* Login   * Register * FAQ
It is currently Sun Aug 20, 2017 4:46 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 1:51 am 
Offline
250cc Rally Go'er
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2011 6:54 pm
Posts: 277
Location: New York F'ing City
Scooter Model(s): A Honda VFR isn't really a scooter but don't hate me!
Beca Boo wrote:
Thanks for all the research. Right now my main concern are the glasses and visor bit which is new news to me. In short ( cause my head is spinning from this)

1. I need to ride with Z87 rated glasses that may or may not have markings on them stating that (dependent on the year manufactured).

2. I can get a summons for riding with my visor open or cracked open regardless of if I have Z87 rated glasses on.

What about 3/4 helmets with no visor? How are you supposed to ride with your visor down all the time?

I don't know why this is so difficult. You are required to wear eye protection. That eye protection must conform to ANSI Z87.1.

If you have Z87.1 eyeglasses of some sort, it doesn't matter whether your visor is up or down because no matter what, you are then "wearing" an Z87.1 eye protection device. If you have no compliant eyewear then your visor needs to stay down in order to be "wearing" ANSI Z87.1 eye protection.

If you have a helmet that has no face shield then you are required to wear Z87.1 eyewear of some kind. It's not anyone's problem but yours if your helmet has no face shield.

YOU MUST HAVE SOME KIND OF ANSI Z87.1 EYE PROTECTION. IT IS RIGHT THERE IN THE LAW. THE FIRST QUOTE IN THE FIRST OF THE TWO BIG POSTS.

Whatever markings may exist on the eyewear you choose may depend on which year of the standard they comply with.

_________________
Join the NYMSTF now for a scooter -friendly NYC


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:33 am 
Offline
4000cc Scooter Titan

Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:12 pm
Posts: 4916
Location: dabronx
Scooter Model(s): 2006 LX190 DRAGON RED SCOOTER
I caught a ticket once. Just once... i don't like full face helmets cause they fog up. I take off or keep visor up and wear goggles. 3/4 helmets with shield still allow wind to water up your eyes and debris that can affect your vision while in flight. I wouldn't take a chance for the sake of looking kool with some ray bans or nothing at all with a 3/4 helmet with shield. an over zealous cop maybe looking to make your day a learning experience in NYC helmet laws. Even if you think you're in the right and have the time to go plead your case to an overworked judge. Goggles are cheap and kool.

_________________
interests: scooters and bow-legged women


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:57 am 
Offline
1000cc Scooter Legend
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 9:42 pm
Posts: 1222
Location: Lower East Side, NYC
Scooter Model(s): 1966 Bajaj 150
Home Depot goggles all the way!

They even have tinted ones.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:05 am 
Offline
250cc Rally Go'er

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:22 am
Posts: 378
Scooter Model(s): more
I'm sorry Brad. I'm not as smart as you. I need shit explained in simple terms. It always helpful to highlight things and make them bold too so I can may more attention. Youtube videos are the best. Checkout Dellboys garage. Love that guy except for the redneck flag in his garage. That shouldn't be highlighted. That should be deleted. I may have more questions but now I'm afraid to ask because you might highlight me or bold me.

Seriously though, you put up some good info. Cheers. We all needed some clarification.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 12:27 pm 
Offline
250cc Rally Go'er
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2011 6:54 pm
Posts: 277
Location: New York F'ing City
Scooter Model(s): A Honda VFR isn't really a scooter but don't hate me!
Beca Boo wrote:
I'm sorry Brad. I'm not as smart as you. I need shit explained in simple terms. It always helpful to highlight things and make them bold too so I can may more attention. Youtube videos are the best. Checkout Dellboys garage. Love that guy except for the redneck flag in his garage. That shouldn't be highlighted. That should be deleted. I may have more questions but now I'm afraid to ask because you might highlight me or bold me.

Seriously though, you put up some good info. Cheers. We all needed some clarification.

If highlighting scares you I'd hate to see what happens with 24 point type. :lol:

The reference to Dellboys Garage is interesting. Thanks for that. Actually I'm thinking maybe this would be a good project for the NYMSTF, to put up some instructional videos. Which reminds me, I need to build a prompter. If anyone with production connections has some beamsplitter glass and/or a Windows, Linux or Android tablet, 10"-12" they can let go cheap, I promise it will go to good use.

