BC Sport Bikes Forum banner
201 - 220 of 252 Posts

·
Fastronaut
Joined
·
6,508 Posts
Fourteen pages about Screaming Beagle pipes and now OP brings up the Supreme Court. Can't we just move on to the topic of somebody who got a ticket because their ape hangers were too high or their plate was mounted sideways? :rolleyes
Could be worse; could be talking about V-stroms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
754 Posts
Just turning on the bike causes it to make unnecessary noise, because you took out the ability to make it quieter. ..imho..
lol sorry..
There is a clear distinction in 7A.01.

Using your example, to violate, one must start in a manner which causes any loud and unnecessary noise. It has to do with the way it was started to cause the loud and unnecessary noise.

7A.01 doesn't cover maximum allowable limit. So just by starting a bike, it by itself cannot result in a violation. In order to fall into one, it must be started in a manner which causes any loud and unnecessary noise. Note that the noise must be unnecessary when caused for that bike with that muffler.

Swapping pipes is not some manner of starting, or driving, or ... or an action related to operating a motor vehicle. Hence the action of swapping is not covered by 7A.01.

It's O.K. I guess not everybody can understand Calculus, for example. If somebody doesn't under Calculus, then Calculus is not a legitimate branch of mathematics?

Technically, 7A.01 was written sufficiently clear IMHO. It was strategically written not to overlap with the schedule to Division 7, and still can stand without specified maximum allowable limits.

There can only be one absolute definitive allowable maximum limit for each type of vehicle. And no, manufacturers all over the world cannot have a duplicate of each cop in BC to work in their labs to help them to determine whether their mufflers would comply, and whose opinions can change day to day.

An engineer standard has to be accurate and reproducible. Recalls are expensive from the manufacturers' point of view.

But then people should also realize that even a quiet bike, ie Bandit 1250S with a stock pipe can still get this ticket, theoretically speaking.

Text Font Line Number
 

·
countdown to next crash..
Joined
·
2,658 Posts
We get it. We just don't agree with you. You can't browbeat people into agreeing with a stupid situation no matter how persecuted you sound.
I don't believe it - after all the back and forth, you still haven't a clue what this discussion is about!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,914 Posts
someone I know with a Gixxer street-fighter got a ticket becasue his license plate was 'trimmed' to an oval shape (the corners were carefully clipped off), the other day.

No trimming plates, people!
I have a friend who's a plate trimmer. He got nabbed. Had to get a new plate... took it to the station to show the cop... and then went home and trimmed it again. LOL! Damn those motorbikes!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
143 Posts
I don't believe it - after all the back and forth, you still haven't a clue what this discussion is about!
I don't believe it - after all the comments about reading the thread in its entirety, you still haven't! You obviously are the one who needs to get a clue. The OP has since this thread started began to give more insight into his situation. Myself as well as several others have since stated that we agree with him in principal. However, I myself would have handled the situation differently. This thread had finally evolved from childish name calling to an actual discussion. Then you go and quote something from several pages ago just so you can start flinging shit again. Seriously? Just go away, we don't need or want you here.
 

·
countdown to next crash..
Joined
·
2,658 Posts
I think that's the point being made. Instead of helping riders to solve the problem of arbitrary enforcement, you just want to point out to everyone how clever you are. Do you get it now?
is it unreasonable to assume that a harley rider, at idle speeds, could still tell when someone's pipes weren't stock? If I read it correctly, the cop rode harleys and according to Ian himself, when he asked Ian to rev the bike up, it was to his regular cruising rpm's. I think if you assume he had a reasonable chance of identifying aftermarket pipes, then it's not arbitrary enforcement. Whether the ticket was applied to the correct legislation is a reasonable discussion, but I still don't think I'm getting the whole story from tootil. Not that it matters anymore since he's blocked.

As far as you...here's the thing. There are some who will scream that the sky is falling with any piece of new legislation, or whenever they feel they have been wronged in the slightest. I don't get any indication you're a reasonable person. You enjoy your rants and you don't make any valid points, you just post something negative directed at the people on these forums and then disappear for a while. I cant be bothered to spend any more time reading your posts, so now you're blocked as well.
 

·
I like traffic cones :S
Joined
·
15,773 Posts
example: my old bike was loud as fuck.

when i was in the city i short shifted the fuck out of it in neighborhood areas. many times coasted with clutch in coming home.

so is that warrant a ticket if i got pulled over somewhere in fraser canyon?

same thinking they employ would see sportbikes siezed the second you buy them. aftrr all, you aint buying something that will do 300kph to ride speed limit all the time . or am i wrong?
 

