New law requiring helmets in california

Papa Bear you are smoking CRACK if you think for one minute that Kawasaki does not CARE about us! If they didnt care then they would tell everyone to go F themselves by not making another SXS and just saying to hell with trying to do anything for our sport in terms of saving it.

Are any of you blind to what Jeff Knoll just posted or to what I just said about the MANUFACTURERS trying to SAVE THIS SPORT? Are you guys so self centered that you can't for one minute put yourselves in their shoes? Do you not realize that the manufacturers by trying to make whats already been in their USER MANUALS for years law because all of the ambulance chasing lawyers are trying to ruin this sport?

EVERY MANUFACTURER INVOLVED IN ROHVA SUPPORTED THIS!!!!!! Can everyone see that??? ROHVA spoke on behalf of all of them, who cares if Kawasaki was in attendance, who cares if Kawasakis name is on the bill, ROHVA is on the bill and they represent EVERYONE!!!!!!!

Geez guys... IN case you missed what Jeff Knoll just said, and what we have tried to convey many times in this thread and in conversation - "Keep in mind that the Consumer Products Safety Commission is looking for an outright ban on this type of vehicle."

If we don't bend to allow certain rules to be put in place we risk the CPSC to enact a law or rules that would force manufacturers to build UTV's in a way that NONE OF US WOULD WANT TO DRIVE THEM thus forcing manufacturers to just say the hell with it and go the route of the ATC. Again, we may need to lose an arm to save the body. Wearing a helmet or saying no more bench seats bolted into a bed may just be something we need to deal with.

I am not saying I like this law, but I like this law WAY more than I like not have any UTVs or any more business in this sport. Kawasaki is VERY much for all of us as enthusiasts, as is Polaris, Arctic Cat, Can-Am, John Deere, Yamaha, Honda, etc etc.. If they weren't then why would they even be putting this law in place? They want to continue building and selling machines for ALL OF US TO ENJOY. If they feel they need to implement rules to help protect themselves from the CPSC and from dirty whore lawyers then we should consider supporting them in that. Then again, if wearing a helmet is the friggen end of the world to you then I guess you need to do what you can to fight that?

As for why manufacturers don't put Harnesses in a UTV. Its simple, the minute they do that is the minute they admit that the machines are dangerous enough to need them which means that the dirty whore lawyers can have another bit of ammo in suing them. Its BS, they know it, we know it but LAWYERS will do what they can to make a buck. They are the ones that could give 2 shits about any of you or me or my family. They care about MONEY!

There is way to much money in this sport for Kawasaki to say "F" it. That is why they are here, its for profit and their is nothing wrong with that.

Save this sport? If they want to save it, lets start saving the land. Without that we dont need to buy their vehicles. I dont see the UTV market being the next ATC issue. I dont see the Fed's banning UTV's.

Google Ken Glaser trademarks. He is an attorney who makes his living creating corporations (12 of them so far in just a few years) positioned to collect "sponsorships" from manufacturers. He is who started ROHVA. He takes sponsorship money, puts each manufacture on his board and he then write laws to protect his sponsors I mean clients!

BTW not every manufacture is part of ROHVA. Honda is not involved with the racket!

Maybe we can bend, but when you ban the use of previous models and years of UTV' s that were out before the invention of the factory 4 seat UTV and before this law then that is not bending. That is bending over and taking it!

Maybe they should have considered making the law effect 2013 and beyond models. Grandfather 2012 models and not effectively make these vehicles worth pennies on the dollar. Not make 65% of current UTV's used in California illegal. If families cant use their UTV then how much money will not be spent in the local desert area economy? How much does the Imperial Valley count of the winter time desert tourist to bring revenue into their city's and into California from out of state tourist coming to our deserts and sand dunes?

Maybe make the helmet law for people under 16 years of age? But how can you justify making all UTV people wear a helmet when a 500 hp buggy's with twice the wheel travel capable of going 100+ mph dont have any helmet laws.

So the manufactures are more worried of a lawyer suing them for adding doors and real harnesses vs selling a product that is truly safe. Heck Polaris seatbelts have a bungy cord type of attachment to let the seatbelt have some give! What the heck is that! We all have learned that give like that is what causes back and neck injuries.

Once again their own Org ROHVA is run by a Lawyer!
 
NO ON HELMETS WITH ROLL CAGE! JEEPS AND BUGGIES DON'T REQUIRE IT THEN NONE FOR US IF WE HAVE PROPER CAGE AND RESTRAINT! A big heavy helmet is not safe for a child! They won't ride and that ends our family activity! :mad:

I too agree about heavy helmets, I truely believe that is more dangerous then having no helmet. They could simplify the law and allow bike, skate or ski helmets. Those are much lighter, yet still offer protection. My daughter wears one and I am OK with that, But I will in no way put her in a DOT or Snell helmet as they are way to heavy! If I get ticketed for it, I will go see the judge, if I lose I will pay the fine and she will continue to wear the same helmet and I will take my chances getting another ticket.
 
