine.us

D'Vine Wine - 1660 Champa St http://wineryindenver.com/contact.html
D'Vine Wine International Inc. Fax: (561) 416-9098

BJ's Restaurant - 14442 E. Cedar Ave - http://www.bjsrestaurants.com/locationdetail.aspx?lcID=61 FAX# 1-303-343-3285

Miyama Steak House & Sushi Bar - 9101 Kimmer Drive - http://www.miyamaofcolorado.com/ sihara39@aol.com (303)706-1777

Texas de Brazil - 8390 East 49th Avenue - http://www.opentable.com/rest_profile.aspx?rid=7890 valeriegaddis@texasdebrazil.com
Phone: (720) 374-2100







---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Biker Republic TEA Party - Oct 12-13, 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For those who have heard the scuttlebutt, for those who have never heard
and for those who might be curious:

The members of Biker Republic will be having a "TEA" Party on Oct.
12-13th in Mount Jackson, VA. This is an event that was started many
years ago and the members decided to keep having it.

Anyone taking our lists is invited and welcome to attend.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT THE TEA PARTY IS:

A weekend retreat where the most extreme, hardest working biker folk get
together for companionship, re-energizing, opinionating and
strategizing. The members take turns hosting the party at their house or
some other private place. For the most part, it is informal with no set
schedule. Folk come and go as they please, enter into and out of
conversations as they please and share stories/thoughts/opinions as they
please.

ALL brands of bikes and ALL patches are welcome. 4-wheeled vehicles are
welcome. RV? Get on the TEA List
(http://www.bikerrepublic.org/mailinglists.html) and ask.

Those starting ANY kind of shit that is deemed "out-of-line" or
"disrespectful" will be dealt with swiftly.

This is a "camping" retreat. While there is a house with running water
and electricity, the retreat takes place outside in the weather. Prepare
yourselves accordingly.

Food is provided for the most part - but you MUST get on the "TEA List"
(http://www.bikerrepublic.org/mailinglists.html)
and let us know if you're coming so enough food is available. It would
be uncool and unfair to others if you just decided to "show".

You should plan on providing your own "drink" and such - although most
everyone shares. Yes, there's some "drinking" at this retreat. The 2nd
Amendment is also recognized as a Constitutional Right.

The cost for attending the TEA Party is YOUR conscience in terms of a
free-will donation to cover the cost of food, water, electricity,
setting up, cleaning up, etc...that the host provides and all donations
go directly to the host for putting up with all of us. NO money goes
anywhere else, NO ONE is getting rich off this event.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT THE TEA PARTY IS NOT:

"It ain't no ABATE Party"...quoted from Duck only minutes ago.

There aren't any bands, bike rodeos, poker runs, tattoo artists,
vendors, bike shows or sanctioned nudity (sometimes "shit happens", but
it ain't scheduled ;)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, if you're curious about Biker Republic, it's mission and it's
members - you're welcome to come to VA and hang out with us for a weekend.

If you have questions - get on the TEA List at the bottom of this webpage:

http://www.bikerrepublic.org/mailinglists.html

And ask away! We're hoping to meet some of you!

-spotman

Biker Republic


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Maryland Residents Have To Release Medical Records To Buy Guns
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please consider joining our forum list at www.bikerrepublic.org/mailinglists.html
To post to the forum at forum@bikerrepublic.org
(Mailing list information, including unsubscription instructions,
is located at the end of this message.)

Maryland Residents Have To Release Medical Records To Buy Guns
By Jennifer Von Reuter
WHAG-TV

NBC25 NEWS - Gun buyers in Maryland will now have to sign a waiver to release
their medical records. The new rule went into effect on August 1st in response
to the Virginia Tech massacre.

The extra paper work intends to keep people safe, but it's another step gun
buyers face.

Now, anyone with a history of receiving mental health treatment or anyone that
has been admitted to a state mental hospital can be denied a hand gun license.

Buying a hand gun is not easy. There are pages and pages of questions and
forms to read and sign.

