Post by Wyldcomfort on Feb 25, 2007 10:15:29 GMT -5
Why would you make a law that forces law abiding citizens to break it in order to educate those who have failed to follow current laws and to create public awareness. We are families, spending quality time with our children. Why punish all of us due to a very small number of incidents outside of the type of riding we do??? Our Families are riding together on public lands - almost all of the "statistics" are from children riding unsupervised at home- most without helmets.
We can be consoled as the good Doctor and Senator Bates doesn't feel the need for us to worry - "In addition, you and I both know the likelihood of this being enforced is very small. In our area of the state, law enforcement in the areas used by ATVs is essentially nonexistent. The impending loss of O & C funds for public safety means the likelihood of enforcement is next to nothing. For organizations such as the MRA, who already make great attempts to ensure safety and environmental safeguards and who also pay for public safety officers, means this legislation is little more than an attempt to create public awareness to those who do not recognize the responsible use of ATVs." This makes criminals out of law abiding families that want to do the right thing. Just because they don't enforce it doesn't mean we wouldn't be breaking the law and setting a poor example for our children.
Looks like the changes will be - only including class 1 (atv's) and lowering the age to ride from twelve to eight on private land only. This still keeps our kids off of all public lands - where they happen to be riding with their families. Once again, how old was Kyle??? Where did he die? So "Kyle's Law" wouldn't have saved Kyle??? Is this about protecting kids or keeping families off of public lands for conservation reasons??? Are we to accept a law that targets families recreating together with the consolation it won't be enforced? Maybe it was smart of Sen. Bates not to have responded before now. One last question...why would we use statistics from Canada - do we not have bicycles here??? Truth is, here more people are killed and injured on bikes....(according to Safekids website anyhow). He doesn't state the fact that SVIA has publicly stated they do not approve a ban for children under 12 - they are just picking and choosing the information they want to use. He quotes the recent OHSU report but it amazes me how they can come up with all of these conclusive numbers when Parks and Rec, OSU, and Consumer Product Safety Commission isn't able to because we don't have complete numbers. Did the OHSU study take into account they were given Federal money to obtain these statistics and it has only been the last few years there has been reporting - they are adding new facilities each year - was that taken into consideration in the percentages?
Before we Legislate anything, we must first have the complete picture, accurate information and statistics. We need to be HONEST rather than selective. We must demand accuracy in reporting, heck we first must mandate reporting....
We can be consoled as the good Doctor and Senator Bates doesn't feel the need for us to worry - "In addition, you and I both know the likelihood of this being enforced is very small. In our area of the state, law enforcement in the areas used by ATVs is essentially nonexistent. The impending loss of O & C funds for public safety means the likelihood of enforcement is next to nothing. For organizations such as the MRA, who already make great attempts to ensure safety and environmental safeguards and who also pay for public safety officers, means this legislation is little more than an attempt to create public awareness to those who do not recognize the responsible use of ATVs." This makes criminals out of law abiding families that want to do the right thing. Just because they don't enforce it doesn't mean we wouldn't be breaking the law and setting a poor example for our children.
Looks like the changes will be - only including class 1 (atv's) and lowering the age to ride from twelve to eight on private land only. This still keeps our kids off of all public lands - where they happen to be riding with their families. Once again, how old was Kyle??? Where did he die? So "Kyle's Law" wouldn't have saved Kyle??? Is this about protecting kids or keeping families off of public lands for conservation reasons??? Are we to accept a law that targets families recreating together with the consolation it won't be enforced? Maybe it was smart of Sen. Bates not to have responded before now. One last question...why would we use statistics from Canada - do we not have bicycles here??? Truth is, here more people are killed and injured on bikes....(according to Safekids website anyhow). He doesn't state the fact that SVIA has publicly stated they do not approve a ban for children under 12 - they are just picking and choosing the information they want to use. He quotes the recent OHSU report but it amazes me how they can come up with all of these conclusive numbers when Parks and Rec, OSU, and Consumer Product Safety Commission isn't able to because we don't have complete numbers. Did the OHSU study take into account they were given Federal money to obtain these statistics and it has only been the last few years there has been reporting - they are adding new facilities each year - was that taken into consideration in the percentages?
Before we Legislate anything, we must first have the complete picture, accurate information and statistics. We need to be HONEST rather than selective. We must demand accuracy in reporting, heck we first must mandate reporting....