CHP forced to remove Lane Splitting Guidelines-Need your help now!

[UDRider]

It is sad that one miserable person could ruin it for everyone else.

 

[OBJMS33]

What I want to know is why any government job deserves a pension, when virtually no private company offers them anymore. Just weaksauce 401k matching.

What I want to know is why none of the non pensioned public are not asking this question when it comes to the union bashing. It's somehow the state workers fault that the private sector has slowly taken you to the cleaners for years and eroded your retirement and your worker protections? So we should get sqrewed too? UC pays around 4-500$ per month into my pension.
Dont know where this guy gets the figures he quotes. And if one is mad about the benefits state workers get, makes real sense to advise them how to get a job as one.

 

[clutchslip]

..... OAL .....

Stay tuned for more. Busy, busy week.

Thanks for the PDFs. Most helpful.

My suggestion is to start with the OAL and the falsehoods in his petition. Then move to legislators with the information and OALs decision.

Here are the first errors and omissions that I see:

A. He states there was no public input.

B. Guidelines do not need to be specifically sanctioned by statute. Departments issue guidelines all the time on procedures. Take the DMV or CARB, for example.

C. He specifically mentions "weaving" more than once, which we know is not the same as lane sharing.

D. He uses all motorcycle deaths as though they are all due to lane sharing without any supporting evidence.

E. The guidelines were actually MORE restrictive on motorcycles than what was issued before. Which was NOTHING. His assertion is in direct opposition to what was actually published, because we had no guidelines.

F. His lack of regard for public safety is apparent. While disguised as a prophylactic, his petition will remove useful safety guidelines, and thus create more danger for all motorists. He should be admonished for his selfish disregard for his fellow motorists.

 

[boney]

What I want to know is why none of the non pensioned public are not asking this question when it comes to the union bashing. It's somehow the state workers fault that the private sector has slowly taken you to the cleaners for years and eroded your retirement and your worker protections? So we should get sqrewed too? UC pays around 4-500$ per month into my pension.
Dont know where this guy gets the figures he quotes. And if one is mad about the benefits state workers get, makes real sense to advise them how to get a job as one.

Please take the pension discussion elsewhere. I'm not saying it's not worth discussing, I'm say that you are 'jacking an important thread and your continued comments will only pollute the lane-sharing discussion, which is the original content of this thread.

 

[Lunch Box]

Thanks for the PDFs. Most helpful.

My suggestion is to start with the OAL and the falsehoods in his petition. Then move to legislators with the information and OALs decision.

Here are the first errors and omissions that I see:

A. He states there was no public input.

B. Guidelines do not need to be specifically sanctioned by statute. Departments issue guidelines all the time on procedures. Take the DMV or CARB, for example.

C. He specifically mentions "weaving" more than once, which we know is not the same as lane sharing.

D. He uses all motorcycle deaths as though they are all due to lane sharing without any supporting evidence.

E. The guidelines were actually MORE restrictive on motorcycles than what was issued before. Which was NOTHING. His assertion is in direct opposition to what was actually published, because we had no guidelines.

F. His lack of regard for public safety is apparent. While disguised as a prophylactic, his petition will remove useful safety guidelines, and thus create more danger for all motorists. He should be admonished for his selfish disregard for his fellow motorists.

Well stated, sir. I will be following this closely, and will look to Surj for further information and suggestions. This Mandler fellow really needs a hobby.

 

[moto-rama]

What I want to know is why any government job deserves a pension, when virtually no private company offers them anymore. Just weaksauce 401k matching.

Maybe because when "privately employed" people gave up their collective bargaining rights they fucked themselves like the little weak pussies they are.

Some publicly employed people are not weak, pussified, sissy motherfuckers that won't give up their collective bargaining rights and the power it gives are the last defense for the rest of the paid by the hour saps.

Don't get butt hurt over unions, and the benefits of membership....Get organized or accept that you get what you asked for.

And please don't threadjack this discussion with your off topic thinly veiled political agenda.

 

[Lunch Box]

Maybe because when "privately employed" people gave up their collective bargaining rights they fucked themselves like the little weak pussies they are.

Some publicly employed people are not weak, pussified, sissy motherfuckers that won't give up their collective bargaining rights and the power it gives are the last defense for the rest of the paid by the hour saps.

Don't get butt hurt over unions, and the benefits of membership....Get organized or accept that you get what you asked for.

And please don't threadjack this discussion with your off topic thinly veiled political agenda.

Wow, that is some excellent reasoning. So anyone who is not in a union is weak, pussified and sissy. Got it. Now can you maybe start a new thread in the sink to share your amazing insight? This thread is about the very real threat to lane sharing here in California. Please keep it on topic.