Recently the Maryland State Police added another form that aims at keeping
guns out of the hands of dangerous people.

"I think it's a good thing. I think it's something maybe they should've
thought of before something terrible happened," says Jason Naylor, who owns a
hand gun.

So far The Gun Center in Frederick has not had any customers object to signing
the new waiver that allows the Maryland State Police licensing division to
check into their mental health history.

The store's manager, Jack Moberly, says, "They have the option of not signing
it. If they don't sign it they don't get the gun."

Some lawmakers say the new rule infringes on the constitutional right to bear
arms and should have been brought before the general assembly, giving the
legislature and the people a chance to voice their opinion.

"We need to address the Virginia Tech tragedy, that's absolutely 100%
imperative, but there's a way in which you do that where you respect privacy,
respect the constitutional right to bear arms, and you do it in such a way
where the public has a way to participate," says Washington County Delegate
Chris Shank.

Whether it's a matter of personal safety, or the right to privacy, or the
right to bear arms, they're tough choices, but a decision that could save lives.

A person who received mental health treatment in the past can still buy a gun
in Maryland after getting a letter from their doctor that says the they're in
good mental health standing.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20877458/

Subscribe to FastFred's Biker Ezine with the instructions located at
http://www.fastfreds.com/join.htm

Great people talk about ideas.
Average people talk about things.
Small people talk about other people.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Families push death-by-vehicle law
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Families push death-by-vehicle law
Prosecutions on hold while high court assesses constitutionality
By MOLLY MURRAY, The News Journal
856-7372 or mmurray@delawareonline.com
Posted Thursday, September 13, 2007

http://delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070913/NEWS/709130371/1006/NEWS

The man who drove his truck into Abby Reichardt's father while he rode his bicycle on a rural Kent County road might as well have hit a mailbox.

At least that's how police and prosecutors explained it to Reichardt five years ago. Under the law at the time, they could only convict the man of careless driving, an offense that carried a $115 fine and up to 30 days in jail. "Hitting your father was no different than hitting a mailbox," she recalled them saying.

For Reichardt, it didn't add up. "Sometimes there actually is an accident," she said. But in cases like the death of her father, Warren G.H. Pritchett Jr., Reichardt believes the driver didn't make a conscious effort to avoid it.

She worked to get a law passed designed to punish drivers whose minor traffic violations result in a death.

But four years later, the law's constitutionality is in question and the 14 cases in which motorists were being prosecuted under it have been delayed.

"For families, their lives are on hold," Reichardt said.

Now, family members who lost parents, husbands and children in accidents in recent years have launched a petition drive to save the law. And others are banding together to push state lawmakers to make the existing law even tougher.

As it is currently written, the law -- a misdemeanor offense -- carries a fine of up to $1,150 and prison time of up to 30 months. But in recent months, defense attorneys questioned its constitutionality. Earlier this summer, a Kent County Superior Court judge agreed, ruling it unconstitutional.

As it now stands, the law is in legal limbo.

At issue, said Eric Mooney, a defense lawyer in Georgetown who has been involved in three death-by-motor-vehicle cases, is whether the law is clearly defined.

Under the law, any motor vehicle offense can be used to levy a death-by-motor-vehicle charge. To Mooney, that is too broad. The offense leading up to the charge could be something as small as a burned-out turn signal, he said.

And, he said, "it's such a wide range of penalties."

Mooney has one case pending -- that of an off-duty Georgetown police officer, Bradley Cordrey, accused of veering off the road and striking and killing Seaford veterinarian Sarah Dykstra.

Mooney also represented Ellendale ambulance driver James Larrimore, whose charges were recently dropped because of a state law designed to protect drivers of emergency vehicles involved in accidents.

And he was involved in a third case, in which Nicholas Austin was sentenced May 23 to a fine of $1,150 and six months in prison suspended for one year's probation on a death-by-motor-vehicle charge that resulted when he failed to yield at a median crossing on U.S. 113. One person was killed in that accident, according to court records.

