Sure I won't have a problem if I'm pulled over, but why should I have such inconveniance thrust on me in the name of motorcycle safety? I don't understand how that will increase safety, don't appreciate such incursions into my basic freedoms and don't like the federal government throwing money at a problem in such a nonsensical manner.
I agree with the AMA:
"Those questions, which have been posed by the AMA to Deal and other officials, include: How do motorcycle-only checkpoints increase the safety of motorcyclists? Where do states draw their authority to conduct motorcycle-only checkpoints? Is "probable cause" required to stop a motorcycle and, if so, what constitutes probable cause? "
Also agree with them here:
"The AMA believes that the primary source of motorcycle safety is in motorcycle crash prevention and not in arbitrarily pulling over riders and randomly subjecting them to roadside inspections," Moreland said.
I see it as a total waste of tax payer's money.
I think I have to agree with you there, it's not so much that I'm worried about them finding anything, I know I'm legal and everything is in order. It's the principal of the thing, and since I only ever use the interstate to go QUICKLY from point A to B, I don't appreciate having to pull over and sit through any type of check. If it were up to me, I'd spend the money on something else, maybe invest it into more and/or cheaper motorcycle safety classes?
agree 100%,your being conned.I don't think you need a checkpoint to figure out who has straight pipes,,if they want to pull those guys over they already have probable cause.
Also, I would think a lot more people drink and drive in cars than on bikes, much easier to do.
As far as the I have nothing to hide theory,,that may be true but why should the people in cars not have to be stopped too? An unsafe car or truck can do much more damage than an unsafe motorcycle.
If it were up to me, I'd spend the money on something else, maybe invest it into more and/or cheaper motorcycle safety classes?