(RoadRage, 2011)

Let me start out by saying that in no way, shape or form is this meant to infringe upon any personal freedoms, rights or even your desires as human beings that were fortunate enough to have found yourselves living in the greatest society on Earth, the United States of America. This was not written to tear down any personal credos of “Ride Free” or to regulate you in any way. This is meant to EDUCATE, not REGULATE.

The simple truths that are written herein were once known by all in the MC (Motorcycle Club) Community. They were a part of what characterized and upon which most individual club’s bylaws were constructed, as well as being engrained in the belief system of every one of those club’s members. The “Old School” bikers can surely attest to this.

The MC world is one that is founded upon FREEDOM and held together through RESPECT. It is critical that both of these cornerstones be regarded as equally important, within the MC Community, in order to ensure the peaceful coexistence of such a vastly diverse sub-set of society.

This unique culture, with its many “Colors,” is represented by everything from the “1% Outlaw Biker Clubs” at one end of the spectrum to the “Christian Biker Clubs” at the other end and just about everything you can think of in between. The only things that are always present in every club are, of course an undying love for riding motorcycles (that’s pretty much a given) and the two fundamentals mentioned above, the unwavering desire for Freedom and the absolute necessity of Respect.

Bear in mind, all of this is written with regard to MCs. Not your everyday Joe Independents, average citizens who have no clue as to the inner workings of our part of society, nor those RUBs that one day decided to buy everything brand new from the bike to the jacket, helmet, chaps, tassels, gloves, pant stirrups and vests with way too many brand new, stupid looking patches on them. Now, to avoid sounding hypocritical, let me also state that all of those “Motorcycle Enthusiasts” have every right to enjoy the freedom of the road and deserve the right to earn their own portion of respect, as much as we in the MC Community do. But for the purposes of this writing, they are in fact excluded.

To continue speaking on the fundamentals of Freedom and Respect, it’s important to realize that, in a perfect world, everyone would be free to do whatever they wanted when, where and however they pleased. While this sounds great it brings with it another set of problems. For instance, there is the fact that one man’s exercising of his unrestrained freedom will almost always infringe upon another man’s freedom and inherently bring with it a measure of disrespect.

So… while the ideal of Freedom is pure, the reality of freedom is only able to be implemented when tempered with respect. Again, in the setting of our imaginary perfect world, we would like to assume that this measure of respect would be common knowledge among the members of this particular sub-set of society. Almost an unwritten “Code Of Respect” somewhat akin to the, no longer recognized, “Rules Of The Road” that all motorists used to know and abide by “back in the day.”

In the heart of every Biker burns a fire stoked by their desire for and expression of their personal freedoms. For “Patch Holders” of established MCs, it is not a wildfire that is left to burn out of control, this fire is contained with a ring of respect. Respect for their patch/club, respect for other patches/clubs and perhaps most importantly, respect for themselves. Freedom expressed without respect can be a dangerous thing. Respect is not easily attained and it is always earned, not given or even taken.

“Patch Holders” of well known, established MCs have, by the very fact that they are wearing a “Full Patch,” EARNED a measure of respect from the other members of the MC Community. That respect is, in a sense, automatically bestowed upon the patch holder because of the community’s belief in and the history of the known, established and respected club that “patched out” that particular member. Without the foreknowledge of and respect for the club issuing the patch, the patch holder would have earned no respect within the MC community.

When you decide to exercise your personal freedoms by starting up a club because you just “want to do things your way” or you “can’t seem to find a club that you can commit yourself to because of this or that” or whatever your particular reason for starting up your own club may be… This situation is known as a “Pop Up Club.” While starting up a new club, in and of itself, is not necessarily a bad idea… Doing it the wrong way, the disrespectful way, is ALWAYS A BAD IDEA.