Listen, I agree with you guys in terms of standing up for the no helmets thing and the floorboards rule and all of that. It sucks, we all agree, it sucks. I love the mobilization of the community in standing up for their rights. But I have a feeling that fighting these laws can and possibly will hurt us, or at least slow or even halt the development of bigger badder UTV's as the manufacturers fear losing the market due to manufacturing laws and lawsuits.

Perfect example of what I mean by guys hurting our sport and spawning these lawsuits is the dimwit who folds his RZR4 XP900 with a car load of people in the dunes and trys to claim that he was only going "15mph" and its Polaris' fault.... lol THAT IS WHAT IS HURTING US HERE AND CAUSING ALL OF THIS!

Maybe I am way off here? I see it a bit differently, I work with these manufacturer on a personal level, so for me to hear Papa Bear or anyone else talk about how the Manufacturers don't care about anything about bottom line I call BS and I take offense. Sure maybe the top senior brass sitting in suits and count dollars only care but you mean to tell me that these guys developing, designing, building, selling, etc etc at the Manufacturer level don't care? These guys LOVE this sport, most of them ride a lot on their free time. I am talking about men and women from Kawasaki, Polaris, Arctic Cat, Can-Am, etc etc that I know and work with and can see how much they love this sport and building cars that WE as enthusiasts will love. They have a lot of people that LOVE what they do working at the manufacturer level, they love to off-road just like you and I, and they have as much of their personal selves invested into this hobby as any of us.

Anyway, I avoid these threads for many reasons but one this I will say is the sharing of debate, conversation, and ideas is good. I know we all care and thats why we are here!!
 
Listen, I agree with you guys in terms of standing up for the no helmets thing and the floorboards rule and all of that. It sucks, we all agree, it sucks. I love the mobilization of the community in standing up for their rights. But I have a feeling that fighting these laws can and possibly will hurt us, or at least slow or even halt the development of bigger badder UTV's as the manufacturers fear losing the market due to manufacturing laws and lawsuits.

Perfect example of what I mean by guys hurting our sport and spawning these lawsuits is the dimwit who folds his RZR4 XP900 with a car load of people in the dunes and trys to claim that he was only going "15mph" and its Polaris' fault.... lol THAT IS WHAT IS HURTING US HERE AND CAUSING ALL OF THIS!

Maybe I am way off here? I see it a bit differently, I work with these manufacturer on a personal level, so for me to hear Papa Bear or anyone else talk about how the Manufacturers don't care about anything about bottom line I call BS and I take offense. Sure maybe the top senior brass sitting in suits and count dollars only care but you mean to tell me that these guys developing, designing, building, selling, etc etc at the Manufacturer level don't care? These guys LOVE this sport, most of them ride a lot on their free time. I am talking about men and women from Kawasaki, Polaris, Arctic Cat, Can-Am, etc etc that I know and work with and can see how much they love this sport and building cars that WE as enthusiasts will love. They have a lot of people that LOVE what they do working at the manufacturer level, they love to off-road just like you and I, and they have as much of their personal selves invested into this hobby as any of us.

Anyway, I avoid these threads for many reasons but one this I will say is the sharing of debate, conversation, and ideas is good. I know we all care and thats why we are here!!


Joey,
Like you I am proud of this whole community, unlike the people on RDC who seem incapable of organizing like the UTV crowd.

Regarding the people who hurt this sport. I would be OK with the manufactures pushing and passing a law that states if you modify your UTV in any way that compromises the structure, suspension or drive train then you have voided any rights to sue the manufacture. Now adding seat belts or misc accessories (Bling) that do not effect structure or performance would not be in this category.

I would also be OK if they mandated some sort of school, like what you do to get a Motorcycle license. Part of this school could touch on Treading Lightly programs and other land issues.

To me these would be things that could be done to protect Manufactures, teach new buyers, and show that we are trying to educate. This might (Probably not) keep some of these environmentalist from being able to make the claims they do. Also this would be a great way to track the sport and get better statistics.

But once again making laws that say your 2006 Rhino with a full aftermarket cage and rear seats in now illegal is just wrong. Every aftermarket cage I have seen is better built then what comes from the factory. Aftermarket rear seats are bolted to the bed or chassis. Most factory seats are held in by a slot and a single release latch mechanism .

Making laws that state if you cant touch the floorboards then you cant ride, is wrong, just wrong.

The lawsuits this could bring California "People vs State" could cost California 5X what they think this law is going to save by limiting who can ride. Also considering the UTV market is the fastest growing market in the off-road industry. Polaris claims they have grown 30% each year in the past 3 year. In 2012 they expect to sell twice as many UTV's as compared to 2009. I have also read that the UTV market makes up approx 33% of the off-road market and in Green Sticker fee's.

Out of that 33% how many are vehicles that had added rear seats? How many were purchase with the idea of carrying children? Lets just say 20%. So that could be 20% of the current market that would either be illegal or could not carry kids. If you cant use your machines then you dont need to pay Green Sticker fee's, Dune passes, Gas & food. The aftermarket industry will be effected, the Sand Sport Show will be effected. The RV industry will be effected.

It is amazing how many people and businesses can be effected by a law that was pushed by the manufactures as they are more concerned about the bottom line and about being sued.

