[ Home | Contents | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Easy, Cotton, Hawk et al
Date: 4/23/2003
Time: 7:43:51 PM
Remote Name: 64.216.140.211
Is Your SMRO an Extension of the Salvation Army or a Motorcycle Rights Organization? --------------------------------------------------------------------- SMRO stands for State Motorcycle Rights Organization. During the 1960's the federal government began to focus on taking rights away from motorcyclists. Helmet Laws became the law of the land from coast to coast with few exceptions by the late 1960's. Bikers realized during the early 1970's there was great need for the motorcyclists of the United States organize and fight oppressive laws aimed at motorcyclists.
Lou Kimzey and Easyriders set forth the battle cry to American bikers. ABATE began as a national effort in the beginning but it was quickly learned that every state was different. SMRO's were born from coast to coast and the battles in the state legislatures soon followed. In the beginning those drawn to the cause were freedom fighters wish to dislodge big brother from their backs. Anyone willing to join the battle was allowed to join these SMRO's.
Helmet laws have been changed and repealed in 30 of 50 our states and by less than 1% of motorcyclists in each state, the true freedom fighters. Some blame the misconception that SMRO's were Harley oriented organizations; however most members rode imports in the early years of the movement. Efforts were made to attract import riders and even non-riders to boost membership levels.
Somehow SMRO's lost track of the true purpose and goal. In an effort to appease some detractors many decided to show we were good little bikers and charitable citizens. Hence the birth of the charity craze and the public relations focus; we continued to enlist anyone who would join all the while. Many we acquired into our ranks were either only interested in making us appear normal or even worst just cared about charity. Freedom fighters within SMRO's became out numbered by the influx of those who did not share the Freedom Fighters' values. SMRO's have and are suffering as a direct result. Some SMRO's have faltered and become ineffective in the battle for biker rights. Many in the general public now have the misconception that ABATE is an extension of the Salvation Army.
Freedom fighters are not normal everyday Americans; freedom fighters are freedom-loving individualists that are not afraid to stand up and be counted. Freedom fighters are willing to make some noise and in some cases event to defy oppressive laws and be arrested to defend freedom. During the American Revolution no more the 25% of the colonists ever supported the revolution. Many Patriots paid a high price for their unpopular stand to secure liberty.
Easy the founder of South Carolina's MRA comes to mind; Easy refused to pay a $10 fine for not wearing a helmet and was jailed for the offense. The judge was even disgusted that he had to sentence someone to jail for not wearing a helmet.
Well meaning non-freedom fighters have shifted the focus away from motorcycle rights. As a result we chose to fund raise and give our fortunes to the likes of the MDA and other nationally funded groups; we gained a little attention for our charitable work. Today we enjoy the good-little-biker image, but little else. I think that much of our early success was due to the fact we were mysterious and threatening to society at large, and to legislators in particular. This is evident by the fact the first helmet protest run in South Carolina was met by many State Troopers and Capitol Police. Highway Patrol cars were placed around the whole parameter of the statehouse.
Bolstering our numbers in and of itself does not make success more certain; care must be taken to attract more freedom fighters to our SMRO's. Currently we have been weakening SMRO's philosophies and goals due to the divergence of opinions on what ABATE or the SMRO should be. ABATE and the SMRO was form with a distinct purpose; we have been moving further and further from that purpose. ABATE began as A Brotherhood Against Totalitarian Enactments; we are not a safety organization, educational organization, or a charity! We are a brotherhood of freedom fighters that organized to fight oppressive laws against bikers PERIOD! Our number one priority should always be biker rights; we should help bikers who are subjected to unreasonable enforcement of traffic laws, harassment by authorities, and discrimination by anyone. We should fight all unfair or unjust legislation that impacts motorcyclists.
Many SMRO's now seem to veer away from any confrontations with authority; they seem only to willing to sacrifice a motorcyclists' life or rights to just get along. Peace at any cost is not peace and it is certainly not liberty or freedom. What happened to the officer who single-handedly doubled the death rate of the 2002 Myrtle Beach Spring Bike Rally? Some in ABATE of SC's Horry Chapter now seem more concerned about image and turn outs at Charity events than justice. An officer of Horry ABATE has now inferred that support of the Right of Way Bills S418 and H3653 would be greater among her chapter if not for the loud call for justice in this horrible incident.
This focus on Charity and Image as opposed to Motorcycle Rights is the root cause that has persuaded many a veteran SMRO member to drop out of the movement; we are losing the very people that brought us much of our early successes. I would rather have a dozen of those freedom fighters than 144 safety/education/charity enthusiasts! Freedom fighters unwilling to compromise our liberty and freedoms with bureaucrats are needed now more than ever.
