Catch us live on BlogTalkRadio every



Tuesday & Thursday at 6pm P.S.T.




Wednesday, May 18, 2016

Police Lie Under Oath; Their Testimony Shouldn’t Be Trusted More Than Any Other Witness...

OFF THE WIRE
By Michelle Alexander
Thousands of people plead guilty to crimes every year in the United States because they know that the odds of a jury’s believing their word over a police officer’s are slim to none. As a juror, whom are you likely to believe: the alleged criminal in an orange jumpsuit or two well-groomed police officers in uniforms who just swore to God they’re telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but? As one of my colleagues recently put it, “Everyone knows you have to be crazy to accuse the police of lying.”
But are police officers necessarily more trustworthy than alleged criminals? I think not. Not just because the police have a special inclination toward confabulation, but because, disturbingly, they have an incentive to lie. In this era of mass incarceration, the police shouldn’t be trusted any more than any other witness, perhaps less so.
That may sound harsh, but numerous law enforcement officials have put the matter more bluntly. Peter Keane, a former San Francisco Police commissioner, wrote an article in The San Francisco Chronicle decrying a police culture that treats lying as the norm: “Police officer perjury in court to justify illegal dope searches is commonplace. One of the dirty little not-so-secret secrets of the criminal justice system is undercover narcotics officers intentionally lying under oath. It is a perversion of the American justice system that strikes directly at the rule of law. Yet it is the routine way of doing business in courtrooms everywhere in America.”
Mr. Keane, in his Chronicle article, offered two major reasons the police lie so much. First, because they can. Police officers “know that in a swearing match between a drug defendant and a police officer, the judge always rules in favor of the officer.” At worst, the case will be dismissed, but the officer is free to continue business as usual. Second, criminal defendants are typically poor and uneducated, often belong to a racial minority, and often have a criminal record. “Police know that no one cares about these people,” Mr. Keane explained.
All true, but there is more to the story than that.
Police departments have been rewarded in recent years for the sheer numbers of stops, searches and arrests. In the war on drugs, federal grant programs like the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program have encouraged state and local law enforcement agencies to boost drug arrests in order to compete for millions of dollars in funding. Agencies receive cash rewards for arresting high numbers of people for drug offenses, no matter how minor the offenses or how weak the evidence. Law enforcement has increasingly become a numbers game. And as it has, police officers’ tendency to regard procedural rules as optional and to lie and distort the facts has grown as well. Numerous scandals involving police officers lying or planting drugs — in Tulia, Tex. and Oakland, Calif., for example — have been linked to federally funded drug task forces eager to keep the cash rolling in.
Exposing police lying is difficult largely because it is rare for the police to admit their own lies or to acknowledge the lies of other officers. This reluctance derives partly from the code of silence that governs police practice and from the ways in which the system of mass incarceration is structured to reward dishonesty. But it’s also because police officers are human.
Research shows that ordinary human beings lie a lot — multiple times a day — even when there’s no clear benefit to lying. Generally, humans lie about relatively minor things like “I lost your phone number; that’s why I didn’t call” or “No, really, you don’t look fat.” But humans can also be persuaded to lie about far more important matters, especially if the lie will enhance or protect their reputation or standing in a group.
The natural tendency to lie makes quota systems and financial incentives that reward the police for the sheer numbers of people stopped, frisked or arrested especially dangerous. One lie can destroy a life, resulting in the loss of employment, a prison term and relegation to permanent second-class status. The fact that our legal system has become so tolerant of police lying indicates how corrupted our criminal justice system has become by declarations of war, “get tough” mantras, and a seemingly insatiable appetite for locking up and locking out the poorest and darkest among us.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/motorcyle-helmet-laws/id573720859?mt=8The Worst Kept Secret Cops Lie:
http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/12/02/the-worst-kept-secret-cops-lie.aspx
This was shared by Joe via CopBlock.org’s ‘submit tab.’

Knowledge

Do you strive for knowledge?