Also I dont doubt the people you meet and deal with at the manufacture level are true enthusiasts. The guys developing, designing & building no doubt are into the sport and what they are doing. But like you said it's the "Brass" that pull the strings and make all the decisions. Those are the ones who ultimately run the business and those are the ones who pay Org's like ROVHA and "Sit on the Board". Those are the one who look at bottom lines, shareholders and not whats good for you and I.
 
Joey,
Like you I am proud of this whole community, unlike the people on RDC who seem incapable of organizing like the UTV crowd.

Regarding the people who hurt this sport. I would be OK with the manufactures pushing and passing a law that states if you modify your UTV in any way that compromises the structure, suspension or drive train then you have voided any rights to sue the manufacture. Now adding seat belts or misc accessories (Bling) that do not effect structure or performance would not be in this category.

I would also be OK if they mandated some sort of school, like what you do to get a Motorcycle license. Part of this school could touch on Treading Lightly programs and other land issues.

To me these would be things that could be done to protect Manufactures, teach new buyers, and show that we are trying to educate. This might (Probably not) keep some of these environmentalist from being able to make the claims they do. Also this would be a great way to track the sport and get better statistics.

But once again making laws that say your 2006 Rhino with a full aftermarket cage and rear seats in now illegal is just wrong. Every aftermarket cage I have seen is better built then what comes from the factory. Aftermarket rear seats are bolted to the bed or chassis. Most factory seats are held in by a slot and a single release latch mechanism .

Making laws that state if you cant touch the floorboards then you cant ride, is wrong, just wrong.

The lawsuits this could bring California "People vs State" could cost California 5X what they think this law is going to save by limiting who can ride. Also considering the UTV market is the fastest growing market in the off-road industry. Polaris claims they have grown 30% each year in the past 3 year. In 2012 they expect to sell twice as many UTV's as compared to 2009. I have also read that the UTV market makes up approx 33% of the off-road market and in Green Sticker fee's.

Out of that 33% how many are vehicles that had added rear seats? How many were purchase with the idea of carrying children? Lets just say 20%. So that could be 20% of the current market that would either be illegal or could not carry kids. If you cant use your machines then you dont need to pay Green Sticker fee's, Dune passes, Gas & food. The aftermarket industry will be effected, the Sand Sport Show will be effected. The RV industry will be effected.

It is amazing how many people and businesses can be effected by a law that was pushed by the manufactures as they are more concerned about the bottom line and about being sued.

Also I dont doubt the people you meet and deal with at the manufacture level are true enthusiasts. The guys developing, designing & building no doubt are into the sport and what they are doing. But like you said it's the "Brass" that pull the strings and make all the decisions. Those are the ones who ultimately run the business and those are the ones who pay Org's like ROVHA and "Sit on the Board". Those are the one who look at bottom lines, shareholders and not whats good for you and I.

I mentioned this before when you mentioned RDC members not being involved. However, this law does not affect many of the RDC faithful as they are off road racers. RDC members always mobilize when it comes to helping a fallen racer and his family. I have seen RDC members unite in the face of many tragedies. It's unfair to call then out. Sure it would be nice to have the members there get excited about this but it's just not a subject that type of member is into, nor are anyone on many of the MX forums.
 
So they made the law but have they defined the penaltys for breaking it yet?

Trying to determine if its cheaper to break the law vs fuel cost to play in AZ and NV.
 
FOR SALE:

2010 RZR4
Medium hours
couple scratches
Pro Armor Harnesses
ROPS Cage
Rugged Radio with HS's
Lock n ride
lighted whip :)

Craigs list #5524kj8899
 
Read it carefully guys, especially the 1st paragraph. There's a difference between an OHV and an ROHV.

This law defines an ROHV and the provisions of this law apply only to ROHV's not OHV's. (SXS's with engine displacement under 1000cc)
 
MY BAD, as previously stated my english is horrible, my reading is apparently worse, and my common sense...guess i threw it out the window :eek:
 
Thanks Jim for your humbleness, and I'd like to thank mary jane for my dumbness...My speed reading has gone to shit...apparently I have trouble distinguishing "recreational" I even asked another dipshit here at work to read the law and he came up with the same answer... So, just be aware, the LEO you might encounter probably is at the same level as we are, dumb....
 
Thanks Jim for your humbleness, and I'd like to thank mary jane for my dumbness...My speed reading has gone to shit...apparently I have trouble distinguishing "recreational" I even asked another dipshit here at work to read the law and he came up with the same answer... So, just be aware, the LEO you might encounter probably is at the same level as we are, dumb....

I just want one of those suits you're wearing in your avatar :cool:
 
XPirate,
No worries, this has been very confusing, and the parts you have questioned I to have questioned. When talking with one of the Senators offices their staff was under the same impression you were. They too thought all OHV's needed helmets.
 
NO SABE ENGLIS...... :rolleyes:

What did that song say once, F$CK the police, F$CK the police, F$CK'em...well, at least I can :rolleyes: So, going forward, I was planning on buying parker pumpers and full face helmets anyways ;) And I always wanted a dual-sport...
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
17,308
Messages
179,410
Members
12,150
Latest member
avakalanaya
Back
Top