Oregon Judge: Not pedaling? Not a bicycle.
- Thread starter happyvalley
- Start date
When reading that article, I noticed a few things..
1.) They didn't mention the model of "bike". That would be important.
2.) "One of his pedals was broken" (Well duh! If the pedals are broken it's not a bike)
3.) He "proved" his bike can't go faster than 20mph.. They don't say HOW he did.
Would love to know the answers..
1.) They didn't mention the model of "bike". That would be important.
2.) "One of his pedals was broken" (Well duh! If the pedals are broken it's not a bike)
3.) He "proved" his bike can't go faster than 20mph.. They don't say HOW he did.
Would love to know the answers..
The broken pedal was forensic, he was stopped because:
“My thinking is that if he’s not pedaling it, it becomes a motor vehicle under the statute,” Springfield police officer Brian Gay said Thursday.
“My thinking is that if he’s not pedaling it, it becomes a motor vehicle under the statute,” Springfield police officer Brian Gay said Thursday.
Yeah, I agree with you, however the officer can write any ticket he wants, it matters what the judge thinks..
That was the issue going forward...
The JUDGE did NOT say that, the judge pointed out the "facts" that I just stated and was wondering what the SPECIFICs actually were (as I asked above)...?
That was the issue going forward...
The JUDGE did NOT say that, the judge pointed out the "facts" that I just stated and was wondering what the SPECIFICs actually were (as I asked above)...?
It sounds like the local crime stoppers have some time on their hands. You might understand if the guy was a reckless rider, speeding, not obeying traffic laws. But here's a guy in his forties getting around town on a quiet electric motor bicycle, minding his own business. Somewhere in that town some people were selling and buying drugs, some guy was battering his wife or kids, a car was stolen, a local politician was ripping off the taxpayers or taking payoffs from a local businessman. Real stuff. But this? Ludicrous.
SB
SB
I tried to look up the website of the "electric wheels" company and couldn't find it. (I wanted to see what models they had that supposedly went "up to 23mph").
I looked up a little bit about the guy and found that, that was not his first run-in with the law... My opinion is that he's probably been a small thorn in the "law's" side (for issues unrelated to Ebikes) for a little while and he was targeted because of it.
That's why I was curious about the specifics to this case...
My opinion is, that if you're constantly "butting heads" with the law, they'll usually "fight back" with whatever tickets they can hit you with, no matter how trivial they seem to you and me.
(On a side note: I think he's the same guy that was ticketed on a charge unrelated to ebikes (he won the "fight" in that case and won a little bit of money on his reverse complaint) and (I think, not sure tho) that "surprisingly enough" the Judge in that case was the same judge on this case. That may be why it seems it's a trivial to you and me, but not to "others".
I looked up a little bit about the guy and found that, that was not his first run-in with the law... My opinion is that he's probably been a small thorn in the "law's" side (for issues unrelated to Ebikes) for a little while and he was targeted because of it.
That's why I was curious about the specifics to this case...
My opinion is, that if you're constantly "butting heads" with the law, they'll usually "fight back" with whatever tickets they can hit you with, no matter how trivial they seem to you and me.
(On a side note: I think he's the same guy that was ticketed on a charge unrelated to ebikes (he won the "fight" in that case and won a little bit of money on his reverse complaint) and (I think, not sure tho) that "surprisingly enough" the Judge in that case was the same judge on this case. That may be why it seems it's a trivial to you and me, but not to "others".
Last edited:
Idaho is nice - electric bikes don't need pedals here.
Though it's messed up - I can't side with either as they're both extremes.
He should have gotten a fix it ticket.
Though it's messed up - I can't side with either as they're both extremes.
He should have gotten a fix it ticket.
This DUI bicycle scooter stuff is too bad ! 
There is little public support for people with no license to drive anything with a motor.
Electric bicycle freedom going, going, gone !
DUI scooters
Anything to make a quick buck, right ?
There is little public support for people with no license to drive anything with a motor.
Electric bicycle freedom going, going, gone !
DUI scooters
Anything to make a quick buck, right ?
Last edited:
I feel pretty strongly about DUI suspended licenses - the concept of alcoholism is that you are a danger to themselves and others. Someone who is drunk on a motorbicycle is a danger to themselves and others.
I don't feel that motorized bikers should be known as "Those drunks who lost their licenses". Granted, there are other situations in which a suspended license can come to play where there is no danger to others or substance abuse involved, and for that I would defend suspended license MxB riding, but I draw the line at DUIers.
I don't feel that motorized bikers should be known as "Those drunks who lost their licenses". Granted, there are other situations in which a suspended license can come to play where there is no danger to others or substance abuse involved, and for that I would defend suspended license MxB riding, but I draw the line at DUIers.