Most “Pop Up Clubs” are started by founding members that have very limited experience with the MC world and the inner workings of it, or it’s unwritten “Code of Respect” that MCs are expected to govern themselves and their members by. This is usually because they either didn’t want to have to go through the “prospect” period required by all legitimate MCs or they unknowingly believe “it’s just that easy” to design and sew on a cool looking patch and viola… they are an MC.

In very few cases have “Pop Up Clubs” been formed with the knowledge that their actions were disrespectful to each and every patch holder of every MC, that had to earn that full patch through a prospecting period. But much like the laws of the land state… ignorance is no excuse. To simply put a “Cut” on and call yourself a full patched member of an MC without having EARNED that right, having prospected and proven that you understand the way the MC Community works and that you understand “Protocol” and respect… is so insulting that you might as well have spit on and slapped the face of every member of every MC in your community. This is NOT an exaggeration by any means.

How would a pop up club’s sewing on of some patches, assigning some officers and calling themselves an MC be any different than any other group of untrained people joining a particular subset of society and believing themselves to be automatically equal? Would you consider putting on a uniform and calling yourself a US Marine without having gone through basic training? Would you put on a smock and begin to practice medicine without having gone through med school? How likely are you to throw on a helmet and a turnout coat then run into a burning building to fight a raging fire without having completed the “probie” portion of the fire academy? Would it not be considered an insult for you to call yourself a journeyman carpenter without having completed your apprenticeship?

The first thing that patch holders of respected MCs ask when they see a Pop Up Club is “why didn’t you just join an established MC?” Of course there are about as many viable answers to that question as there are ideas of the perfect motorcycle, but it is a valid question none the less. Yes, you have the right to disagree with the basic philosophy of each and every established MC in your community and can thereby feel compelled to start up your own version, one that will “do it the right way” or whatever you think you’ve figured out better than everyone else. But there is a right way and a wrong way to do so.

It has been my experience that most Pop Up Clubs do it the wrong way, the disrespectful way. If you start up a club and right from the beginning put on what is known as an “MC Cube” and / or separate your patch into a “3 piece patch” (with top rocker, center patch and bottom rocker not connected to each other) YOU HAVE DONE IT THE WRONG WAY, THE DISRESPECTFUL WAY!

If you “fly that patch” in front of the wrong people you may very well have yourself in more trouble than you ever expected your well intended expression of your personal freedom to have gotten you into. If you disrespect certain members of the MC world you will very strongly regret having done so, whether you knew that’s what you were doing or not. KNOW THE COMMUNITY YOU ARE TRYING TO JOIN AND EDUCATE YOURSELF ON THE THINGS YOU ARE EXPECTED TO DO, THE THINGS YOU ARE EXPECTED NOT TO DO AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF DOING THEM ANYWAY.

If you are still interested in starting up a new club rather than joining an already established one, respected by the MC Community, then here are some things that will help you do it the right way. DO NOT CALL YOURSELF AN “MC”… PERIOD! You have not EARNED the right to call yourself an MC nor have you or your founding members EARNED the right to call yourselves PATCH HOLDERS. PERIOD! Start your organization as a (SC) “Social Club” or a (RC) “Riding Club” or a (MSC) “Motorcycle Social Club.” Set your “Club” up much like an MC with rules / regulations / bylaws and all the rest of the organizational portion of the start up but DO NOT call it an MC. Show up to and introduce yourselves at local COC (Confederation Of Clubs) and similar meetings. Recruit new members through a proper prospecting period. Attend as many of the local MC events around your community as you can, showing support, getting yourself out there and noticed. Just make sure that what the community is noticing is your members acting appropriately (respectful) because believe it… YOU ARE BEING WATCHED and everything your members do is noticed.