No one is sure whether Austin's case or others that have already been decided will be reconsidered if the law is found to be unconstitutional.

A Sussex County Superior Court judge ruled in June that the law was constitutional. Two weeks later, the Superior Court judge in Kent County ruled it was not.

The state Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether the law is constitutional and whether prosecutors must prove a driver acted intentionally, recklessly or knowingly to cause the accident.

Meanwhile, Superior Court President Judge James T. Vaughn Jr. ordered all pending cases of death by motor vehicle assigned to himself and in court records said they would be stayed pending action by the state Supreme Court. There are 14 cases pending -- three in Sussex County, five in Kent County and six in New Castle County.

Amy Russ is among the victims' family members who are pushing to keep the law.

Russ created a Web site http://chrisruss.net/ and is circulating an online petition in support of the law. Her husband, Christopher Russ Sr., was killed May 25 when a driver pulled out in front of him as he was riding his motorcycle in New Castle County. That driver was charged under the state's death-by-motor-vehicle law. So far, 445 people have signed the petition in support of the law.

Meanwhile, Lois Shelton, whose 10-year-old daughter, Kelly Standridge, was killed along with her best friend in an accident just before Thanksgiving 2004, is pressing state legislators for an even stronger law.

Standridge and Melissa Russell were killed when they were riding with then-17-year-old driver Erika Klase.

Klase struck a utility pole and was also seriously injured in the accident. She was sentenced to three months in prison on a death-by-motor-vehicle charge.

"I'm just trying to help the next family that has to deal with this," she said.

Former state representative Wayne Smith, who sponsored the law, said he believes Superior Court Judge T. Henley Graves "got it exactly right" when he ruled the law was constitutional.

Smith said lawmakers were concerned that the fine for a careless-driving charge was not sufficient when an accident resulted in a death.

"That is just not suitable for these situations," he said.

THE LAW
Any motor vehicle offense can be used to levy a death-by-motor-vehicle charge.
The law -- a misdemeanor offense -- carries a fine of up to $1,150 and prison time of up to 30 months.

POST/VIEW ALL COMMENTS HERE: http://forums.delawareonline.com/viewtopic.php?t=53276


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. HERO AND DORK of the week
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HERO
- karen01@stny.rr.com
I do not know this person
But she is tracking an incredible amount of federal
activity as it pertains to motorcycles for the BR info
list. I nominate her for Hero.

Mack

DORK St. George Police Sergeant James Kuehnlein


http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2007/100907Motorist.htm


Not all police are heroes.

Date: Sep 13, 2007 6:53 AM


Missouri: Police Threaten, Detain Motorist for Parking After Hours A St.
George, Missouri police officer is caught on tape threatening to invent
charges to arrest a motorist for parking after hours.

..A motorist who refused to discuss his personal business with a St.
George, Missouri police officer was threatened with arrest last Friday.
Brett Darrow, 20, no stranger to unconventional encounters with police
<http://bulletins.myspace.com/news/15/1522.asp>; , caught a St. George
Police Sergeant James Kuehnlein stating that he had the power to invent
charges that would put Darrow behind bars. Update: Sergeant Kuehnlein
was placed on unpaid leave Monday pending an investigation.

"Try and talk back... to me again," yelled Sergeant Kuehnlein. "I bet I
could say you resisted arrest or something. You want to come up with
something? I come up with nine things."

The incident began at around 2am. Darrow was to meet a friend who was
working late and was going to pick him up. Darrow headed toward a
24-hour commuter parking lot in an unincorporated part of Saint Louis
County in his 1997 Nissan Maxima. He put on his turn signal and entered
the lot, which, aside from Kuehnlein's cruiser, was essentially vacant.
After stopping the car, the police officer approached and began
questioning Darrow about what he was doing. When Darrow declined to
discuss his personal business, the police sergeant exploded. Although
the video clearly shows Darrow driving properly and using his turn
signal, the police officer insisted that Darrow had broken the law.