Educate yourself

Before doing anything it’s important that you have a solid foundation and a clearly defined goal, without which you may be acting aimlessly or even counter-productively. Review content here on CopBlock.org and expose yourself to content and ideas shared elsewhere. Ask questions. Think for yourself.
If you have suggestions about content that should be included here please let us know: http://www.copblock.org/contact

Badges don’t grant extra rights

Can an action illegitimate for you suddenly become legitimate when done by another simply because they have on their chest an ounce of tin? It shouldn’t, but many act as if this is the case. This (bad) idea, when accepted, bestows upon some stranger the “right” to initiate force. Replace that bad idea with one more commonsensical: Individuals are responsible for their actions no matter their attire or place of employment.
True, individuals working in law enforcement might mean well, but they’re hamstrung by perverse incentives. Their claimed monopoly means no one is held accountable, nor can it ever be “fixed” through internal investigations. If you see a police officer doing something wrong for you to do, call them out, record and share. Transparency is key. Failure to act after witnessing even the most trivial of transgressions only bestows upon such actions tacit consent and sets the stage for even more egregious actions.
Stop acting as if those wearing badges have extra rights – they don’t. You know this. See through the charade and think for yourself. Good people are standing up for their rights and connecting with and supporting others. Cease looking to an external authority and govern your own life.
Audio
Books
Cameras
CopBlock.org Content:
Essays / Posts
Videos
Websites

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

California State Knife Laws (2016 revision)

OFF THE WIRE
Unfortunately laws are always complicated and there can be multiple penal codes related to any given issue. On this page I've attempted to collect California State penal codes pertaining to knives and knife carry.

Disclaimer - I am not a lawyer. The following information is for reference only. The discussion and interpretation is my own. So, please keep that in mind. If you need qualified consultation or legal advice, please contact a licensed criminal attorney and/or local Sheriff's office. The discussion is regarding the lawful knife carry, nothing else!

Like I said above, the laws are complicated. In US to make things more complicated we have Federal and State laws, and in addition to that local counties and cities can have their own laws. Which particular law takes priority for any given issue depends on the laws and I guess particular case as well. In relation to knife carry, the state law is generally more or less universal, however, particular cities and towns have their own, as usual more strict laws regarding the knife possession and carry. I'll discuss that below, but as a rule of thumb, just because California state law allows particular blade doesn't mean it is legal in all places. Always check your local town/city penal code. E.g. San Francisco and Oakland have 3" blade length limit, which isn't in the state law. Same is true for Los Angeles.

One more thing to keep in mind is that not all the law enforcement officers know penal code all that well. For starters, if you get asked whether or not you have a knife on you, tell the truth, but better yet, state that you have a blade legal under California law. You may get some problems, because the officer thinks you have violated the law. In other words, LEO doesn't know the knife carry law in details. In that case, better not to argue the point, calmly explain they you believe you're not in violation of the law, that your knife is legal under California law, including citing penal codes we're discussing here and either ask the officer to contact superiors or get the receipt if he/she is confiscating the knife and later contact the department. Aggravating the situation will most likely result in additional charges against you and possible arrest. However, if your piece gets confiscated you must be issued a receipt. If the officer is refusing to do so(i.e. issue a receipt) or threatening with additional problems he's in the wrong, not you. Without confrontation, ask for the receipt and if he(or she) still refuses, write down his/her badge number, name, time and place where the incident took place and report it to the nearest police station. For more details on dealing with law enforcement and various situations involving knives including their use please visit Jim March's excellent article California Knife Laws: A Comprehensive Guide.