PS I do understand different people learn best in different ways. Please pardon my irritability. it's part of my charm. :roll:

_________________
Join the NYMSTF now for a scooter -friendly NYC


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:46 pm 
Offline
250cc Rally Go'er
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2011 6:54 pm
Posts: 277
Location: New York F'ing City
Scooter Model(s): A Honda VFR isn't really a scooter but don't hate me!
One more related item:

The NYS eye protection law used to specify an old standard called VESC-8. VESC no longer exists and this was causing much confusion (but people with Z87.1 eyewear were treated as compliant) so in late 2009 the DMV changed Part 54 to replace VESC-8 with Z87.1.

The reason I mention this is because in the definitions in NYCRR Section 54.2 , compliant eyewear is now defined as an "eye protection device as defined in American National Standard Institute's Z87.1 as most recently amended." [italics mine]

In 2009, the 2003 version of the Z87.1 standard was the most recent. I think about this only because technically the law could, in 2013, require you to be using eyewear made to the 2010 version of the standard. This would be obscenely stupid - even OSHA doesn't care if you use older eyewear - and I doubt any judge would care but I wanted to document this anyway. If for example it ended up having any bearing on the issue of markings.

That's all for now! ;)

_________________
Join the NYMSTF now for a scooter -friendly NYC


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 12:54 pm 
Offline
50cc Lane Splitter

Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:25 pm
Posts: 87
PossiblyMaybe wrote:
Is this worth fighting? I don't want to take time off from work and deal with going to court, if i don't have much of a case. Also, I don't know if it would help my case to prove to the judge that I have now replaced the shield, have now bought regular goggles, have now bought a new helmet?

Any suggestions or ideas?


This ticket is absolutely worth fighting -- you are entirely in the right. It should only take an hour or so, at most, and you will be doing a great service to yourself and other scooter riders.

In fact, your RayBan Wayfarers are compliant with the z87 standard (as it says in the little booklet that they came with (I have a pair too) -- in fact this is pretty common for decent quality glasses sold in the United States. But the fact that they are compliant is not relevant to your getting the ticket dismissed, as you are under no legal burden to prove their compliance. Rather, the burden is on the PO to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that your glasses are not compliant. Theoretically, the State could hire an expert to examine them and testify as to his or her findings, but the only person who will be testifying is the cop who gave you the ticket.

After the cop gives his narrative, you will have an opportunity to cross-examine him or her. Ask 1) whether he has any scientific knowledge or technical training relating to optical lenses; 2) whether he is familiar with the Z87 standard and if so to explain its requirements 2) how without such technical knowledge he is able to conclude that the glasses are not compliant. Now you can ask for dismissal of the Violation based upon a failure to make a prima facie case that the statute has been violated. It is highly unlikely that you will lose, but even if you do, you have a right to appeal the decision, and you will win that. If you want to guild the lily, you can print out the VTL statute and the Z87 standard at 29 CFR 1910.6 to show the judge that its highly scientific and that there is no way to determine by looking at it that the glasses are compliant or not -- but that shouldn't be necessary. If you have your Ray Ban booklet you can bring that too, but again you shouldn't need it.

In my opinion, these tickets represent the worst sort of police harassment against scooterists. They are absolutely baseless, and should absolutely be fought.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:02 pm 
Offline
4000cc Scooter Titan

Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:12 pm
Posts: 4916
Location: dabronx
Scooter Model(s): 2006 LX190 DRAGON RED SCOOTER
Wayfarers can't protect your eyes from debris. If their is no eye cavity protection present it doesn't matter if the lenses are up to par.

_________________
interests: scooters and bow-legged women


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:35 pm 
Offline
50cc Lane Splitter

Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:25 pm
Posts: 87
charlybrwn134 wrote:
Wayfarers can't protect your eyes from debris. If their is no eye cavity protection present it doesn't matter if the lenses are up to par.



I have no idea what you are talking about, but you are confusing the issue. The statute says nothing about "eye cavity" protection, and has no relevance to any argument -- much less proof -- as to whether the statute was complied with, or whether this rider should be convicted of the offense he or she has been charged with.

The only requirement of the statute is that the lenses were "manufactured in conformity with the American National Standard Institute's Z87.1 standard Occupational and Educational Personal Eye and Face Protection Devices." Wayfarers are manufactured in conformity with the standard, according to the documentation which accompanies them. In any case, it is not the defendant's burden to prove that the lenses are in compliance, but the State's burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are not -- which will not happen, and the ticket will be dismissed.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:11 pm 
Offline
4000cc Scooter Titan

Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:12 pm
Posts: 4916
Location: dabronx
Scooter Model(s): 2006 LX190 DRAGON RED SCOOTER
So you're saying you can wear glasses or goggles without eye cavity protection are permitted to use when no shield is being used? I'm not gettin tickets for this issue. Keep it up the fight. Let us know what your using. I use bobsters.