I have a strong suspicion that a judge in Idaho would find a reason to rule in the same manner with the same reasoning and interpretation of the law in a similar case. What this guy is doing is trying to usurp a court ordered suspension of his driving privileges and the judge viewed him as scofflaw. I believe his history with the police and the courts made the bias against him. I believe had he had no history with the police and the courts then he may have had a different outcome.
How gray areas in the statutes are treated comes down to the individual's in question history.
How gray areas in the statutes are treated comes down to the individual's in question history.
An interesting piece of mail sent to the Editorial of the newspaper that published this article, originally found here.
From the codes provided, he should have only been charged for the one time he rode with a broken pedal, if that.
Electric bike law seems clear
With regard to Paul McClain and the Springfield electric bicycle issue (Register-Guard, April 11), it seems to me that Oregon law is clear. Oregon Revised Statute 807.020(14) clearly states that “a person may operate an electric assisted bicycle without a driver license or driver permit if the person is 16 years of age or older.”
ORS 801.258 states that an “electric assisted bicycle” is defined as “a vehicle that 1) is designed to be operated on the ground on wheels; 2) has a seat or saddle for use of the rider; 3) is designed to travel with not more than three wheels in contact with the ground; 4) has both fully operative pedals for human propulsion and an electric motor; and 5) is equipped with an electric motor that: a) has a power output of not more than 1,000 watts; and b) is incapable of propelling the vehicle at a speed of greater than 20 miles per hour on level ground.”
And ORS 801.345 specifically excludes electric assisted bicycles from the statutory definition of “moped.” The law says nothing about what an electric bicycle should or should not otherwise look like.
So why is McClain being prosecuted? For that matter, why was he ever cited at all for driving his electric bicycle without a license?
John Stephens
From the codes provided, he should have only been charged for the one time he rode with a broken pedal, if that.
Electric bike law seems clear
With regard to Paul McClain and the Springfield electric bicycle issue (Register-Guard, April 11), it seems to me that Oregon law is clear. Oregon Revised Statute 807.020(14) clearly states that “a person may operate an electric assisted bicycle without a driver license or driver permit if the person is 16 years of age or older.”
ORS 801.258 states that an “electric assisted bicycle” is defined as “a vehicle that 1) is designed to be operated on the ground on wheels; 2) has a seat or saddle for use of the rider; 3) is designed to travel with not more than three wheels in contact with the ground; 4) has both fully operative pedals for human propulsion and an electric motor; and 5) is equipped with an electric motor that: a) has a power output of not more than 1,000 watts; and b) is incapable of propelling the vehicle at a speed of greater than 20 miles per hour on level ground.”
And ORS 801.345 specifically excludes electric assisted bicycles from the statutory definition of “moped.” The law says nothing about what an electric bicycle should or should not otherwise look like.
So why is McClain being prosecuted? For that matter, why was he ever cited at all for driving his electric bicycle without a license?
John Stephens
It seems that the judge made the distinction of the bicycle being a self propelled vehicle rather than a motor assisted. It seems he reasoned that motor assisted means that the motor assists the rider while s/he's pedaling up to 20 mph on level flat ground.
As I mentioned earlier that this guy is no stranger to the police or the courts and so his history seemed to have biased both entities against him regarding this "grey areas" of the laws.
As I mentioned earlier that this guy is no stranger to the police or the courts and so his history seemed to have biased both entities against him regarding this "grey areas" of the laws.
The judge did find him guilty on the "pedal issue" and nothing else (as of this moment).
I'm still curious as to what electric bike model they are talking about and how the defendant "proved" HIS bike was incapable of greater than 20mph, when (supposedly) the manufacturer state's that model is capable of 23mph. Without that information, we have no clue what the legality is.
(Should the defendant's bicycle be capable of 23mph, he is not riding an "electric bicycle" but, I believe, a moped by Oregon law, which would require a drivers license.)
You're right there.
According to the motorcycle handbook e-bikes must comply with the fmvss though the grey area could be who is a manufacturer. A company who makes an e-bike conversion kit could be required to include lights, horn and mirrors to comform to the fmvss to be considered legal in Idaho or a person installing the kit could be considered manufacturing a moped thus be required to add those things on their own to comply. I suppose that's why the Emmett police stopped that lady and told her it was illegal. No lights, no horn, no mirrors. I wish I had more than 2nd hand info on that.
Anyway, my point was about the person's history with the courts and the police probably created the bias against him with the grey areas of the statutes. Not good when a court may be setting a precident until the government gets its act together and iron out the grey areas.
I'm sorry Jburr, but what gray area of the law are you referring to. The electric assisted bicycle definition there has no requirements to meet FMVSS there. Using Idaho law on a bike in another state is kinda pointless.
Other than the 1 time he was riding with a broken peddle, the law says he is legal. Most cops would have let that slide, if they had even pulled him over in the first place.