Knife Carry Related Laws 2012 revisions - In 2012 California state legislature revised penal code. In short, no major changes to the knife carry laws, however the numbers to the existing penal codes have been changed completely. California penal code has several sections interesting to us in this discussion: sections 16100-17360 (formerly 653K), and pretty much everything under Part 6/Title 3/Division 5 (all formerly under 12020). Basically many types of knives got their own sections in definition and carry law parts. Sections 171.b and 626.10 remain unchanged.
16100-17360 - Since 2012, belongs to the Part 6 - Control Of Deadly Weapons, Title 1 - General Provisions, Division 2 - Definitions; Old 653K is completely removed.
Chapter 6 of PC - Since 2012 covers Deadly Weapons, where Title 3 covers - Weapons And Devices Other Than Firearms, and the parts we're specifically interested in are under Division 5 - Knives And Similar Weapons, which in turn contains several chapters, including dedicated articles to several types of knives under Chapter 2 - Disguised Or Misleading Appearance;
Penal code Part 6/Title 3/Division 5 - Defines what is a legal pocket knife and what is illegal, by types, e.g. a switchblade and gravity or ballisong knife(PC 17235). Pocket knives, most likely those would be the folding knives are legal, while switchblades, gravity and ballisong knives are illegal.
PC 16470 - Deals with the street carry laws. Basically, you can not carry a dirk or a dagger, definitions below, and more importantly, can't carry folding knife in open/locked position - ...only if the blade of the knife is exposed and locked into position. Therefore folders, carried closed and concealed are legal. No length limitation.
PC 21510 - deals strictly with switchblades, making it a misdemeanor to carry upon a person, or possess in a car, or in a public place, sell, loan, transfer, give, expose for sale, a switchblade knife.
There are other penal codes dealing with knife carry in specific places. Those are: penal code 626.10 which deals with the knife school carry rules. There is also penal code 171.b which deals with the knives in public buildings.

Simply put, the law defines what is illegal, so if your knife and carry isn't what the law defines as illegal you should be fine. Once again, keep in mind the local laws. Details below.

Very Short Summary

State California allows for concealed carry of the folding knives and there is no limit to the blade length. As long as the knife is not banned by PC 16100-17360 or in Part 6/Title 3/Division 5, it is legal. Division 6 of the same title bans knuckles, division 7 bans nunchakus and so on. 17235 does not make Assisted Openers(AO) illegal. However, depending on the particular AO mechanism and other details some AOs may fall under switchblade category. Kershaw Speed Safe is not one of them, it is perfectly legal, details further down. As far as the state law goes, fixed blades must be carried openly, in the sheath, on the waist. I can't find where does the law ban either double edged blades or dirks and daggers. As the wording is, those are ok for open carry. No knives longer than 2.5"in the school, but folders are ok in the Universities and Colleges, unless, they were banned by local authorities. CCR(California Code Of Regulations) has a separate provision prohibitins any non employee and non student from carying any knife with a locking blade, dirks, daggers etc, and anything that can be used to inflict serious bodily injury. Needless to say it's way too vague, although if you had aforementioned dangerous object on you to do your lawful work, then you're ok. No knives longer than 4" in public buildings or buildings open to public meetings, e.g. courts, city halls, police stations, city council meetings, etc.

Penal Codes


PC 20200 - Defines open carry as A knife carried in a sheath that is worn openly suspended from the waist of the wearer is not concealed within the meaning of Section 16140, 16340, 17350, or 21310. The handle shouldn't be covered by clothing.
Part 6/Title 3/Division 5 - Defines legal and illegal pocket knives. Full text of the penal code 17235. The most interesting part of the penal code is the following definition of the switchblade knives:
As used in this part, "switchblade knife" means a knife having the appearance of a pocketknife and includes a spring-blade knife, snap-blade knife, gravity knife, or any other similar type knife, the blade or blades of which are two or more inches in length and which can be released automatically by a flick of a button, pressure on the handle, flip of the wrist or other mechanical device, or is released by the weight of the blade or by any type of mechanism whatsoever.