_________________
interests: scooters and bow-legged women


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:07 pm 
Offline
Poster Child
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:40 pm
Posts: 7
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Scooter Model(s): Vespa GTS 250
@Makanmata - thank you for your feedback. I went online and pled not guilty.

Get this, my hearing date is scheduled for May 2014! I guess I have 8 months to get my defense ready. I don't have the owners booklet for my Ray Bans, though I'm sure I can find something to printout online or call their 1-800 number.

I'm pretty confident I can argue this convincingly, though I am concerned that if they find me guilty, my $100 fine will jump up immensely with 8 months worth of past due/finance/interest penalty fees. Anyone have experience with how that works? How they calculate these additional fees if found guilty?

Thanks again everybody! I hate the feeling of the cops being bullies, and I'm just supposed to hand my lunch money over to them without a fight. If I did break the law, then fine I'll pay the fee. But it's the principle of it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:57 pm 
Offline
1000cc Scooter Legend

Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 4:12 pm
Posts: 1607
Scooter Model(s): SYM HD 200
PossiblyMaybe wrote:
@Makanmata - thank you for your feedback. I went online and pled not guilty.

Get this, my hearing date is scheduled for May 2014! I guess I have 8 months to get my defense ready. I don't have the owners booklet for my Ray Bans, though I'm sure I can find something to printout online or call their 1-800 number.

I'm pretty confident I can argue this convincingly, though I am concerned that if they find me guilty, my $100 fine will jump up immensely with 8 months worth of past due/finance/interest penalty fees. Anyone have experience with how that works? How they calculate these additional fees if found guilty?

Thanks again everybody! I hate the feeling of the cops being bullies, and I'm just supposed to hand my lunch money over to them without a fight. If I did break the law, then fine I'll pay the fee. But it's the principle of it.


You have a right to plead not guilty and it is not an unpaid summons unless you fail to pay the fine after losing the hearing. You do not pay the fine before the hearing.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 10:53 am 
Offline
50cc Lane Splitter

Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:25 pm
Posts: 87
PossiblyMaybe wrote:
I hate the feeling of the cops being bullies, and I'm just supposed to hand my lunch money over to them without a fight. If I did break the law, then fine I'll pay the fee. But it's the principle of it.


I think that well captures what is going on here. Its a shame that riders don't take advantage of the rights afforded them in challenging tickets. Their dirty little secret is that the City loses money on every ticket that they write, and that those losses rise greatly when people fight their tickets. If everybody getting bullshit tickets took the time to fight them, the City wouldn't be able to afford to prosecute them all, and would have to discourage police from writing harassive tickets -- and instead encourage them to do their purported jobs of protecting the public. I think its unfortunate the dominant view on this site is to encourage people to pay unjustified tickets, and not to fight them.

Cops also hate having to come into court and justify their actions in a forum where any lack of professionalism can be brought out without fear of retribution, and if they had to do so for every ticket they would certainly write less of them. Especially with a totally trumped up ticket like yours where the cop doesn't understand the law it is based upon, it will be clear to everybody (including the Judge) that he just wanted to hassle you for the simple reason that he could. Moreover, they also need to show up for court on what might otherwise be a day off -- and therefore many cops simply don't show (which will result in dismissal).

So now you are on hold until at least May, and you will be able to get at least one adjournment of this date online -- with no questions asked -- which could theoretically push it out another 8 months or so (wait to ask for that adjournment the week before the hearing). It could be that the DMV or the cop will also ask for an adjournment(s) too, and if the whole thing is pushed out for 24 months, you can make a motion for dismissal for failure to provide you with a speedy trial (which should be granted), and on the grounds that memories will have faded. Even if you don't make it the full 24 months, delay will make it more likely that the cop will have lost his notes and be unable to testify, and there is always the possibility that he will leave the force (figuring the average NYPD career is about 20 years, means that 5% or so leave the force every year). My advice is to seek a court date on a Friday during the summer or before a three day weekend, to maximize the chance of a cop no-show.