 

[moto-rama]

Wow, that is some excellent reasoning. So anyone who is not in a union is weak, pussified and sissy. Got it. Now can you maybe start a new thread in the sink to share your amazing insight? This thread is about the very real threat to lane sharing here in California. Please keep it on topic.

Read it again.

 

[revnort]

Please take the pension discussion elsewhere. I'm not saying it's not worth discussing, I'm say that you are 'jacking an important thread and your continued comments will only pollute the lane-sharing discussion, which is the original content of this thread.

+1

 

[NoobCorpse]

Let's keep the union / pension shit in a different thread - this thread has enough on-topic potential so keep the other opinions out please.


That said: maybe I'm misunderstanding the importance of the guidelines laid out by the CHP, but how is this really that bad, and not just a good wake-up call? Lanesharing took place in an undocumented fashion for years, only official word was it is "not illegal" and there is "no statues for it in the CA vehicle code", which means it's off the books and CHP can issue tickets for OTHER THINGS if they use their judgement and deem a rider's speed/behavior/etc unsafe.

Mandler's complaint states that he is complaining about these CHP guidelines that inform a CHP officer's judgement and were established without proper legislation. CHP responds by taking the whole thing down, putting us back into the (IMHO favorable) gray area where it goes back to being "not illegal, but not exactly endorsed". It seems to me that the more official things get written around lanesharing will put us on a path to direct legislation - which has the potential to get shot down or even made explicitly illegal?

What am I missing?

 

[Cabrito]

I'm wondering what brought his attention to this to start his crusade. Increase in lane splitters/sharers since the guidelines came out, and or the increase in media coverage? Increase in splitters/sharers behaving badly?

I'm not sure, but I feel like I've seen an uptick in people sharing using all sorts of tactics that I didn't used to see as much. High speed, sharing on two lane roads (riding on the shoulder). Generally feeling entitled to share however and whenever they want and using the new guidelines as the reason/excuse.

 

[EastBayDave]

That said: maybe I'm misunderstanding the importance of the guidelines laid out by the CHP, but how is this really that bad, and not just a good wake-up call? Lanesharing took place in an undocumented fashion for years, only official word was it is "not illegal" and there is "no statues for it in the CA vehicle code", which means it's off the books and CHP can issue tickets for OTHER THINGS if they use their judgement and deem a rider's speed/behavior/etc unsafe.

Mandler's complaint states that he is complaining about these CHP guidelines that inform a CHP officer's judgement and were established without proper legislation. CHP responds by taking the whole thing down, putting us back into the (IMHO favorable) gray area where it goes back to being "not illegal, but not exactly endorsed". It seems to me that the more official things get written around lanesharing will put us on a path to direct legislation - which has the potential to get shot down or even made explicitly illegal?

What am I missing?

that this anus is good enough to get gov't law givers to pay attention, & believe false facts & figures.

CLEARLY this is his first step to trying to get the practice banned entirely. If they pay attention to this dweebs arguments, they may make his suggestions law. I truly hope BARF legal members are listening; & the war should start now!

 

[NoobCorpse]

that this anus is good enough to get gov't law givers to pay attention, & believe false facts & figures.

CLEARLY this is his first step to trying to get the practice banned entirely. If they pay attention to this dweebs arguments, they may make his suggestions law. I truly hope BARF legal members are listening; & the war should start now!

But that's kinda my point, he's not the only anus that's trying to get legislation around lanesharing legality, and it's been happening for years, and it's been a "loophole" that it is not illegal or explicitly called out in the CVC, and lots of people before him have tried to get it made illegal.
CHP having "guidelines" officially posted starts to put it in writing, which is good for the spirit of the guidelines for new riders to follow since it's basically learned through socialization only. But, the flip side is that CHP, being a state-funded law enforcement organization, means that them offically posting and promoting guidelines will irk other taxpayers and see it as a state organization promoting an activity that, while not technically illegal, a group of people seem to loathe and will fight just as hard to get it banned or made illegal.

So if this guy's pointing this out, and CHP takes down the guidelines, returning it to "gray area" status, isn't that kind of a good warning for us motos to not put too much about it in official writing? Again, this is what I'm trying to understand. Lanesharing has been under attack from people wanting it banned long before this guy, so it's not just about that.

 

[VicTim]

This buttwad did that?

https://www.facebook.com/kenneth.mandler

I left him a message on facebook asking him why he did this. When he responds back I'll let you know.