It is during this initial period of your club, called something other than an MC, that you are actually “prospecting” your club to the MC community. There really is no getting around the prospect period. Since you felt you didn’t want to prospect for an existing club, your whole organization must now go through, for all intents and purposes, a prospecting period. There is no set time limit for your organization’s prospecting period, anymore than there is a standard amount of time for every individual MC’s prospects. That time is up to the individual or, in this case, club. How long does it take to earn respect? How long does it take to prove that you understand the way things are to work (Protocol)? It varies. But know this for certain… THERE IS NO ACCEPTANCE WITHOUT EARNING RESPECT.

Think about it. You are starting up a club, that one would assume will be heavily involved in the local MC Community… Why wouldn’t you want to have their acceptance and respect? This community isn’t for everyone. It has certain expectations that MUST be met. Do it the wrong way and… well… There’s just no telling what you might find out there on the road. Do it the right way and you might just be welcomed into OUR community. The choice is yours.

We want to thank the organizer of the event for holding this event for our troops and this comment is in no way holding them responsible for the discrimination. Our club will NEVER patronize Pure Platinum. The following is the announcement for the event:

“This is a free Show to EVERYONE, come celebrate FREEDOM that has been fought hard for by these very brave Men and Women of the U.S. Armed Forces. Plenty of giveaways and fun for all starts at 8pm. Get there early we got free shirts and other gear to giveaway.”

The two words capitalized are the most important. Both are in serious question.

PICKERINGTON, Ohio — A federal traffic safety agency is offering law enforcement agencies hundreds of thousands of dollars to set up checkpoints that target only motorcyclists, and the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) wants to know why.

The AMA has asked the agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), to suspend the grant program until questions raised by the motorcycling community are addressed.

“How do motorcycle-only checkpoints increase the safety of motorcyclists?” Ed Moreland, AMA senior vice president for government relations, wrote in a letter to NHTSA Administrator David Strickland on Aug. 9. “Where do the selected states draw their authority to conduct” motorcycle-only safety checks?

“Will ‘probable cause’ be required to stop a motorcycle under the terms of this grant program?” Moreland asked. “If so, what will constitute probable cause?”

Under its Motorcycle Law Enforcement Demonstration grant program, the NHTSA will award up to $350,000 in total to be divided among as many as five law enforcement agencies to set up traffic checkpoints that target motorcyclists.

The demonstration program is modeled after a controversial program in New York where the state police set up a series of checkpoints that targeted only motorcyclists, raising the ire of the AMA and motorcycling community. In 2008, for example, New York State Police announced plans to set up 15 checkpoints near motorcycling events that summer.

The AMA questioned the potential discriminatory and legal nature of the program and sent a list of questions for clarification to the New York State Police. To date, New York authorities have not responded.

Moreland said that if the NHTSA is truly interested in motorcyclist safety, it should fund proven programs that help prevent crashes — rather than checkpoints that single out motorcyclists.

“The primary source of motorcycle safety is in motorcycle crash prevention, and NHTSA should focus on decreasing the likelihood of crashes from occurring in the first place,” Moreland said.

The AMA urges all riders to contact Strickland and ask that the discriminatory Motorcycle Law Enforcement Demonstration grant program be suspended until questions raised by the motorcycling community are addressed.

The easiest way to do that is to go to the AMA website at AmericanMotorcyclist.com > Rights > Issues & Legislation

“The Case for Impeachment: Why Barack Hussein Obama Should be Impeached to Save America” by Steven Baldwin covers all of these issues and more in making its arguments.

“This is the beginning of the end for the United States unless the people exercise their precious remaining liberties and stand and demand that their elected representatives impeach this president before further mortal damage is inflicted upon America,” the report concludes.

The author explains that the Founding Fathers enshrined the impeachment clause into the United States Constitution because they feared that a president intent on subverting the very principles upon which the American experiment was built would someday rise to power.

CLICK HERE TO CONTINUE

Have you heard of the “Great Outdoors Initiative”? Chances are, you haven’t. But across the country, White House officials have been meeting quietly with environmental groups to map out government plans for acquiring untold millions of acres of both public and private land. It’s another stealthy power grab through executive order that promises to radically transform the American way of life.

