Relax, we went through thishere in Caas I mentioned.After a little while the cops were just happy to see a lid on your head. They are too busy with real crime, unless you give them a reason. I doubt there will bepolystyrene police. [sm=chairshot.gif]

 

For those who may be interested here is where DOT sets the standard: FMVSS 218 (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations)
It is a little long so am just posting the link to it.
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regul...sr/571.218.htm




Ride hard you can rest when you die.

 

it appears we said the exact samething in both
of our posts!

Heres mine again:





211Chuck

titleAndStar(1176,0,0,false,",")
Road Master


[align=center][/align]
Posts: 1176
Joined: 9/13/2006
Status: online




I'm directing my post toward guys who wear non DOT
helmets because they are trying to make a statment
towards the (MAN) instead of just being a REAL MAN
and not wearing the helmet at all.

All the other guys that wear non DOT black beanies
because they like playing Mr. Dress Up on a few
weekends a year when they have time to ride is all
goodas far as I can see. Everyone needs a way to
releave stress and if pretending your Marlin Brando
or one of the Hell's Angels by dressing up on your
motorcycle a few times of the year thats great to
me" it sure beats the heck out of playing golf.. LOL"

 

I give up- you win okay. If you want to call what I'm doing, playing dressup and not being a real man - what the **** ever!

 

Where are you getting the liner has to be 1 inch thick? Nowhere in the law or FMVSS 218 does it say how thick the helmet has to be or how much it must weigh. Please provide a link to where you are getting your information.

 

Exactly. Here is the standard (FMVSS 218) from 49 CFR (code of Federal regulations) Sec. 571.218. The only place it mentions padding is where it specifies the placement of the inside label.

http://www.bikersrights.com/nhtsa/fmvss218.html

 

https://apps.dot.state.nc.us/pio/rel...ls.aspx?r=1441is the North Carolina's DMV website. I read it and the house bill final rewrite approval.
I believe a few have misread the law.
1. Yes it has to be FMVSS 218 compliant
2. Has to be marked on the outside with a DOT sticker
3. Has to have a manufacturer's label on the inside, this is the same label FMVSS 218 requires.
4. Has to have a liner approximately one inch thick, this is not a minimum thickness just a way of differentiating from a novelty helmet.
5. Novelty helmets can not be sold as helmets in the US they have to be called a "novelty helmet". Therefore, the law states novelty helmets do not meet the requirement.

Thus, no it does not have to havea label saying "DOT" sewn to theinside. No it does not have to have a one inch liner. Is the law vague? No, it says you have to wear helmet, the helmet has to be DOT complaint. A novelty helmet will not substitute for a DOT helmet. Can you take it to court and win? Yes, only if the cop writes a ticket for it not having a one inch thick liner or you have on a proper helmet.

 

I beg to differ. Here is the law for you to read. page down to 20‑140.4. Special provisions for motorcycles and mopeds. http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Sessions/2007/Bills/House/HTML/H563v6.htmlNo media interpretation.

The law is vague because it states that the helmet must meet the FMVSS. A standard like I have said can only be tested in a lab, not on the side of the road. The lawsays nothing about padding or foam or any stupid sticker or label. The sticker is for the manufacturer to show their product met a standard not for a consumer to prove it to a LEO. If this were the case the helmets would have to have a permanent marking and a law to restrict its removal (god help us). Show me a law that requires I leave the sticker on or replace it if it comes off during normal wear and tear. Look at your mattress tags;ever worry about the mattress police? http://ask.yahoo.com/20040726.htmlNo, because that is between the manufacturer and the retailers for proof of compliance. Example:http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/import/FMVSS/index.html#SN218 "The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has a legislative mandate under Title 49 of the United States Code, Chapter 301, Motor Vehicle Safety, to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) and Regulations to which manufacturers of motor vehicle and equipment items must conform and certify compliance".

[size=2]If every NC safety law was amended to include compliance with the FMVSS that applied when the vehicle and/or accessory left the manufacturer the LEOs, courts and public would be in a never ending battle. We are not a socialist state and this type of cop out by our legislature is a mistake. If their objective is to reduce deaths then a strategy to enforce existing traffic laws for cagers to include turn signalsand running red lights would have a greater impact IMHO. Additionally, if a campaign to inform thepublic of the impact of their actions when they "didn't see the motorcycle" were undertaken, from the initial licensing of teens to billboards like the "click it or ticket" ones I think there would be a far greater reduction in

 

I did read the law. If I were you I would read it again. You don't have to test the helmet on the side of the rode. Hence meet FMVSS 218 requirements. The helmet has already been tested. FMVSS 218 says it has to have the label and the sticker to be DOT approved. By your way of reading the FDA would have to test every pill before you took it. They only test a sample.
I dont agree with the law but I do think they knew what it said before it was passed.
I spend 20 years in the army so I completely understand following the rules. This is because the constitution does not apply. Military laws are controlled by congress who has the responsibility in the Constitution to regulate the military.
I just dont live in a state who regulates me against myself.
I am the first to say something about violations of our liberties. I think the PATRIOT ACT is the most dangerous piece oflegislation ever passed.
I am not attempting to say the LAW is good. I just tried to say everyone is arguing about the sticker or label is incorrect. they need to argue about the one inch thick part if they get stopped.

 

OK bro,you can read, I can read, we all can read, but the law is not on the DOT site. The DOT version is not what was ratified in the 2007 session. I read the law, I posted the exact law not the DOT version. We'reon the same page except that my point was the LEOs can not test the helmet on the side of the road if the sticker/label is gone or illegible, the sticker/label is not required by law to be there post purchase, and a better approach would be to educate the public rather than use a standard only intended for manufacturers not the public/consumer. Hell, LEOs can't enforce the laws on the books now let alone adding more. The burden of proof still resides with the state not the citizen. IMO If there is no definitive way for the LEO to determine if your helmet is DOT or not then there is not probable cause. If your sticker is gone here ya go...instant legal, or not??http://www.chopperstickers.com/DOT-Sticker-pr-130.htmlIf they can't prove you are wrong there is no violation. And last, where is this damn 1" padding thing in thelaw? If I missed it post it.

BTW, I threw the military stuff infor the non mil spec types just for GPBS not a shot at your understanding rules. Even imperfect rules in the military face scrutiny when they fail or become outdated. But..."the constitution does not apply"???The benefits thing has nothing to do with the constitution but a govt subsidized heath plan that...nevermind. Let's just go ride, first beer is on me[sm=icon_cheers.gif]