As for the hearing itself, you have a great case, with the law and facts on your side, and you should win. I guess it can't hurt to get the Ray Ban booklet (I imagine you could pick one up at LensCrafters if Ray Ban won't send you a new one (or some other indication from them that the lenses are Z87 compliant), but don't fall into the trap of creating a situation where you are making a burden of proof for yourself that doesn't exist. Before you get into whether or not the lenses are compliant, force the cop to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are not compliant -- which he obviously will not be able to do. Only after you point out that the cop is unable to demonstrate with any evidence whatsoever (much less beyond a reasonable doubt) that the lenses are not compliant, should you attempt to demonstrate that they are -- and my prediction is that you will not get that far before the judge finds you not guilty.

Good luck, and thanks for taking a stand for all of us, and taking the time to fight.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:20 pm 
Offline
2000cc Scooter Royalty
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:05 am
Posts: 2049
Location: A deluxe UES apt in the sky
Scooter Model(s): 07 GTS, 07 Stella
Makanmata, you provide good advice. You do have to remember that the NYC tickets are handled by the TVB with an ALJ presiding and don't afford the rights of most courts, e.g., no discovery or supporting deposition and clear and convincing evidence as opposed to proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Regardless of principle, it's important to weigh the cost of your time (which may not simply be monetary in nature) vs. the cost of the ticket, which often leads to the least costly outcome of just paying the crap ticket, particularly considering the outcome could be the cost of the ticket + the cost of your time, moreso with the TVB.

Also, the cops no show does not guarantee dismissal, particularly if the defendant has already requested an adjournment.

_________________
No one knows what it means, but it's provocative...Gets the people going!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 4:17 pm 
Offline
50cc Lane Splitter

Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:25 pm
Posts: 87
CrazyInNYC wrote:
Makanmata, you provide good advice. You do have to remember that the NYC tickets are handled by the TVB with an ALJ presiding and don't afford the rights of most courts, e.g., no discovery or supporting deposition and clear and convincing evidence as opposed to proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Regardless of principle, it's important to weigh the cost of your time (which may not simply be monetary in nature) vs. the cost of the ticket, which often leads to the least costly outcome of just paying the crap ticket, particularly considering the outcome could be the cost of the ticket + the cost of your time, moreso with the TVB.

Also, the cops no show does not guarantee dismissal, particularly if the defendant has already requested an adjournment.


Those are good points, but ones that work both ways and can actually help the defendant rather than the prosecution. These actually go to an Administrative Law Judge at the TVB, and you are entitled to some limited discovery in the form of either a Demand for Documents relating to the offense, which you can alternately also get through a NY Freedom of Information Law request (and there is usually plenty of time until the Hearing in which to do so). In practice, this means that you are entitled to the cop's notes and any supporting documents. But in practice nobody will seek pre-hearing discovery of you or your case -- and they will be hearing your defense for the first time at the hearing (and that's good). With no supporting deposition, there is no evidence except the Ticket itself, and the cop's narrative, and in a case such as this it is easy as pie to cross examine them and prove that they haven't met their burden.

Clearly, I agree that the cops and the City are hoping that people rationalize paying unfair tickets rather than fighting them at potentially greater cost and effort. I think though that if riders were to realize that the deck is less stacked than some would have you believe, that you will get a semblance of a fair hearing if you take the proceedings seriously and are prepared, and that the time commitment is not as great as people think, that they might decide that it is actually worth the effort. I don't begrudge anybody who decides its in their best interests to pay and be over with it, but I think that the plain fact is that fighting these tickets, and putting the cops to their proofs at the hearing, is amongst the most important bits of rider advocacy that we have at our disposal. I would have hoped to see more encouragement to those willing to fight than has often been expressed by those on this board -- this is a scooter advocacy site after all.

Incidentally, I have heard that outside the City they will often grant an adjournment if a cop fails to show. I know that I fought at least one ticket only a month or so ago in which both my case and another were dismissed due the failure of the cop to appear -- and I had previously sought an adjournment.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 4:44 pm 
Offline
2000cc Scooter Royalty
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:05 am
Posts: 2049
Location: A deluxe UES apt in the sky
Scooter Model(s): 07 GTS, 07 Stella
Makanmata wrote:
Incidentally, I have heard that outside the City they will often grant an adjournment if a cop fails to show. I know that I fought at least one ticket only a month or so ago in which both my case and another were dismissed due the failure of the cop to appear -- and I had previously sought an adjournment.


Absolutely, as should be the case. I was speaking in the context of the NYC TVB and can say from experience that my ticket and several others for the same officer that same day were not dismissed despite his no show. When I pressed, the excuse I received included the ALJs consideration that I had previously sought an adjournment. Nevermind the fact that nobody was forced to show up on my account because the adjournment was requested in advance of the scheduled hearing date.