In April, President Obama issued a memorandum outlining his “21st century strategy for America’s great outdoors.” It was addressed to the Interior Secretary, the Agriculture Secretary, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency and the chair of the Council on Environmental Quality. The memo calls on the officials to conduct “listening and learning sessions” with the public to “identify the places that mean the most to Americans, and leverage the support of the Federal Government” to “protect” outdoor spaces. Eighteen of 25 planned sessions have already been held. But there’s much more to the agenda than simply “reconnecting Americans to nature.”

The federal government, as the memo boasted, is the nation’s “largest land manager.” It already owns roughly one of every three acres in the United States. This is apparently not enough. At a “listening session” in New Hampshire last week, government bureaucrats trained their sights on millions of private forest land throughout the New England region. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack crusaded for “the need for additional attention to the Land and Water Conservation Fund — and the need to promptly support full funding of that fund.”

Property owners have every reason to be worried. The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) is a pet project of green radicals, who want the decades-old government slush fund for buying up private lands to be freed from congressional appropriations oversight. It’s paid for primarily with receipts from the government’s offshore oil and gas leases. Both Senate and House Democrats have included $900 million in full LWCF funding, not subject to congressional approval, in their energy/BP oil spill legislative packages. The Democrats have also included a provision in these packages that would require the federal government to take over energy permitting in state waters, which provoked an outcry from Texas state officials, who sent a letter of protest to Capitol Hill last month:

“In light of federal failures, it is incomprehensible that the United States Congress is entertaining proposals that expand federal authority over oil and gas drilling in state water and lands long regulated by states… Given the track record, putting the federal government in charge of energy production on state land and waters not only breaks years of successful precedent and threatens the 10th Amendment to the United Sates Constitution, but it also undermines common sense and threatens the environmental and economy security of our state’s citizens.”

This power grab, masquerading as a feel-good, all-American recreation program, comes on top of a separate, property-usurping initiative exposed by GOP Rep. Robert Bishop and Sen. Jim DeMint earlier this spring. According to an internal, 21-page Obama administration memo, 17 energy-rich areas in 11 states have been targeted as potential federal “monuments.” The lives of coyotes, deer and prairie dogs would be elevated above states’ needs to generate jobs, tourism business and energy solutions.

Take my home state of Colorado. The Obama administration is considering locking up some 380,000 acres of Bureau of Land Management land and private land in Colorado under the 1906 Antiquities Act. The Vermillion Basin and the Alpine Triangle would be shut off to mining, hunting, grazing, oil and gas development and recreational activities. Alan Foutz, president of the Colorado Farm Bureau, blasted the administration’s meddling: “Deer and elk populations are thriving, and we in Colorado don’t need help from the federal government in order to manage them effectively.”

Indeed, the feds have enough trouble as it is managing the vast amount of land they already control. As the Washington, D.C.-based Americans for Limited Government group, which defends private property rights, points out: “The (National Park Service) claims it would need about $9.5 billion just to clear its backlog of the necessary improvements and repairs. At a time when our existing national parks are suffering, it doesn’t make sense for the federal government to grab new lands.”

The bureaucrats behind Obama’s “Great Outdoors Initiative” plan on wrapping up their public comment solicitation by November 15. The initiative’s taxpayer-funded website (http://ideas.usda.gov/ago/ideas.nsf/) has been dominated by left-wing environmental activists proposing human population reduction, private property confiscation, and gun bans, hunting bans and vehicle bans in national parks. It’s time for private property owners to send their own loud, clear message to the land-hungry feds: Take a hike.

Drain the swamp? HAHAHAHAHAHA!

My column today exposes the swamp creatures who coddled and protected Charlie Rangel all these years. Three House Dems have called on him to resign. And Democrats here in Colorado are bailing on him. But it’s too little, too late to mask the Democrat Party’s Rangel stench.