 

[fawndog]

While I think the semantics are silly, I kinda get it. CHP is an enforcement agency, so it's very easy to take any "guidelines" set forth by them as pseudo-law. I know many on here even disagree with the guidelines themselves.

The guidelines should really be in the DMV moto handbook and/or the MSF, where most tips and guidelines for riding and driving are.

My worry is that this could spark more desire for legislation, which I think can only be bad for us.

Well we have;
Don't text while driving
Buckle up
Don't drink and drive

So the message is CHP can advise you against bad behavior, but not good behavior. I'm sure CHP conceded because we're a minority of motorist.

 

[horsepower]

"The Office of Administrative Law sided with Mandler, noting that CHP Commissioner J. A. Farrow certified that his department would not "issue, use, enforce, or attempt to enforce the public education information." The OAL determined that posting the guidelines on the website was "issuing" them."

The CHP is a Vehicle and Penal Code law enforcement service agency. Safety , enforcement and public service is part of the law enforcement mission statement. No different from the DMV!!!

Where does issuing, enforcing, etc.. "Don't drink and drive, Share the road" etc result in Damages? Any judgment must be equated with either damages or relief. Education Saves lives. And if one educational issuance is eliminated, then All must be and any resulting damages should be levied against mr Mandle in wrongful death lawsuits, etc.

The Administrative legal department who heard this pleading and agreed with it is ust as worthless as this man.

Well we have;
Don't text while driving
Buckle up
Don't drink and drive

So the message is CHP can advise you against bad behavior, but not good behavior. I'm sure CHP conceded because we're a minority of motorist.

The CHP didn't concede, some bullshit admin committee conceded.
To me there is NO difference between any govt agency supporting safety by issuing warnings and promoting education...DMV, MSF.....what, eliminate any agency education that helps define a law you might not agree with?? It's like me as a non drinker going after all the education and statistics on what's the acceptable legal alcohol limit because i secretly want to eliminate drinking entirely. Buffoonery that results in more deaths if education is eliminated.
Let's appeal this thing.

 

[ALANRIDER7]

I left him a message on facebook asking him why he did this. When he responds back I'll let you know.

This douchebag is all about principles- he's dug in like an Alabama tick.

We have principles as well. Why just lay down for this dickhead? Why? The barf thing to do is to mount a MASSIVE campaign of counter-attack and get things put back the way they should be. One myopic dweeb cannot stand up against the e-horsepower that barf can generate. Let's put this asshole on the hot seat and keep the issue in the spotlight until he relents. He stuck his unwanted stick into our hornet's nest. If he used the system, so can we. Fuck this guy. He's not doing the motorcycle community any favors with his misguided crusade.

Let's set things right. How do you fight and win against someone like this? Use his tactics against him.

 

[redrum750]

Feel free to criticize me, but I think that guy was actually protecting your rights.

If you want to spread safety information, get it in print like articles and books and post it on the internet. You can also get it included in educational seminars like MSF, Lee Parks, Doc Wong, Reg Pridmore.

Once the guideline written by the CHP gets quoted in a court case, it could become law. Do you want that?

 

[NoobCorpse]

Feel free to criticize me, but I think that guy was actually protecting your rights.

If you want to spread safety information, get it in print like articles and books and post it on the internet. You can also get it included in educational seminars like MSF, Lee Parks, Doc Wong, Reg Pridmore.

Once the guideline written by the CHP gets quoted in a court case, it could become law. Do you want that?

This is my thinking as well - more official text, more possibility of getting actual, limiting, enforcable legislation.

 

[Lunch Box]

The CHP is a Vehicle and Penal Code law enforcement service agency. Safety , enforcement and public service is part of the law enforcement mission statement. No different from the DMV!!!

Where does issuing, enforcing, etc.. "Don't drink and drive, Share the road" etc result in Damages? Any judgment must be equated with either damages or relief. Education Saves lives. And if one educational issuance is eliminated, then All must be and any resulting damages should be levied against mr Mandle in wrongful death lawsuits, etc.

The Administrative legal department who heard this pleading and agreed with it is ust as worthless as this man.


The CHP didn't concede, some bullshit admin committee conceded.
To me there is NO difference between any govt agency supporting safety by issuing warnings and promoting education...DMV, MSF.....what, eliminate any agency education that helps define a law you might not agree with?? It's like me as a non drinker going after all the education and statistics on what's the acceptable legal alcohol limit because i secretly want to eliminate drinking entirely. Buffoonery that results in more deaths if education is eliminated.
Let's appeal this thing.

Agreed, and agreed. I have very little experience with this sort of thing, but will certainly do my part. We need to push back!