Basically, this section outlaws switchblades, or automatic knives, plus ballisongs, or butterfly knives. Also whatever else can be opened with the flick of the wrist. However, there are lots of legitimate knives that also fall under that category. Next section clarifies that part:

"Switchblade knife" does not include a knife that opens with one hand utilizing thumb pressure applied solely to the blade of the knife or a thumb stud attached to the blade, provided that the knife has a detent or other mechanism that provides resistance that must be overcome in opening the blade, or that biases the blade back toward its closed position.

The paragraph above was added to the PC 17235 (to the original 653K) thanks to SB 274, or Karnette amendment(California state Senator Betty Karnette of the 27th district introduced it in 2002). This is an important clause that makes legal regular folding knives which can be opened with one hand. The knife must have some sort of thumbstud to move the blade into the open position and has to have some sort of mechanism to keep it in the closed position and provide some sort of resistance to overcome when opening it. For the record, a thumbstud doesn't necessarily has to be affixed to the side(s) of the blade, but can be on the top like on Kershaw Shallots.

Kershaw Speed Safe AO - The Karnette amendment is also what makes Kershaw Speed Safe assisted opening knives perfectly legal in California. Speed Safe satisfies 3 conditions instead of minimum two, not to be a switchblade, i.e. it has a thumbstud on the blade, which the knife operator has to push to open the knife, second Kershaw AOs have a detent, and just those two would be enough to comply switchblade law, but the torsion bar of the Speed Safe mechanism also forces the blade to stay in closed position, i.e. provides bias towards locked position.

Blade Length Limit - As you can see there is no length limit ever mentioned in this code. So, normally unless there is a specific law restricting the blade length in any given local area, you can carry folding knives of pretty much any length, not outlawed in 16100-17360 or in Part 6/Title 3/Division 5.

Part 6/Title 3/Division 5 - Deals with knife carry and prohibits several types of knives. It is way too long to cite it here completely, thus only the most relevant parts here. For The reference - full text of the penal code Part 6, Title 3.
General - Division 5 and subsequent divisions outlaw several types of knives and other weapons/devices. Violating any of the rules carries out the same punishment: is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison.. I.e. same penalty for Lipstick, Undetectable, Belt buckle knives, etc.

Division 5 of Title 3 of Part 6 prohibits and bans several different types of knives, before 2012 they were all in the same section(12020), listed by name:
Old version in section 12020, pre 2012 - (1) Manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, lends, or possesses ... any ballistic knife, ... any belt buckle knife, any lipstick case knife, any cane sword, any shobi-zue, any air gauge knife, any writing pen knife, ...
After 2012 each type listed above got its own article under Division 5, including 1 year prison punishment.
So, not only you can't carry, but you can't even posses any of the listed in above. Some of it makes sense, some not so much. The section 22210 bans slungshots, but slingshots are ok. Half of those things are most likely unknown to general public and probably knife enthusiastas as well. For your information, Shurikens are also included in Division 9 of the Title 3, section 22410-22490. They are not exactly knives, but still edged weapons. Ok, moving on.

PC 21310 - any person in this state who carries concealed upon the person any dirk or dagger is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison - We'll go through definitions later, but this one says no to concealed dirks and daggers. By the way as this one is, it doesn't prohibit them, just states they have to be carried openly, on the waist as we saw open carry definition. Sad part is that dirk (and dagger) definition in the law, see Dirk Or Dagger in PC 16100-17360 definitions, covers pretty much anything, because ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death applies to the screwdrives and pens just as well. And those things do get used in crimes as a stabbing weapon.
Ref - Definitions of terms in Penal Code Part 6/Title 3/Division 5