"Oh, while you were coming towards me you were swerving back and forth
within the roadway," Sergeant Kuehnlein said. "I might give you a ticket
for that. You want me to come up with some more? When you turned in, you
failed to use your turn signal, your right turn signal."

Without the video, Darrow tells The Newspaper that he would have stood no
chance disproving the officer's word in court. Twenty-eight percent of
the St. George municipal budget comes from traffic citations
<http://bulletins.myspace.com/news/07/757.asp>; . Darrow wonders how many
of the tickets were legitimate.

"Looking into this guys eyes, he was crazy," Darrow said. "I was really
scared he was going to assault me. I just wonder how many other people
have been arrested on these charges."

After ordering Darrow against the car and searching him, Sergeant
Kuehnlein released the motorist.

View video
<http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vdmlkZW8uZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS92aWRlb3BsYXk
/ZG9jaWQ9LTI3MTU3OTIxMTc3OTM5Nzc3NTk=> of incident below. Warning:
Police officer uses graphic language.








Article Excerpt:

Transcript of audio made by Brett Darrow:

1:07
Officer #1: How we doin? What's going on?
Brett: Nothing.
Officer #1: Why you parkin here?
Brett: Can't I park here? It's a commuter lot right?
Officer #1: Yeah, but we have problems after midnight time.
People break into cars. You got any ID on you?
Brett: Yeah, I do.
Officer #1: Can I see it please?
Brett: Did I do something wrong?
Officer #1: Yeah you're a suspicious vehicle right now.
Brett: I'm what?
Officer #1: [Leans into the car and yells] You are a suspicious
vehicle right now.
Brett: In a commuter parking lot?
Officer #1: Yeah you are cause we have car thieves in here. Yeah
you're right.
Brett: Cause I can park right here.
Officer #1: You want me -- You wanna come out of the car? Come
on out. Come on out.

1:32
[I exit the vehicle]
Officer #1: Let me see your ID.
[I give him my valid Missouri License]
Officer #1: Let me see your insurance card for the vehicle.
Brett: Did I commit a moving violation?
Officer #1: Yeah you did, when you were coming in here.
Brett: Really? What was that?
Officer #1: Yeah, you wanna try me? You wanna try me tonight?
You think you've had a bad night? I will ruin your ****ing night.
[Officer starts to get close up to my face]
Officer #1 You want to try me?
[Officer is inches away from my face, screaming as I'm pinned
between him and my vehicle]
Officer #1 Do you wanna try me young boy? Do you want to try me
tonight young boy?
Brett: No I don't.
Officer #1: Do you want to go to jail for some ****ing reason I
come up with?
Brett: No I don't.
Officer #1: Do you wanna see who knows the law better, me or
you. My experience compared to your young ass. Huh? Don't ever get smart
mouthed with a cop again. I show you what a cop does. Do you understand
me?
Brett: Yes sir.
Officer #1: Try and talk back -- Talk back to me again. I bet I
could say you resisted arrest or something. You want to come up with
something? I come up with nine things. Do you wanna try something?
Brett: No I don't.
Officer #1: Wait here.