Many of the founders of ABATE can no longer recognize ABATE anymore. The brutal truth is ABATE or an SMRO is not for everyone just like motorcycling isn't for everyone. You can put anyone on a motorcycle but it does not automatically make that person a biker or rider. You can let anyone join your SMRO but that does not automatically make that person a freedom fighter. It is easy to get a big turn out at a charity event but just try to get the same turn out at a letter writing party. MRO stands for Motorcycle Rights Organization; many charity mongers use the term MRO but don't have a clue what it means.
We get thousands to show up for the Lowcountry ABATE Toy Run each year but where are they the rest of the year? Nearly all participants of the Toy Run enjoy riding lidless but only a very small fraction has done anything to win or preserve that right. Yet some of the past leadership of Lowcountry ABATE was more interested in catering to them at the cost of selling out their hard working freedom fighters. Thankfully the tide has changed in Lowcountry ABATE but the battle is not over; the same battle is being fought from coast to coast in many SMRO's by a few freedom fighters that are not willing to just hand over their organizations to safety/education/charity enthusiasts! The time has come to rally behind these few diehard freedom fighters and return SMRO's to the people that really care.
Special thanks to Easy, Cotton, Hawk et al.
From: giovanni
Date: 3/6/2003
Time: 3:12:00 PM
Remote Name: 63.212.191.92
Call off useless war on drugs [ Post 482006 ]
Category: News & Opinion Topic: Constitution & Civil Liberties Synopsis: This fight has become a war on people and the Bill of Rights Source: The Charlotte Observer Published: March 6, 2003 Author: Danny Brooks For Education and Discussion Only. Not for Commercial Use.
Posted on Thu, Mar. 06, 2003
This fight has become a war on people and the Bill of Rights
DANNY BROOKS Special to The Observer
As most Libertarians agree, the best way to win the so-called war on drugs is to end it once and for all. Not partially, but completely. As long as there are any drugs that are illegal, there will be people willing to risk prison in order to profit from them as well as use them.
It's a classic no-win situation.
You would think that someone would've paid attention to that old adage about being doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past if we don't learn from them and draw a correlation between the current drug war and alcohol Prohibition. But, for a non-Libertarian politician to apply a little common sense to this multibillion dollar-a-year fiasco would be political suicide.
In what has become a war on people and the Bill of Rights, millions of nonviolent high school and college kids have had their lives shattered by prison sentences that are not at all proportional to their "crimes."
Ironically, many of these "criminals" were caught doing the very things that politicians have been accused of, and even admitted, doing. In the 2000 presidential campaign, both George W. Bush and Al Gore decreed that the punishment for doing what many believe they themselves did should be a minimum of 10 years in prison. Former Libertarian presidential candidate Harry Browne wanted to ask both Bush and Gore, "Would your lives have been better had you spent 10 years in a federal prison for your youthful indiscretions?"
The debate over the war on drugs has people firmly entrenched on both sides of the issue. Some people believe it is no business of our government if they want to partake in moderate drug use, not unlike smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol, in their homes after a hard day at work. If they don't hurt anyone else or break any laws then they should be left alone. By contrast, I'm sure families who have lost members to drug overdoses would like to see all drugs destroyed.
But when are people going to start being held accountable for their own actions? Yes, drug addiction, like alcoholism, is a disease. But unlike cancer, it is 100 percent preventable. If the inflicted person had chosen to not start abusing drugs in the first place, there would be no problem. But there are always people who are going to be addicted to something and willing to risk their very lives for some sort of "high."
Suppose that every drug in existence were legalized tomorrow. Would people still die of overdoses? Absolutely. Would children still try drugs? Sure. But how would that be any different than what goes on now?
For starters, legalizing drugs would remove the criminal element much the same way that ending Prohibition cleaned up our streets of gangs fighting over territories. These thugs would not be able to compete with pharmaceutical companies that produce affordable, safe, nontoxic drugs.
There will always be crime, but legalizing drugs would remove the black market and allocate resources to fight violent crime instead of being used to go after people who may harm themselves but are no threat to us.
Our own government has used the drug war to check out bank accounts, perform strip-searches at airports, monitor e-mail and even take property without even charging a crime because of asset forfeiture laws that state that property, unlike people, is not innocent until proven guilty.
If you give a police officer the OK to search your car, he can disassemble it completely and does not have to put it back together. Think about that the next time someone's argument is, "Well, if you aren't doing anything wrong, what do you have to worry about?"
Drug use is a moral decision, and you cannot legislate morality. When people break the law, whether on drugs or not, they should be prosecuted. Otherwise they should be left alone if they aren't hurting anyone else. Making drug use illegal is wrong. Legalizing drugs would solve more problems than are caused by this insane war.
Danny
Brooks
Observer community columnist Danny Brooks of Davidson is a computer programmer/analyst and member of the Cabarrus Libertarian Party. Write him c/o The Observer, P.O. Box 30308, Charlotte, NC 28230-0308, or at lbrooks2@carolina.rr.comlbrooks2@carolina.rr.com.