·
Fastronaut
Joined
·
6,508 Posts
Yes, but the same cars don't exceed the speed limit just by turning the ignition on...same.can't be said about some straight piped bikes...
A straight piped bike will exceed the speed limit by just turning on the ignition? Man I have got to get me one of those,,,
 

·
Fastronaut
Joined
·
6,508 Posts
The point is the argument is specious.

All vehicles will exceed the speed limit by a solid enough margin go get them seized (unless you're on a riding mower).

Trying to connect the idea that a motorcycle can exceed the speed limit but is not illegal so a exhaust that exceeds the noise limit should also be legal doesn't fly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
311 Posts
Discussion Starter · #215 ·
Whether the ticket was applied to the correct legislation is a reasonable discussion, but I still don't think I'm getting the whole story from tootil. Not that it matters anymore since he's blocked.
JJJoseph: For the record, I was never rude to the poster and I answered all of Islesfan91's questions...even offered to personally show him / her a transcript. Now we see from the post that he / she doesn't want the whole story.

Amusing.

I cant be bothered to spend any more time reading your posts, so now you're blocked as well.
Even more amusing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
501 Posts
The point is the argument is specious.

All vehicles will exceed the speed limit by a solid enough margin go get them seized (unless you're on a riding mower).

Trying to connect the idea that a motorcycle can exceed the speed limit but is not illegal so a exhaust that exceeds the noise limit should also be legal doesn't fly.
No, it's not. All vehicles CAN exceed the speed limit, sure, but it doesn't HAVE to. You have to conciously want to speed, i.e. step on the accelerator pedal until the vehicle speed exceeds the speed limit. On the other hand, some of the straight piped bikes are so loud that even just starting them up they exceed the noise limit. That means as soon as it is operated, it is illegal, i.e. it cannot be operated in a way that is under the sound limit. See the difference?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
311 Posts
Discussion Starter · #217 ·
On the other hand, some of the straight piped bikes are so loud that even just starting them up they exceed the noise limit. That means as soon as it is operated, it is illegal, i.e. it cannot be operated in a way that is under the sound limit. See the difference?
Back to the original point: Exactly, "some" but not all.

And simply the act of owning or operating a vehicle does not make you a lawbreaker unless you exceed a certain threshhold for the type of operation for which the burden of proof should be substantially higher than what it is. BTW, not that this is any justification for loud operation of anything but I suspect most of the trucks and buses in Vancouver would instantly fail an objective noise test.

Here's a statement from a cop interviewed in the Kelowna Daily Courier concerning charges for unnecessary noise. "We're not looking for every bike going down the street," RCMP Insp. Rick Flewelling told council last Aug. 22. "We're looking for those that are really cranking it."

Uh huh.... sure.
 

·
Fastronaut
Joined
·
6,508 Posts
No, it's not. All vehicles CAN exceed the speed limit, sure, but it doesn't HAVE to. You have to conciously want to speed, i.e. step on the accelerator pedal until the vehicle speed exceeds the speed limit. On the other hand, some of the straight piped bikes are so loud that even just starting them up they exceed the noise limit. That means as soon as it is operated, it is illegal, i.e. it cannot be operated in a way that is under the sound limit. See the difference?
I get it, the speed theory is not my red herring.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
143 Posts
I think that's the point being made. Instead of helping riders to solve the problem of arbitrary enforcement, you just want to point out to everyone how clever you are. Do you get it now?
I'm not exactly sure what's wrong with you or what condition or retardation you suffer from but please seek professional help. I have no idea what I said that makes you feel that I "just want to point out to everyone how clever I am". From my first post my intent has been to find out more about the situation to offer assistance. On the other hand all you have been doing is quoting partial posts that are completely irrelevant and then insulting people. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If they don't agree with you that's not a reason to start bashing them. If you've been trying to help the OP get his point across you've done a great deal more harm than good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
501 Posts
Back to the original point: Exactly, "some" but not all.

And simply the act of owning or operating a vehicle does not make you a lawbreaker unless you exceed a certain threshhold for the type of operation for which the burden of proof should be substantially higher than what it is. BTW, not that this is any justification for loud operation of anything but I suspect most of the trucks and buses in Vancouver would instantly fail an objective noise test.

Here's a statement from a cop interviewed in the Kelowna Daily Courier concerning charges for unnecessary noise. "We're not looking for every bike going down the street," RCMP Insp. Rick Flewelling told council last Aug. 22. "We're looking for those that are really cranking it."

Uh huh.... sure.
Agreed. While I think it's certainly more likely for a motorcycle equipped with a loud exhaust to exceed the noise limit, the burden of proof should be on the officer to demonstrate that it was in fact exceeded. However, I wonder what the SOP is for an officer to cite someone for "stunting" or "squeeling the tires" at the light. Do they need corroboration on their observation?
 
201 - 220 of 252 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top