2:52
Officer #1 Oh, while you were coming towards me you were
swerving back and forth within the roadway. Okay? I might give you a
ticket for that. You want me to come up with some more? When you turned
in, you failed to use your turn signal, your right turn signal [Turn
signal was used, see video at 0:06]. You wanna try me some more? Huh?
Come on smart ass. Gimmie an attitude a little bit more. I bet -- I
guarantee I can tow this car by the time I'm done with you. You wanna
try me now? Gimmie a little more lip. [officer gets back up in my face]
Come on boy. Come on boy give me some more lip. You're done?
Brett: I don't want any problems officer.
Officer #1: You're about ready to get it. You already start your
****ing problems with your attitude. Did we have a bad night boy? Huh?
Answer me or I'll lock you up for failure to imply with a police
officer's commands.
Brett: Cause I'm not answering your questions about my personal
business?
Officer #1: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You want me to show you? You want
me to show you? You want me to lock you up to show you I'm right and
you're wrong?
Brett: No I don't officer.
Officer #1: You want me to show you the ****ing law.
Brett: No, I mean I know Sean who used to work here. [A new
neighbor of mine that used to work in the St. George police department]
Officer #1: Sean who? You mean my buddy, my best friend?
Brett: Yeah. He's me neighbor.
Officer #1 Okay, he's my best friend. Oh good. Why don't you go
call him and tell him you came in front of Kuehnlein and see what he
says If you got lucky you'll walk away from me.
Brett: I really don't want any trouble officer.
Officer #1: What are you doin' with a camera hooked to your car
seat?
Brett: I have lots of cameras in my car.
Officer #1: Why is that?
Brett: And they upload to secure sources
Officer #1: Okay. I don't really care about your secure sources.
I've got one in my car. See that?
Brett: Okay.
Officer #1: It's a secure source.
Brett: Okay.
Officer #1: I really don't care about your camera system cause
I'm about ready to tow your car. Then we can tear them all apart...
Brett: Oh well, it doesn't matter. The videos not even in here.
Officer #1: Okay, it doesn't matter, I really don't care about
your video
Brett: I'm sure the news will like it.
Officer #1: I don't really care cause you're about ready to go
to jail.
Brett: I don't want to go to jail officer.
Officer #1: I'm gonna show you you're about ready to.
Brett: You're right officer
Officer #1: Okay.
Brett: I'm sorry.
Officer #1: You think these security cameras -- I guarantee ya,
mine and my boy mic is gonna tell a little different and your attitude.
Brett: I don't want any problems.
Officer #1: You started it. Why do you have an attitude? As a
matter of fact, I was gonna come in here, see if you're okay. First of
all we have people try to commit suicide in here. We have car thieves
come in here. We have people break into cars here. I have enough
probable cause to stop you. Okay?
Brett: Okay officer, I'm sorry. I don't want any problems.
Officer #1: What is your problem tonight?
Brett: I just had a bad night officer.
Officer #1: You know what? You don't take it out on me. You
don't never take it out on a cop cause we will ruin your career and life
and everything else you have coming before you. Okay?
Brett: Okay.
Officer #1: What is your problem tonight?
Brett: I had problems earlier, I just came in here to sit.
Officer #1: You know what, that's all you tell me. You don't
give me no problem with -- what did I do wrong cause I guarantee I come
up with nine things. If you know Sean, why don't you ask Sean about me.
Okay?
Brett: What's your name?
Officer #1 Sergeant Kuehnlein.