Even the cops don't know the law as shown with the comment;
“My thinking is that if he’s not pedaling it, it becomes a motor vehicle under the statute,” Springfield police officer Brian Gay said Thursday.
And he wasn't convicted on the missing peddle alone SANGESF. The article clearly states;
Strickland’s decision boils down to this: He wrote that “factory specifications” indicate McClain’s vehicle is capable of traveling faster than 20 mph, and that it had a missing pedal when he was stopped and ticketed in one instance. Therefore, it doesn’t meet the state’s legal definition of an electric-assisted bicycle, the judge said.
He even says he provided proof that his bike does less than 20 mph. As far as the factory specs, I'm sure that everyone here is getting their 150mpg right? after all, a company wouldn't stretch the truth to sell a product, would they?
Other than the 1 time he was riding with a broken peddle, the law says he is legal. Most cops would have let that slide, if they had even pulled him over in the first place.
Even the cops don't know the law as shown with the comment;
“My thinking is that if he’s not pedaling it, it becomes a motor vehicle under the statute,” Springfield police officer Brian Gay said Thursday.
And he wasn't convicted on the missing peddle alone SANGESF. The article clearly states;
Strickland’s decision boils down to this: He wrote that “factory specifications” indicate McClain’s vehicle is capable of traveling faster than 20 mph, and that it had a missing pedal when he was stopped and ticketed in one instance. Therefore, it doesn’t meet the state’s legal definition of an electric-assisted bicycle, the judge said.
He even says he provided proof that his bike does less than 20 mph. As far as the factory specs, I'm sure that everyone here is getting their 150mpg right? after all, a company wouldn't stretch the truth to sell a product, would they?
You know that companies are going to average a generality when making a specification. That guy could weigh 400 pounds and maybe his e-bike won't go over 20 or whatever but in reality the states make averages of generality when they write laws too. Fact is that perhaps a 150 pound person can go faster than 20 mph on that e-bike. Unfortunately for this guy the courts must accept the manufacturer's specifications and not the individual performance of one person on one e-bike.
It's like those so called 80cc HT 2 cycle engines. The manufacture markets and sells them as 80cc but in reality the displacement is 66cc or so. The EPA started making the manufacturers put labels on their engines to legally sell them in the US. You expect a manufacturer to have 'Creative marketing allows is to call these motors 80cc but the real displacement is 66cc' labels on them? It might be that the engines meet the EPA emissions requirement for an 80cc but may not for a 66cc so the manufacturers found a way to consider them 80cc. And since the manufacturer gives it a spec of 80cc a court is going to refer to that spec and not what the end user claims. If the end user wants to sue the manufacturer for fraud that's a different story.
Last edited:
Ok so not, pedal alone and company specs can say whatever...
AGAIN, my questions are....
What bike is it?
What model?
How did he prove it can't go over 20?
Without the answer to those questions, any discussions about this case are moot.
Last edited:
Untill various states include in there laws concerning suspention or revocation an exact statement that forbaes one from operating an MB then they should be able to exploit the "grey areas"
I have read the entire IL. Vec code and the astounding number of contrdictions and outright screwups is amazing!
Remember if you ride and your over 18 then the politicans and the police work for you!,now we all know they don't think of it that way, but we should.
Get out and vote ,go to city council meeting's ,call and write letters . Just remember that they do think of us as "those drunks on motorized bikes" so keep coments positive please.
We all need to work tword better laws and bring MB culture to the mainstream $0.02
I have read the entire IL. Vec code and the astounding number of contrdictions and outright screwups is amazing!
Remember if you ride and your over 18 then the politicans and the police work for you!,now we all know they don't think of it that way, but we should.
Get out and vote ,go to city council meeting's ,call and write letters . Just remember that they do think of us as "those drunks on motorized bikes" so keep coments positive please.
We all need to work tword better laws and bring MB culture to the mainstream $0.02
No system is going to be perfect. There are going to be 'grey areas, voids, a contradiction or 2' in the 1000s of statutes but that's why we have a judicial system that creates 'case law' in those circumstances. No legislature is going to create grey areas, contradictions, or voids in the law on purpose. In fact they work diligently to avoid it if all possible. With that said we have a judicial system that must interpret the laws and apply them in a given situation. If the courts come across a grey area then they can resort to interpret the intention of the legislature and come up with reasonable conclusions that doesn't conflict or fills in the voids or what not.
That's what gives the courts leeway to create case law. Funny how it's called 'setting a precedent' when the court rules your way and condemned as 'activist judges legislating from the bench' if the court rules against your way. If one wants to exploit the grey areas in the law they can still be held accountable for their actions.
That's what gives the courts leeway to create case law. Funny how it's called 'setting a precedent' when the court rules your way and condemned as 'activist judges legislating from the bench' if the court rules against your way. If one wants to exploit the grey areas in the law they can still be held accountable for their actions.