_________________
No one knows what it means, but it's provocative...Gets the people going!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 9:08 pm 
Offline
1000cc Scooter Legend

Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 4:12 pm
Posts: 1607
Scooter Model(s): SYM HD 200
Makanmata wrote:
CrazyInNYC wrote:
Makanmata, you provide good advice. You do have to remember that the NYC tickets are handled by the TVB with an ALJ presiding and don't afford the rights of most courts, e.g., no discovery or supporting deposition and clear and convincing evidence as opposed to proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Regardless of principle, it's important to weigh the cost of your time (which may not simply be monetary in nature) vs. the cost of the ticket, which often leads to the least costly outcome of just paying the crap ticket, particularly considering the outcome could be the cost of the ticket + the cost of your time, moreso with the TVB.

Also, the cops no show does not guarantee dismissal, particularly if the defendant has already requested an adjournment.


Those are good points, but ones that work both ways and can actually help the defendant rather than the prosecution. These actually go to an Administrative Law Judge at the TVB, and you are entitled to some limited discovery in the form of either a Demand for Documents relating to the offense, which you can alternately also get through a NY Freedom of Information Law request (and there is usually plenty of time until the Hearing in which to do so). In practice, this means that you are entitled to the cop's notes and any supporting documents. But in practice nobody will seek pre-hearing discovery of you or your case -- and they will be hearing your defense for the first time at the hearing (and that's good). With no supporting deposition, there is no evidence except the Ticket itself, and the cop's narrative, and in a case such as this it is easy as pie to cross examine them and prove that they haven't met their burden.

Clearly, I agree that the cops and the City are hoping that people rationalize paying unfair tickets rather than fighting them at potentially greater cost and effort. I think though that if riders were to realize that the deck is less stacked than some would have you believe, that you will get a semblance of a fair hearing if you take the proceedings seriously and are prepared, and that the time commitment is not as great as people think, that they might decide that it is actually worth the effort. I don't begrudge anybody who decides its in their best interests to pay and be over with it, but I think that the plain fact is that fighting these tickets, and putting the cops to their proofs at the hearing, is amongst the most important bits of rider advocacy that we have at our disposal. I would have hoped to see more encouragement to those willing to fight than has often been expressed by those on this board -- this is a scooter advocacy site after all.

Incidentally, I have heard that outside the City they will often grant an adjournment if a cop fails to show. I know that I fought at least one ticket only a month or so ago in which both my case and another were dismissed due the failure of the cop to appear -- and I had previously sought an adjournment.


For a traffic infraction there is generally only one document - the summons. There could be a memo book entry, but it is extremely unlikely to be of any value, probably just an entry like: 10:30 July 2, 2013 summons #xxx issued Lexington and 42 St.

There could be a daily activity report if the Officer is assigned to traffic. That would give an idea how many tickets he issued that day and what they were for, but still not of much value. Supporting depositions are important, because they often screw them up and give you a free pass. But that does not apply in NYC.

The most important thing, in my opinion as a retired LEO, is to push it back as far as possible, the longer the better. Unless you gave the Officer a hard time, it is fairly unlikely he will remember the stop a year later.

You have to make sure that in Court he is NOT reading from his notes, and if he states that he needs to refresh his recollection, challenge that by asking if he has any recollection of the incident at all. If he says no, you are done, case dismissed.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2013 7:51 am 
Offline
2000cc Scooter Royalty
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 9:45 pm
Posts: 2779
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Scooter Model(s): 64 Allstate 125 75 Rally 200 84 PK125 Automatica 62 125 64 Cento 79 P200 3 smallframe 85 T5 69 Ape D
I'll try to get some pics today of compliant glasses, and we're not talking goggles - they are glasses, but will protect your eyes when stuff whits them. As for the Z87 part, it is tiny on some glasses to see it - look on the arm of the glasses.

(note: the glasses Alan got for the Usual Suspects Rally were compliant)

_________________
"it's not worth buying an entire pig just to get a little sausage."

"Ever pick your feet in Poughkeepsie?"

Another Usual Suspect...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 2:21 pm 
Offline
Poster Child

Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 2:19 pm
Posts: 1
Scooter Model(s): Honda
I just got this ticket today....Wearing Sunglasses at a stop sign with my face shield up. Any updates on how the fight went for the ticket?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group