5:31
Officer #1: Do me a favor. When you do turn in here next time,
use your turn signal.
Brett: Okay.
Officer #1: Okay. And seriously if you are pissed off, you're
impairing your driving. Okay? I don't know if you were talking on the
phone or just not paying attention, you were honestly coming down the
roadway not staying within your roadway. You were honestly going back
and forth. I don't know what you were doing, but I go it all on tape.
Okay?
Brett: Okay.
Officer #1: I don't know if you were playing with something
else, or paying attention to something else, I don't know.
Brett: Alright.
Officer #1: You need to be more aware. And when people pull you
over, my job ain't to be P-ed off. Okay? My job is to conduct my career
and my job. Okay?
Brett: Okay.
Officer #1: I don't have to have a reason to pull you over.
First of all you're a suspicious vehicle in the commuter lot that's
pretty much vacant and the commuter lot hours is after dusk, after 12
o'clock. Okay? You understand what I'm getting at? I know the law a
little bit... How old are you by the way? 18?
Brett: I'm 20.
Officer #1: Okay, I was close. Okay. I think I've been around,
as a matter of fact, I've been a cop almost as long as you've been
alive. Okay?
Officer #1: Do you understand what I'm getting at?
Brett: I really don't want any problems officer.
Officer #1: Do you understand what I'm getting at? I'm trying
not be ignorant, but when you give me lip, I'm gonna give it right back
to you ten times harder. Okay? You give me an attitude, I'm gonna give
you attitude a lot harder. Okay?
Brett: Alright.
Officer #1: You understand what I'm getting at? I'm trying to
honestly see what's wrong, why, with your attitude. You understand?
Brett: Yeah.
Officer #1: Okay. You seem... You ever been in trouble before?
Brett: Yes.
Officer #1: For what?
Brett: Assault.
Officer #1: To who?
Brett: An off-duty police officer.
Officer #1: A cop?
Brett: I was assaulted by a police officer and a grand jury
dismissed all the charges and the City of St. Louis paid me not to sue.
Officer #1: Okay. You have a problem then. Is it, was it your
attitude that night, probably? Or he just had...
Brett: No.
Officer #1: Or he just had...
Brett: No, it was an intoxicated off-duty police officer that
attacked me.
Officer #1: Oh, it didn't happen while he was on-duty?
Brett: No, He was off-duty.
Officer #1: You need to honestly lose... Okay, where do you work
at?
Brett: I own my own company.
Officer #1: What do you do?
Brett: I'm a painter. I'm a paint contractor and I go to school.
Officer #1: Okay. Let's say you're a painter. Okay. You were
going to sit there a few minutes right?
Brett: Yeah.
Officer #1: We're gonna talk for a few seconds. Okay, then I'll
let you go. If you don't have no warrants against you, I'm gonna run
your name real quick. You don't have no warrants do you?
Brett: No.
Officer #1: Okay, lets say I come to your job or you come to my
house, wherever you're painting and I start giving you attitude. What
would you do? Would you get a little irritated about that? And probably
not do a great job of painting or something? Am I right or wrong?
Brett: You're right officer.
Officer #1: No. Don't agree with me cause you want to agree with
me now. Agree with me because, if I'm right, tell me if I'm wrong.
Brett: I don't want any trouble.
Officer #1: Here's my back-up you don't think I'm gonna do
anything. We've got cameras and body mics.
Brett: Well I don't know. You said you were going to charge me
with resisting arrest and whatever else.
Officer #1: Well yeah. I can come up with more stuff than you
can.
Brett: I'm just standing here.
Officer #1: No, cause you kept flinging your hands. [My hands
were held at my beltline the whole time]
Brett: My hands were down here.
Officer #1: At toward me. Nah, you were swinging up and down.

8:30
[Officer #2 walks up and #1 starts talking to him]
Officer #1: He comes by me, coming down the road going in and
out of the roadway within, within the lane. Failure to use a right-turn
signal.
Brett: Was I speeding too?
Officer #1: Speeding. Do you understand I don't have to pull you
over for speeding. Okay, It's your driving.
Officer #2 He's got a camera in the car.
Officer #1: It's to a secret link. I told him about our cameras
too and our body mics. But anyway, the first thing he does is give me
attitude about why I'm pulling him over. First of all, he's in the
commuter lot after dark. I told him a lot of people try to commit
suicide. Uh, people steal cars. People break into cars. He tried giving
me lip and uh, he tried telling me all this stuff.
Officer #2 Why does he have the camera?
Officer #1: Cause he was assault right, but an off-duty drunk
city cop so he put cameras in his car. I don't understand it. Anyway,
that's him. But, now he's just agreeing with me just for the fun of it
cause he had a bad day so he thinks he's gonna tell me the law why I
can't pull him over.

