Do not ride a motorized bike without a license!

Look at it this way...
With all this confusion...
I would think that reasonable doubt is pretty much a given.
There is a lot of information and some of it, seems to conflict.
There was even an opinion, by the FL attorney general, that the legislature needs to clear up the inherent confusion created by conflicting laws.
In my opinion, that sounds like the AG trying to tell the legislature that inherent conflicts in the law creates reasonable doubt in/to its very core.
 
SpecialX,
I was married to a cop. I heard stories that would make you wonder and yes your right, while they are putting their life on the line every day to keep peace and order the local politicians view them as a money generator as well and everyone was expected to do their share. You were watched to make sure you did it as well or the chief would have a wee talk to you behind his closed office door just so you understood. You just may find yourself patrolling parts of town that weren't the best for a very long time.You wouldn't necessarily see a day or afternoon shift for a while either.

As I found out there are good and not so good lawyers as well. As always there are some who go through the motions and take your money and a lot that will fight tooth and nail to get you off because they believe that every one they lose goes against them. Asking your local lawyers association for someone who is skilled in defending what for you need them for is a good idea. If you need pro bono ask anyway. Many lawyers will work for what the state or province pays just to defend you.

It sounds like the state of Florida has it stacked on the court's side. Their attorney can argue it two different ways but your attorney can only argue the case once? They drag a simple case of driving a motor bike on the sidewalk and not having a license on for a year?

No, your not wrong about the police being funded by the state. I'm more than a little curious though as to just who you think should be funding them. The fed's put money in, the states and towns put money in, and most of it comes out of the tax payers pockets. It's been that way since humans have found out that they didn't have to put up with crooks.
At least they have come a long way from the days when they hung you when you were 8 years old and stole a loaf of bread to survive or shipped you to a penal colony thousands of miles away.

As for the police having an attitude. As my wife put it once when someone asked her why. When you have a 14 year old, blonde haired and blue eyed boy who would be the pride of any parents in the back of a cruiser and he suddenly starts crying because he realized that he is an orphan because he had just murdered his grand mother and grand father and his parents as well as his brothers and sisters it's pretty hard not to have an attitude about the human race in general.
As she said, in that line of work you don't always meet the best people.

My argument is that you keep attacking the original poster. Why? He did his best, the lawyer tried and the only person who can judge if he did the job as well as he should have, is the man who is paying the fine and court costs.
He answered your questions and still you keep going on about it so that is why I said, you put yourself in his position and see if it turns out better for you.

I hope that you never have to. There is no joy in it at all.

I have posted many times before that if you get advice from the police, D.M.V. or anyone else make sure you have it in writing with a name and if possible a signature. I learned from my own hard experience that is all that holds up in court. Otherwise it is considered hearsay evidence. There is a good reason government offices don't tell you who provided the information. If it's wrong, they will hear about it and it won't be pleasant when it hit their desk{s}.

Steve.
 
d gizzle,

PD is Police Department were I lived and a Pro Bono lawyer is the person who defends you if you don't have the money.
I agree whole heartedly that they may not do all they can for you and you get the axe and they go back to the office.

They fulfill the time required to do their pro bono work and off they go. However having a couple of very high powered lawyers that married into the family I have asked them some time ago about lawyers who just go through through the motions and just do the minimum.
Seems it's not really wise for the lawyers to under perform because they are being watched. You are entitled to to the same level of defense as a person who is paying for their services.
Also the judge is required to make sure that your lawyer is representing you properly. We both understand just how well that can work out for you.

This does not mean that you are getting someone who is putting their best into the case even if you are paying for their service. Same goes for auto mechanics and any other business. Half the lawyers finished in the bottom half of the class.

I have a personal boyhood friend who I would not let defend me for a parking ticket. When he was in law school he went into criminal law. I asked him why and he told me because it was easy. His theory was that the client was guilty, you knew he was guilty, the client knew he was guilty and above all the court knew he was guilty because he was there so the client was just hoping that you could get him the best deal possible.
You just hoped that you could convince the jury that the client wasn't as guilty as the other lawyer said he was. Some times you hit a home run and the client walked away free.

Over many beers, over many year I heard the same argument both from his fellow student as well as many of the same guys when they were practicing lawyers.

