| Author | Message | ||
     Husky |
Information Alert: California bikers..... Tell the California State Senate to Oppose SB 435 Bill Would Mandate Smog Testing for On-Road Motorcycles Statewide California Senate Bill 435 (Pavley, 23rd District, D), if adopted as written, would mandate all model year 2000 and newer motorcycles be smog tested biannually. The smog test would be required despite the lack of any evidence that motorcycles are a significant source of mobile emissions statewide. The only two counties to ever smog test motorcycles nationwide, Pima and Maricopa in Arizona, have already shown that motorcycle testing leads to no significant reduction in measured emissions levels. Pima County has already dropped their testing program and Maricopa is awaiting EPA’s approval to do the same. Other important points to consider include: Motorcycles, because of their relatively low yearly mileage totals when compared to other classes of vehicles, already have the lowest emissions of any motor vehicle category in California. This bill has no specific information regarding the test method to be used, emissions levels to be enforced or the test’s potential costs to either the state or the individual owners. Proponents claim motorcycle emissions account for 10% of total vehicle emissions statewide, however page 14 of the November 2006 report issued by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District titled "Source Inventory of Bay Area Greenhouse Gas Emissions" attributed far lower emissions #'s to motorcycles (www.baaqmd.gov/pln/ghg_emission_inventory.pdf). California’s motorcycle engine emission standards are already the strictest in the nation, and were just reduced again for model year 2008 and newer motorcycles. If a smog check program is implemented, motorcycles constructed prior to the implementation date should be exempted from the testing. Here is the E-mail link to contact your representative. http://capwiz.com/amacycle/issues/alert/?alertid=1 2937506&queueid=3064598376 Husky | ||
| Wile_ecoyote |
Its another avenue for revenue. The AMA has warned of this happening and is already addressing it with contacts in congress. (or so they say) There are so many other sources of pollution that Cali has to deal with, I think they are creating a blanket that will cover all bases for emmissions in hopes of lowering the total amount they get. | ||
| Teeps |
Done. Passed it around work too; that should be good for a few hundred more. | ||
| Crackhead |
big deal, just load the oem tune before going in for the sniffer test. | ||
| Swordsman |
You still have to pay to have the test done, Crack. When they've already proven that bikes contribute almost nothing, what's the point (other than more cash flow)? ~SM | ||
| Hexangler |
Driving is a privilege not a right. Pay to play. | ||
| Wile_ecoyote |
Well put Hex. thats basically what I was eluding to but put it in other words. Right on. | ||
| Old_man |
A case of motorcycle envy. | ||
| Froggy |
Yep. New York requires annual motorcycle safety inspections. Its basically just a quick check of lights and stuff. Its $7, but I am overdue as I lack a horn at the moment. I have been meaning to get a bicycle horn for it. | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
Just remember this next time you vote. | ||
| Xbrfirebolt |
You'll also have to pass a "visual inspection". Which means you will have to have a stock exhaust system to pass that. | ||
| Xbimmer |
The propaganda machine has already started up, this past week's San Bernardino Sun had an article about how motorcyclists who swap their cat's for a performance exhaust not only increase noise pollution but add to the State's air pollution numbers disproportionate to the numbers of other types of vehicles on the roads. http://www.sbsun.com/search/ci_12346879?IADID=Sear ch-www.sbsun.com-www.sbsun.com Kinda reminds me of the NHTSA witch hunts back in the 80's regarding motorcycles. I'm all for eliminating straight pipe pirate-bikes and pseudo-GP racers with screaming multis on the streets. But seriously, in CA, even a badly tuned cat-less moto I would suspect pollutes far less than the miles of stacked up "clean" cages the rider splits lanes between during prime time on our freeways. | ||
| Rex |
Don't let them do it! It is terrible in Arizona to do this....Move to Oklahoma or something;.....rex | ||
| Ourdee |
Driving is a privilege not a right. Pay to play. I dislike how first part of that is blindly accepted as fact. When you pay taxes to a federal entity and any of said taxes go to maintain a hi-way, it gives you ownership of said hi-way. Try quoting "No taxation without representation". If I own it, I'm using it. Stinkin' revenewers. | ||
| Darthane |
So, anyone should be able to drive without a license, then, Ourdee, as long as they pay taxes? I'm sure if I dig around enough I could come up with a post of yours that either directly or indirectly condemns a fellow road-user. Careful what you wish for. Hex has it right. Driving is not a right. The *chance to learn* is one (even that's arguable since driver's ed isn't free), not the legal ability. I disagree with the initiative, but not because I feel it infringes upon some intrinsic right of mine (perhaps it does, perhaps it doesn't, but to me that's neither here nor there), but because it's ••••••• STUPID, and another perfect example of government's excessive power and waste. | ||
| Bosh |
"Driving is a privilege not a right. Pay to play. I dislike how first part of that is blindly accepted as fact. When you pay taxes to a federal entity and any of said taxes go to maintain a hi-way, it gives you ownership of said hi-way. Try quoting "No taxation without representation". If I own it, I'm using it. Stinkin' revenewers." Ourdee, I agree 100% with your statement. The people of the state own the roads. We pay through the nose for them with our taxes and license fees. There is in-fact (according to me and that's all that matters) an intrinsic right to use the roads as long as you are qualified and pay your fair share. As someone stated above, it's just another way to take more money from the pockets of the already highest taxed citizens of the USA. | ||
| Stoked |
Who in the fook came up with this privilege to ride/drive bullshite. It's easy to understand how entire countries get taken over by dictators with that type of attitude, I had just always assumed none of those lemmings lived in the US. We pay for the damn roads and pay the salaries of the ones who police them. How in the helll is it a privilege to then use them. It's a damn right. | ||
| Sparky |
It's a right-on privilege in California. Sez so in the DMV publications. | ||
| Ourdee |
I've posted about the need for all road users to have to pass tests on all vehicles operated on the road, not just the car that they use the phone in. I also state that governments do me no favors in granting something to me I already own. Who in the fook came up with this privilege to ride/drive bullshite. That stink was propagated to maximum effect through drivers education classes within the framework of the public education system. Just because it is public education, does not make it right. Just because it is stated more than a few times in your hearing does not make it right. It still sounds as wrong to me now as it did when I first heard it 34 years ago. | ||
| Crackhead |
it is a privilege to use the highway system because it was created for the military not for general use. | ||
| Slaughter |
Correction: the INTERSTATE highway system was created for use by the Military with sections usable as auxiliary air fields in time of war... not ALL roads and Highways. | ||
| Ezblast |
Did this turkey pass? - I sent my letters in! EZ | ||
| Krassh |
Another reason I am leaving this state in September. |