171.b - Tells you what you can and can not carry in public buildings and meetings. For the reference - Full Text Of Penal Code 171. 171.b starts with:
(a) Any person who brings or possesses within any state or local public building or at any meeting required to be open to the public pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 54950) of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of, or Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of, the Government Code, any of the following is guilty of a public offense punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or in the state prison:
   (1) Any firearm.
   (2) Any deadly weapon described in Section 653k or 12020.
   (3) Any knife with a blade length in excess of four inches, the blade of which is fixed or is capable of being fixed in an unguarded position by the use of one or two hands.
...
Thus no knives longer than 4" in state and public buildings. Exact definition of the state or local public meeting and open to public buildings can be found in 171.b(c). In short, those are state or local government owned or leased buildings such as courts, police stations, city halls, etc. Meetings mean wherever those officials get together to conduct regular or irregular work, e.g. city council meetings.
626.10 - As stated above defines knives school carry. Again, this one is way too big. For the reference - full text of the penal code 626.10. Subdivision a prohibits you can not bring a fixed blade knife longer than 2.5", a folding knife, ice pick, etc to the school. Subdivision b is pretty much identical, applies to universities and colleges, same restrictions, but folding knives are ok. Subdivisions c, d, e, f make exemptions. E.g. Knives for food preparation and other work places are ok. Students can bring knives if directed so by school or university employees. Subdivision a is below:
(a) Any person, except a duly appointed peace officer as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, a full-time paid peace officer of another state or the federal government who is carrying out official duties while in this state, a person summoned by any officer to assist in making arrests or preserving the peace while the person is actually engaged in assisting any officer, or a member of the military forces of this state or the United States who is engaged in the performance of his or her duties, who brings or possesses any dirk, dagger, ice pick, knife having a blade longer than 2 1/2 inches, folding knife with a blade that locks into place, a razor with an unguarded blade, a taser, or a stun gun, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 244.5, any instrument that expels a metallic projectile such as a BB or a pellet, through the force of air pressure, CO 2 pressure, or spring action, or any spot marker gun, upon the grounds of, or within, any public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, is guilty of a public offense, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison.

Ref - Definitions of terms in Penal Code 171b

California Code of Regulations

CCR is a bit more complicated. By definition it is: The California Code of Regulations (CCR), is the official compilation and publication of the regulations adopted, amended or repealed by state agencies pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Properly adopted regulations that have been filed with the Secretary of State have the force of law. In practice, it's quite difficult to tell who or which agency proposed what, and what if it conflicts with other laws. Still, let's have a look at the provision we're interested in. My sincere thanks to the reader who brought this CCR provision to my attention.

Title 5/Division 10/Chapter 1/S 100015 - Specifically deals with non-affiliates in buildings and on the grounds of the University of California, violation of which is a misdemeanor. Since the online page won't link directly I'll quote most of the section:
No non-affiliate shall, on University property, carry upon his/her person or have in his/her possession or under his/her control any Dangerous Weapon. For purposes of this Section, "Dangerous Weapon" means and includes, but is not limited to:
A. Any firearm in violation of the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995, California Penal Code section 626.9.
B. Any knife having a blade two and one-half inches or more in length.
C. Any folding knife with a blade that locks into place.
D. Any ice pick or similar sharp tool that can be used as a stabbing implement capable of inflicting serious bodily injury.
E. Any razor with an unguarded blade.
F. Any cutting, stabbing or bludgeoning weapon or device capable of inflicting serious bodily injury.
G. Any dirk or dagger.
H. Any taser, stun gun, or other similar electronic device.
I. Any instrument that expels a metallic projectile such as a BB or a pellet, through the force of air pressure, CO2 pressure, or spring action, or any spot marker gun.
And then there's another interesting part: This section shall not apply if, at the time of the alleged violation, the instrument or device alleged to be a Dangerous Weapon was in good faith carried upon the person or in his/her custody or control for use in his/her lawful occupation or employment.