This is not meant as a lawyer slam. I have had friends represented by pro bono lawyer who put up a defense like it was the crime of the century instead of some poor soul having the misfortune to run into my friends fist 3 or 4 times. On two memorable occasions the chap happened to have a uniform on.

My Dad was on two juries where they went to consider the persons guilt. The first time the jury foreman took out the daily newspaper turned to the cross word puzzle and announced that they would all find him guilty, wait a couple of hours to make it look good and announce they had reached a verdict and then they could all go home.
That was until Dad called Bull Pooky. The foreman said in no uncertain terms that wasn't happening because he had places to be other than the court room and he was going to be there. Three days later they found the man not guilty. Dad just explained to everyone that justice was going to be served no matter what.
The other jurors thanked him for speaking up because they didn't believe the man was guilty either but they were cowed by the foreman.

Same basic thing on the second jury. As the original poster said it was 4-2 until the jury went back in and you can bet the 2 that said not guilty were hounded to change their vote.
Was justice served? Probably not.

Steve.
 
In america,when you can't afford a lawyer,the court will appoint you one. That lawyer is called a PUBLIC DEFENDER. They get their paycheck from the state. It is a conflict of interest. And they suck. You might get lucky and get the new guy trying to make a name for himself,but more than likely its going to be a fat old white guy who looks just as tired as his beat up briefcase.
 
d gizzle,
No argument from me if you read what I posted. I agree that your public defender may not be the best and may well be the new guy or the tired old lawyer who is just making some extra bucks.

Here in Canada the lawyers have to do so many hours a year in pro bono work from what I've been told. My brothers, father in law defended me against my wife from whom I had been separated for many years. When I finally went to get a divorce she tried to get me thrown into jail and indeed I was a couple of hours away from it. He did this pro bono. When we got to court there was a list of lawyers and when they graduated. Frank was at the top of the list having graduated 28 years before the next lawyer and they were all into a couple of years at most practicing law at best. Some hadn't been practicing a month. Your public defenders?

Her pro bono lawyer was some poor guy who was just out of law school. Your well described new guy who was out to make a name for himself and he swallowed the load of crap that she handed him about me beating her up and forcing her to sign the separation agreement. He called the cops and somehow my brothers father in law found out and tracked me down.
As I said have things signed by the person who gave them to you and this time it paid off in aces and spades.

My wife was nuttier than squirrel crap and a very accomplished liar. The only part of her story that was wrong was that she went to a pro bono lawyer many years before and got a separation agreement drawn up. I locked horns with the lawyer and he rewrote the agreement the way I wanted it. You get what you pay for.
She was hoping that I didn't have a copy and her story would work.

When the Judge who was going to grant the divorce sat down with the two lawyers to discuss the case my lawyer presented the other lawyer and the judge with copies of the separation agreement. Keep in mind the Judge has seen the other lawyers papers with the story that my wife gave him. Now he has been given the truth by my lawyer.

Her lawyer just sat there reading and saying OH NO and OH MY GOD over and over again. The Judge just looked over the top of his copy of the agreement and glared at the pro bono lawyer.
It seems that the first thing they tell you in law school is make sure the client is not lying to you before you jump in with both feet and make a fool of your self.

Yes, Pro bono lawyers are a crap shoot but so are the lawyers you pay your hard earned money for.

Steve.
 
Can someone who speaks Canadian that's lived in America please help me out here? Your stories of Canadian law got jack squat to do with the court system here. Last I heard, motorized bicycles are illegal in Canada. So what do you know?
 
d gizzle,

Yep. I can help you out there as well. I lived in the glorious U.S.A. for 25 years. Does that qualify me?

You obviously don't under stand that the laws in Canada {except Quebec} and the U.S.A are very much the same being grounded in the British law system and due to our mutual border must work together other than slight differences.

I'll leave you to rant on now.

Steve
 
SpecialX said:
P.S I'm still waiting on those that registered their "homemade mopeds", to show me they have all the required safety equipment (e.g. Directionals, brake lights, etc.) and what cc their motor is and what their top speed is)

Which brings me to another point.
The other issue is that when people start taking advantage of the laws, that is when legislation gets more strict.
(i.e. Above 50cc and 30mph+ capability)

P.P.S. I don't expect a response as I'm expecting not too many people to be fully compliant with the law.

Edit: This is for Florida.
Click to expand...

x,

Here is a fellow forum members thread on the subject:

http://motorbicycling.com/showthread.php?t=46055

Thanks again Dave for the Thread/ post!!!