The enablers of Charlie Rangel
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2010

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is the world’s worst cleaning lady. How has she fulfilled her vaunted promise to “drain the swamp” and preside over the “most ethical Congress in history”? By shrugging her shoulders, downplaying the gravity of myriad ethics charges against corruptocrat Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel and waiting for the “political chips” to “fall where they may.” Imagine a custodial service that fixed toilet clogs by letting the overflowing waste and polluted waters “fall where they may.”

At a press conference to preempt the bipartisan House ethics panel’s announcement of 13 ethics and federal regulation charges against Rangel on Thursday afternoon, Pelosi claimed to take “great pride” in her swamp-draining record. Unblinkingly, she cited the House trial against Rangel as proof that the “process” is working. But that beleaguered panel has been pathetically understaffed, has dragged its feet for two years on the Rangel case and has administered more halfhearted wrist-slaps than all the pushover parents on a season of “Nanny 911.”

Clinging bitterly to the moral equivalence card, Pelosi carped about Bush-era GOP corruption. (Cue a chorus of “Let’s do the time warp again!”) Her lips were sealed, however, on the continuing wheeling and dealing behind the scenes between Rangel’s lobbyist-funded lawyers and the ethics panel on a deal to avoid a congressional trial.

CONTINUED

The mere idea of putting it there is the ultimate insult.  This would be submitting to them.  Be the INFIDEL and never submit to a religion that is not conducive to our American freedoms.  Do not spit on all those who have suffered and died because of the religion that declared war on us.  Do not spit on the founders of this great nation and the Constitution that guarantees  our FREEDOM.  Do not spit on the sacrifice of our brave American troops.  Be the INFIDEL!  Mayor Bloomberg, you are a piss-ant.

IBMSC

On Sunday, June 6th, a multi-ethnic, multi-racial coalition of Americans opposed to Islamic violence and intolerance rallied at the site of the World Trade Center in New York City .

9/11 families were joined by immigrants from India, Russia, Egypt, Israel, Africa, Iran and Europe to show opposition to the construction of a mega-mosque at Ground Zero. Others flew in from overseas to speak or just to share their particular ethnic communities’ experiences at the hands of Muslims.

These are parents and spouses of firefighters killed on 9/11. The rally took place just a minute’s walk from Ladder 10 Firehouse, where their loved ones were stationed for duty that terrible day. Ladder 10 lost seven firefighters.

Crowd estimates ranged from 5,000 (NYPD) to 10,000. The crowd overflowed the police barrier enclosures that ran the full length of two city blocks. This photo shows the enclosure in front of the stage at the intersection of Liberty and Church Streets. The second enclosure ran the length of the next block and can be seen on the other side of the traffic lights.

Thousands of additional participants filled the treed area of Zuccotti Park .

Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller are the founders of STOP ISLAMIZATION OF AMERICA, which sponsored the rally. Ms. Geller is a citizen journalist and blogger who runs the human rights web site Atlas Shrugs. Mr. Spencer is the author of several books on Islam and head of the influential web site Jihad watch. Pamela Geller:

“Ground Zero is a war memorial, Ground Zero is a burial ground. We are asking for sensitivity…It is unconscionable to build a shrine to the very ideology that inspired the jihadist attacks at Ground Zero, right there. We are asking the imam Rauf and Daisy Khan to be sensitive. For mutual respect and mutual understanding that is demanded of us every day.

There’s a hair-trigger sensitivity in the Muslim world, you can’t run the cartoons, you can’t say Mohammed, this is offensive. This is an offensive mosque. To build a shrine, an Islamic flag of conquest on the sacred ground the cherished site, of a conquered land. This is historic, this is Islamic history. It’s what they do. The St. Sofia in Turkey , the al-Quds, at the holiest Jewish site in Israel . Not here. This is where we take a stand. We must take a stand. We must say no.”