Summary - All of the above means that unless you are an employee or a student of the University of California, you can not carry any fixed blades or any locking knives. Non locking knives are also prohibited, as they fall under section F. Unfortunately, F is so vaguely phrased that it can cover pens, pencils baseball bats, bricks and whatever else. However, if you are able to prove that you had any of those dangerous objects to do your lawful work, then none of the above applies.
Related Information:

California Penal Code
Bladeforums Knife Laws Subforum
California Knife Laws: A Comprehensive Guide by Jim March
SB 274 Analysis
AKTI On California Knife Law
Spring Assisted Knife Laws
Last updated - 03/29/16

Motorcycle Noise And Money

OFF THE WIRE
fuck these guys,performing highway robbery
agingrebel.com
It is tempting for bikers to laugh off the holy crusade against “motorcycle noise” and aftermarket exhaust pipes. In the first place, the reasons for replacing the stock exhaust on a Harley are obvious to the people who do it.
Back in the day, 82 inch Shovelheads made about 70 horsepower right out of the box. Brand new 82 inch Twin Cams make about 58 horsepower. The reason for the decrease is that modern bikes are intentionally set up at the factory to run inefficiently. They must run poorly in order to meet the mileage, noise and pollution abatement goals that are mandated by a self-righteous and distant bureaucracy.
It all seems like so much red tape to most riders. Harley-Davidson does not build motorcycles that run well. Harley builds motorcycles that meet arbitrary and fatuous government standards. The standard set of improvements made to brand new motorcycles even has a name. Most people call it “the Harley tax.”
The Harley tax is the amount new owners must pay to “let the engine breathe.” The results of changing the pipes and air filter and fattening the gas to air mixture are immediate and potentially life saving. Motorcycles are small and vulnerable, so riders commonly try to stay safe by out-accelerating danger. And, factory pipes frustrate that ambition to stay alive.

Loud Pipes Save Lives

Secondly, as anybody who has ever actually ridden a motorcycle knows, Harleys are not vehicles so much as they are cloaks of invisibility. It is not simply a matter of motorists not seeing motorcycles. Drivers tend not to recognize the motorcycles they see as other motor vehicles sharing the road with them. So it is common for drivers to simply run over bikes. In the United States these collisions make the papers about 15 times a day. And, it is much harder to survive a freeway collision on a bike than in a car.
Motorcycles that are loud enough to be heard inside a sound-proofed passenger compartment are not only better able to run away from bike-blind motorists. They are also much harder to ignore. Even motorcycle cops know this.
In 2007, the city of Oakland put stock pipes on all 30 of its Harley-Davidsons. The new pipes stayed on until an Oakland cop riding a Harley with a stock exhaust was struck by a driver who said he never knew the motorcycle was there.
According to then Oakland Deputy Chief Dave Kozicki, “the decibel drop sparked a chorus of complaints from other officers, who said they felt less safe.” The department concluded, Kozicki went on to say, that “it was in the best interest of the officers to put more-audible pipes back on.”

The Noise Nuts

The campaign against “motorcycle noise” is also easy to dismiss because it is led by a bare handful of fatuous and unpleasant busybodies.
The concept of “noise pollution” was invented in 2004 by a UCLA professor of “political activism” named Ted Rueter. Rueter started a campaign called “Noise Free America” and as recently as 2005 he had to justify the concept to the left leaning digest Utne Reader. “A lot of people get off on noise and think that there’s something wrong with peace and quiet,” Rueter told the digest. “We’re still fighting a public perception that this is a trivial issue and anyone who’s concerned or interested in curbing noise is a crank.”
Other cranks became aroused when they heard Rueter’s seductive call and most of them took pains to make themselves appear more important than they actually are. The well known and often quoted group Noise Off is a guy named Richard Tur. (The spelling is not a typographical error. He actually spells his last name without the final “D.”)
A “citizen’s group” in Maine, called MECALM (Maine Citizens Against Loud Motorcycles) is a guy named Andy Ford who has a neighbor who is a state senator. A similar “grass roots organization” in New Hampshire called NHCALM is another guy named Bill Mitchell.
It is common to underestimate how important fanatics like Rueter, Tur, Ford and Mitchell are becoming. But, they are important because they are warping public perception and inspiring new laws.

