More good news for motorcyclists....

[Gnu]

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/Ne...ading-rideout/

Can't wait for guilty by association to happen here..

[AdRath]

The logic used to create this crap is so faulty its sad.

[El Zilcho]

Can't wait for guilty by association to happen here..

This is not guilt by association. This is leading an ogranized crime. Traffic crime in this case...

Who knows, maybe terrorism charges will be next? Terrorizing a highway?

[Flashmonkey]

Who knows, maybe terrorism charges will be next? Terrorizing a highway?

Hey we need to do what has to be done to protect the children right?

[gAbRoO]

I think thats UK news and but you never know it may make its way here.

[A-Dogg]

Great Idea!
What next, punishing the person standing in line because the person in front of them used a fake check or credit card to pay?
I think they should attach jailtime. I hear the prison industry is a big money maker all the way around.

[Krimesf4i]

What a joke. Who's to say the lead rider made it through a yellow light while the others stopped on a red. Say the leader slows down his pace for the other riders to catch up after they get the green light... how the hell should the leader be at fault if his friends speed to catch up?

[Jayv]

Hmm

To read how the prosecuting cop posted pictures on a swingers’ website showing him astride a police bike, get MCN, on sale now.

[954RR]

Send this link to Julian Fantino and I'm sure he'll implement and take credit for it!

[LMF]

Send this link to Julian Fantino and I'm sure he'll implement and take credit for it!

You beat me to the punch!

Don't give Fantino any bright ideas. Next thing you know, he'll institute a curfew for motorcyclists.

[Moreno636]

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/Ne...ading-rideout/

Can't wait for guilty by association to happen here..

Absolutely disgusting!!

[moto22]

I don't see how thats going to work, I've been on thousands of group rides ,and it always works in reverse to that. the cops show up, the lead guy boots off and who ever is in the back takes it for the team...


Dat's the rules..

[fastar1]

I see the sense in this. We already know the lead rider has a certain responsibility for the riders behind. I know of groups that have been pulled over and the lead rider, being a mature and sensible person, asked to spare the riders behind because they were only trying to keep up. So in fact he was acknowledging his greater share of responsibility.

This rule would only enforce what we (should) already know is just and fair.

[KRFDPSSTI]

So let me get this straight, im riding minding my own business doing 120km/h on the 401 when another bike rider sees me in the distance and speeds up to 160km/h to catch up to me and i lose my bike along with him?? haha makes perfect sense.

Plate tucked, downshift, full throttle...see you later

[Rossi86]

So let me get this straight, im riding minding my own business doing 120km/h on the 401 when another bike rider sees me in the distance and speeds up to 160km/h to catch up to me and i lose my bike along with him?? haha makes perfect sense.

Plate tucked, downshift, full throttle...see you later

Catch up to a cop riding a Harley up ahead and **** him over too... Say it was the cop's idea all along, he was leading

[FiReSTaRT]

I see the sense in this. We already know the lead rider has a certain responsibility for the riders behind. I know of groups that have been pulled over and the lead rider, being a mature and sensible person, asked to spare the riders behind because they were only trying to keep up. So in fact he was acknowledging his greater share of responsibility.

This rule would only enforce what we (should) already know is just and fair.

Bottom line, you have a licence, you have the responsibility to obey the law. If the leader is breaking the law, you have the choice between doing the same or toeing the line. The resonsibility is yours and not the lead rider's. While a few extremists might scream for higher taxes and harsher legal penalties for everyone and everything, I'd rather not live in a police state, so I'll sincerely hope that you never see the inside of a political office other than being a delivery-boy.
I've organized my fair share of group rides. The speed is always the lowest speed that every rider is comfortable with. Why should I be more culpable than everyone else who chose to follow me? If you don't like the pace, signal that you're leaving the group and leave. Don't ***** and whine that the evil group leader coerced you to break the law and that you're just a poor lost little girl, just obeying the commands of his immense authority.

[El Zilcho]

Don't ***** and whine that the evil group leader coerced you to break the law and that you're just a poor lost little girl, just obeying the commands of his immense authority.

You don't know all that much about human nature, do you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

[fastar1]

The resonsibility is yours and not the lead rider's.

I'm saying the responsibility is shared.

The person in charge has always has some responsibility to make sure the direction he's giving is legal and moral. If this weren't the case, CEOs, generals, investment advisors, contractors, doctors, parents, would never be responsible for any misdirection they give. They can't use the argument that "He didn't have to do it" as a defense in these cases.

[CruisnGrrl]

I see the sense in this. We already know the lead rider has a certain responsibility for the riders behind. I know of groups that have been pulled over and the lead rider, being a mature and sensible person, asked to spare the riders behind because they were only trying to keep up. So in fact he was acknowledging his greater share of responsibility.

This rule would only enforce what we (should) already know is just and fair.

So by your logic if one of the rider's in the back crashes the lead rider's insurance should go up too?

The only person that the lead rider is truely responsible for is their self. They have no control over any other rider's throttle.

[fastar1]

So by your logic if one of the rider's in the back crashes the lead rider's insurance should go up too?

Sure, that argument could hold water if;
1- The lead rider led the others in a way that presented a very high risk of crashing (for example, around a curve or over a crest... into a cornfield).
2- His insurance included coverage for the bikes that were following.

Otherwise, that analogy doesn't compare.

The only person that the lead rider is truely responsible for is their self. They have no control over any other rider's throttle.

That's not the way I see it. The lead rider knows that the guys behind need to follow him, so if he speeds up he should know that they have to speed up too (unless there's traffic and the leader gets slowed up again). In effect, he's in a position of power so he may have very little control over their throttle, but he has some.