I do not believe that the landmarks commission controlled by Mayor Bloomberg, is going to stop this mosque. It’s not going to happen. Here’s Omar Muhamedi, on his human rights council, a CAIR lawyer, who sued the airlines and the Jane and John Does that saw something and said something on those airplanes, if you remember. That’s who’s on his human rights commission. It ain’t gonna happen with Bloomberg. We have to make it happen. You have to get involved.” (Pamela Geller)

Police enclosure on left, with crowd flowing out of park on right. The new Tower 7 and World Trade Center site are in the background. The green tent, center, is located immediately behind the stage.

Port Authority and NYPD officers kept watch over the rally and were well aware of the need for heightened security at this event. One of their own Port Authority officers, WTC Sergeant Alan T. De Vona was on duty at the World Trade Center on 9/11, 2001, and was one of the first to help victims of the terrorist attack. He spoke these words to the SIOA rally:

“It’s almost nine years. I’m hoping that America is watching. I’m hoping that America is remembering. Because, make no mistake. September 11 was an act of war. And thank the military that has lost almost 5,000 troops from that day, defending us. I don’t know what to say to jar America ’s memory. I want America to remember.

Port Authority Police and FDNY firefighters are seen here gathered beneath this banner.

The issues at stake will certainly affect the heart of American freedom, democracy, cultural values and tolerance. America is a tolerant country that allows for the free worship of all its citizens. But our tolerance has limits. Do we have to tolerate intolerant Islamic ideology and Muslims who preach intolerant Islam?”

Hindu human rights activists Narain Kataria, Prasad Yalamanchi and unidentified friend came from Mississippi and Chicago with banners and flyers highlighting the radical statements of imam Rauf and his jihadist roots.

Stephen Dyer and Gary Jules journalism students at York College, with Pamela Geller. Not one major network sent a satellite truck or camera crew to this event. Without bloggers this newsworthy event would have remained unknown to the public and history.

Pamela Geller is greeted by Hindu human rights activists Prasad Yalamanchi and Narain Kataria.

Bhupinder Singh Bhurji, Pamela Geller, and Robert Spencer. Singh Bhurji is the president of the  NAMDHARI SIKH FOUNDATION. The foundation is a member of the Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam (HRCARI). HRCARI is a coalition of Hindus, Sikhs, Christians from Sudan, Egypt and Iraq, moderate Muslims and Jews — who are victims and targets of radical Islam around the globe. He said, at another rally:

“Radical Islamists are killing people in India , trying to dominate that nation. And here too they come with violence against “infidels.” We are “infidels united,” standing together, brown, black and white, against this epoch’s fascist movement. Radical Islam wants to dominate entire world. They want everyone to surrender. Islam radical or otherwise. They want to put the Islamic flag on White House.”

Because of Islamic terrorism, America and the world have seen massive new security measures become a way of life. Anyone openly critical of Islam, or terrorist ideology, must surround themselves with security, or live in hiding. Those courageous enough to confront Islamism are criticized by the cowards and appeasers of the left who seek safety by supporting the enemy. Moderate Muslims were silent when Theo van Gogh was brutally murdered in Amsterdam , just as moderate Muslims in the United States are generally reluctant to speak out against violent Islam. Moderate Muslims also face great danger in speaking out.
Geller and Spencer will press on despite the danger. They hope to inspire Americans to stand up and say enough of political correctness and work to stem the galloping islamization of America and Europe .

While mainstream media outlets cooperate with orders to promote gubernatorial candidates Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman, global internet interest in Chelene Nightingale is exploding in the final 100 days before the November election.

Support From Voters From All Political Parties

Supporters of Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Ronald Reagan, Alex Jones, Martin Luther King, Jr., Glenn Beck, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, Sarah Palin, Cesar Chavez, the American Founding Fathers and the U.S. Constitution are uniting in common support for Nightingale’s campaign for California governor.