New California Law

One of those is a California law scheduled to go into effect next year. It is called the “Motorcycle Anti-Tampering Act” and it was sponsored by a California State Senator named Fran Pavley. Pavley said her new law was aimed at “a few bad apples on our roads (who) are infringing on the rights of others with their illegal, attention-seeking loud pipes.” Pavley’s statement was a loathsome lie but it became true because nobody was able to contradict her.
Pavley is a former middle school teacher who represents the most affluent neighborhoods in Los Angeles and she demonstrates a tendency to treat other adults as if they are her middle school students. She is so ridiculous a person that it is also tempting to either ignore her or laugh her away. Unfortunately, she has the power to enact ridiculous laws.
Pavley’s law effectively forbids Harley owners from replacing their exhausts with better ones. The act requires motorcycle exhausts sold after 2012 to have a visible EPA stamp. The law also requires that motorcycles not exceed a sound level of 80 decibels which is 1.3 decibels quieter than New York’s tony Indochine restaurant on a quiet night as measured by the Zagat restaurant guide. It is 10 decibels quieter than a normal conversation, 30 decibels less than a lawn mower and about 15 decibels quieter than the police bikes in Oakland when they idle. Eighty decibels is also five decibels quieter than the traffic noise inside an auto with the windows rolled up.

Searches And Fines

Police departments throughout the country have eagerly jumped on the motorcycle noise abatement bandwagon. Not only is “loud” quickly becoming probable cause to detain passing motorcyclists. Ensuring that all passing motorcycles are not “loud” has become a reason to implement motorcycle road blocks. These road blocks are, in effect, dragnets that allow police to stop bikers in order to try to get something on them.
The 80 decibel limit is so arbitrary and unreasonable that it gives police a reason to stop and fine everybody. And, as everybody already knows, these fines are a growing revenue source for cities and towns desperate for cash. They are in effect, in the most literal way, highway robbery.
Money, rather than neurotics, is the main reason why motorcycle noise abatement campaigns are picking up steam. There is money in “motorcycle noise” for police and politicians.

Chris Real

There is also money in “motorcycle noise” for a guy named Chris Real.
In order to write the new California law and similar laws in cement, police must have a scientifically justifiable standard for measuring motorcycle noise. And, they must also have the equipment to make those scientific measurements. The author of the scientific procedure is an entrepreneur named Chris Real. He also makes the equipment.
The new standard for measuring motorcycle noise is titled SAE J2825. SAE used to be an abbreviation for “Society of Automotive Engineers.” It is now the trademark of a for-profit company called SAE International. SAE sets numerous standards ranging from socket sizes to the standard dimension of cargo containers. It leans heavily on independent contractors to invent its standards. Chris Real, who owns a company named DPS Technical Incrporated in Upland, California is the author of SAE J2825.
For the last year, since the California “Motorcycle Anti-Tampering Act” was signed into law, Real has been teaching the procedure he invented to cops around the country. The training in California has been subsidized by the state Office of Traffic Safety. The same state agency has also subsidized a campaign in Elk Grove, California to see how much revenue police there can generate by writing motorcycle noise tickets. The Elk Grove police have been writing the tickets for the last year. They don’t write noise tickets for jackhammers or trucks. They only write noise tickets for motorcycles.
Real’s procedure uses what Real sells. DPS Technical’s main product is a “law enforcement sound measurement kit.” The kit includes a “Sound Level Meter, ANSI Type 1 Field Calibrator, 2 vibration tachometers, measuring tape, OHV RPM testing data, spark arrester probe and case.” It also includes “certificates of calibration, personal protection equipment and field carrying case and (an) informational DVD.”
A “typical kit for field enforcement purposes,” the “PN: SLM ENV KT 1” costs $3,100.
No highway robber should be without one.

A Guide to the California Public Records Act (Detailed)



OFF THE WIRE
https://www.cacities.org/Resources/Open-Government/THE-PEOPLE%E2%80%99S-BUSINESS-A-Guide-to-the-California-Pu.aspx














Pocket Guide version
http://www.thefirstamendment.org/publicrecordsact.pdf