There you go x... BOOM!
 
There is one particular part in that thread, that is of utmost importance...

If yours started out just a bicycle and you put a gas motor on it, and they use this argument, then you are stuck, you cannot register it under that definition of the law.
Click to expand...

He made his out of PARTS! (Not, like he said, just a bicycle with a gas motor on it)
His frame was purchased with motor mounts and a specialized frame FOR a moped.

P.S. I saw that thread previously...
And as he said, he did everything the law required him to do..
His was a special case as it was exactly what he wanted (something "different") AND he has a license.
The point being that the majority of the people in FL that don't have a license are the ones that want/need this form of transportation, to get around.
This is because of various reasons.. (Most dealing with money)
1.) Cheap to make.
2.) Don't want to go through the hassle of dealing with a restricted license.
(I hear that insurance while have an RS is crazy expensive)
3.) Electric Bicycles with the same capabilities are crazy expensive.
(We're talking thousands of bucks for electric as opposed to a few hundred for gas)
And I'm sure there are other reasons as to which I'm not aware of.
 
Last edited:
the other day i got ticketed for riding without an M2, which i was convinced that i didn't need. the officer recognized how confused i was and allowed the ticket to be a fixit ticket.

so i studied the california motorcycle handbook for about an hour and a half, rode to the DMV, and got an M1(it is the same test for the M2) within an hour.


on one hand it is great knowing that i'm doing things legally, on the other hand is it sketchy that I can legally ride a motorcycle with about 3 hours of work.
 
Good deal that the cop gave you a break and smart of you to get an M1 instead of the M2.

What city or area in CA did you get the ticket?
Did the cop say you needed a moped license plate too?
Were you wearing a DOT helmet?

Sorry about all the questions, just like to keep track of how areas in CA enforce the motorized bicycle laws.
Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I say "Do not ride a motorized bike without air in the tires". I've got an M1 and have never needed to show it to any law enforcement for motorized bicycling.

Knock on wood? ;)

dnut
 
Well this was in Goleta California at around midnight.

I Was cruising by a dui checkpoint and got stopped.

I was wearing a dot helmet. The officer told me that I should get a better headlight and mirrors and a horn but the most important thing I needed was a license. I've been riding around Goleta for close to a year now and I hadn't been asked about a license.

I do think I want to get a mirror though, at least one on the left side.

No mention of a moped plate.
 
just a note, Canada's motorized bicycle laws vary province to province, not canada-wide. Quebec they are illegal in general last I heard, Alberta doesn't allow gas bikes either (electric is fine). Ontario IIRC has a 50cc limit, manitoba has an 80cc limit and 35kph speed limit. These are all off memory and from what scarce information I can find. Here, in Saskatchewan, where I live, its an 80cc limit. That's all. I can go as fast as I want (limited by speed limits of course) and have to abide by bicycle laws. Its a bit confusing though, you're not allowed to ride on the sidewalks at all with a bicycle, but at night you need lights to be on the road, otherwise you're forced to the sidewalk (no motor obviously).
 
i wish i could get a license ,i want a license ???but here in mi,i had police to house ,(check my post inhere)phoned , emailed Secretary of state in Lansing, been to 2 sos offices in 2 counties, and STILL cannot get one , they say basically its not a moped but a assisted pedal bike and don't need one , but i know people have got them in mi ,i saved all the phone records emails and places i been for in case i do get a ticket and will fight it .
 
deskman said:
the other day i got ticketed for riding without an M2, which i was convinced that i didn't need. the officer recognized how confused i was and allowed the ticket to be a fixit ticket.

so i studied the california motorcycle handbook for about an hour and a half, rode to the DMV, and got an M1(it is the same test for the M2) within an hour.


on one hand it is great knowing that i'm doing things legally, on the other hand is it sketchy that I can legally ride a motorcycle with about 3 hours of work.
Click to expand...

Do you have a moped plate?
fatdaddy.
 
It's not hard to pass a motorcycle test. You just have to prove you can ride, corner, start and stop and shift gears w/o falling over.
 
When I got my M endorsement on my license things were easy here, I got the learners permit without taking a test then 90 days later I borrowed a friends honda 70 and took the written and driving test in a few minutes. 30 years later you have to jump through hoops to just renew a license.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top