Belief in the adage, “As goes California, so goes the nation”, has millions of Constitutional supporters from 48 states and 21 nations interested in seeing Chelene Nightingale become the 39th Governor of California.

California’s status as America’s richest, most populated, most powerful, and most desirable state makes it, and its governor’s race, an international focal point.  A revolution headed by a woman, who is frequently compared to Joan of Arc, makes it the most compelling political story of 2010 by far.

Public Demand Exploding



This was not an easy process but a challenge that gave us the opportunity to meet good friends of all recognized clubs represented here.

Our club prospected hard.  We all put up to 30k miles on our bikes to do it.  We learned and earned.  I am thankful to have such a great crew of true brothers.  It is like the perfect puzzle and the pieces all fit.

I want to thank all the clubs who supported us, there are many.  I especially want to thank Violators MC, Grifters MC, Vietnam/Legacy Vets MC, Boozefighters MC, Smoke Eaters MC, WolfPack MC, Final Option MC, Saddletramps MC, Peckerwoods MC and Rough Riders MC.  Also all the Clean and Sober and Motorcycle Ministries who had our backs and recognized our hard work and friendship.  There are many more whose links you will see on our site.  We will be there for all of you guys.   L&R brothers, thank you!!!

Jimbo, President

Infidel Brotherhood MSC

Ramona, CA

(Doc Dandem, IBMSC)

California’s helmet law that requires motorcycle operators and their passengers to wear approved helmets has been in effect since 1992. Motorcyclists are not much of a voting block and never demanded such forced “protection;” so, why all the concern from the government to force motorcyclists to wear helmets?

Ask that question and the answer will undoubtedly be “safety.” No one can reasonably argue that a motorcycle rider isn’t safer with a helmet. Sure, there are stories of how the doctor said so-and-so would have broken his neck, if he had been wearing a helmet. We’ve heard the same argument about seat belts: “so-and-so would have been killed, if he had been wearing his seat belt and hadn’t been thrown clear…”

However, the true reason for the helmet law is control. The American motorcyclist is today’s outlaw. His crime: pursuit of freedom. If anything you see in public symbolizes freedom, it’s the motorcyclist. Trust me, if the government had its way, motorcycles would be banned and cars not far behind that.

Motorcycles threaten a government attempting to enslave its people. They don’t use much gas; therefore the government loses tax revenue. They can park and fit just about anywhere which allows them to slip through more of the government’s traffic controls. However, the biggest fear that government has are the people who ride them. The fact is, most bikers oppose of this big liberal government and is not afraid to confront it either.

The pointy-headed liberals will argue that medical costs are higher due to head injuries sustained while not wearing a helmet. At the same time, they point to scientific studies that show a far higher death rate for riders without helmets. Well, which is it; higher death rates or higher medical costs? You can’t have both. That’s typical of the hypocrisy of liberals.

Next, the liberal crowd and their lemming-like followers will try to equate seat belt laws with helmet laws. While both may save lives, seat belts in a car allow the driver to stay behind the wheel and hopefully regain control as well as restrain passengers from being thrown about the cabin knocking the driver out of control. A motorcycle rider without a helmet is a threat to no one but himself.

The truth is that helmet laws are nothing more than a “cap” (both literally and figuratively) on our freedom. Allowing this type of intrusion and infringement, how long before these same nanny-state governments decide that motorcycles need at least three wheels to be safe?

Well, at least for a short time on Independence Day, we rode without a helmet. We outnumbered local law enforcement who didn’t want to make an issue of this. The powers that be don’t want to make this a rallying point. They cruised by our staging point at Fiesta Island and wisely saw discretion as the better part of valor. They were obviously relegated from enforcement to merely observing and reporting.

What were they able observe and report? That there were no accidents, no injuries, the world didn’t stop revolving and that not wearing a helmet does not automatically condemn one to death or serious injury. It’s time for the government to get off our backs. We can make our own personal safety decisions, but it isn’t about safety, is it?