Officer #1: It's called... When you go home and you want to tell
everybody, first thing you tell em, you were pulled over because you
were a suspicious vehicle. In the State of Missouri, we have the right
to stop anybody walking for a pat check, or stop a suspicious vehicle
anytime. Okay? That was my probable cause. And this parking lot, as a
matter of fact, what's this parking lot called? Officer #1: What did you
just call it?
Brett: It's a parking lot.
Officer #1: What kind?
Brett: A commuter parking lot
Officer #1: Are you commuting somewhere? Are you commuting
somewhere?
Brett: How would you know that?
Officer #1: Are you commuting somewhere?
Brett: How would you know that?
Officer #1: That's why I was coming to inquire about that, but
you just told me you were going to sit here.
Brett: You don't know if I was going to wait here for somebody
to come pick me up.
Officer #1: I asked you that, did I not.
Brett: I don't have to say anything. I have the 5th Amendment
right.
Officer #1: Do you really?
Brett: Do you know what the 5th Amendment right is?
Officer #1 Do you know what impeding the flow of a police
officers duties are?
Brett: What's that? Go ahead, tell me.
Officer #1: Whenever I ask you... If I'm conducting an
investigat... This is called a field investigation, if you're impeding
it, you're impeding it.
Brett: You're saying, I can't refuse to answer your questions?
Officer #1: They're not incriminating are they?
Brett: You don't know that.
Officer #1: Are they incriminating?
Brett: Yes they are.
Officer #1: They are?
Brett: They could be.
Officer #1: Then are you doing something illegal here?
Brett: No I'm not.
Officer #1: Then they are not incriminating.
Brett: Yes, they could be incriminating. I have the right to
privacy.
Officer #1: What privacy? Not when you're out in public, you
don't have the right to privacy.
Brett: Yes, I do have a right to not tell you where I'm going or
what I'm doing.
Officer #1: Really?
Brett: It's the 4th Amendment right.
Officer #1: Really?
Brett: Yes it is. Violation of my rights...
Officer #1: I like this. You want me to tell you the law.
Brett: Go ahead and tell me the law.
Officer #1: If you fail to comply with my orders, my lawful
orders, you have the right to go to jail. Failure to comply with a
police officer.
Brett: Your lawful orders to answer your questions...
Officer #1: Yes, my field.
Brett: Personal questions?
Officer #1: What's personal questions? You're sitting here in a
commuter parking lot at 2 o'clock in the morning, you understand.
Brett: Okay, that's fine.
Officer #1: You know what, I think I'm gonna bring you with me.
Come on.
Brett: Officer please.
Officer #1: I think you're gonna come with me. Then you can try
and sue me in grand jury and I bet you I win. Then I'll sue you.
Brett: Officer I really... I just had a bad night.
Officer #1: Well let's ruin your night. You want to show me
attitude.
Brett: No, no I don't.
Officer #1: I want to show you the law. I want to show you the
law. I'm gonna show you my law is right yours is wrong.
Brett: Officer, I'm sorry. Like I said, I'm not trying to start
anything. I've had problems with everybody tonight and I didn't mean to
give you attitude. It's just one of those nights.

11:46
Officer #1: [Officer #1 looks at Officer #2] He's getting sorry
now.
I'm sure you've had the same nights.
Officer #1: I don't take it out of people.
Brett: I know, and I shouldn't either.

Officer #2- [speaking to officer #1] He's got a scanner in his
car.
Brett: I've always got a scanner in my car.
Officer #1: And by the way, that is technically a burglary tool
cause you're scanning us while you're driving around. You're trying to
see if you're gonna be detected. [The scanner was off]
Officer #1: What do you do? Do you go look for trouble?
Officers #2- [speaking to officer #1 while looking through my
back window at a small hidden camera] That is a camera.
Brett: I have multiple cameras all over the car.
Officer #1: You have issues man. Okay?
Brett: Alright, I'm sorry.
Officer #1: I think I want to take you to jail just to prove you
wrong. Do you have any weapons or anything on you I need to know about?
Brett: No.
Officer #1: If you would, turn around and place your hands on
the car real quick. I'm gonna pat you down.

[At this point the officer finds nothing and I am finally
released.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Could ya spare a buck?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Biker Republic has formed to fight the overbearing government intrusion into our lives. Our primary is the fight for biker rights. These two fights are intertwined and cannot be compromised. The average citizen is now aware our liberties are steadily being whittled away. We are working to stop this erosion of liberty and while simultaneously working to restore lost liberties. To this end we are active in the political, legislative, and judicial arenas. Our only charity is to help our fellow bikers and restore liberty. We are dedicated to returning to the roots of the motorcycle rights movement. We are the premier news and information source for biker rights activists.