The motorcycle community needs a tuneup

Motorcycles are fine: Their riders simply need to obey the law.

No one has an inherent right to generate unnecessary noise pollution. Driving on America's roads and highways is a community privilege, and producing harmful public noise is always illegal, as enumerated in a vast array of local, state and federal laws (i.e. Asheville noise ordinance, NCGS 20-128, federal Noise Control Act, etc.). The problem is enforcement, and we need expanded government noise-mitigation powers, since what's on the books now has failed to remedy the situation.

Among the public-relations activities of the motorcycle community and the multibillion-dollar industry it supports are things like "honor" rallies and charity runs predictably featuring an alarming number of "exhaust systems" that aren't Environmental Protection Agency-certified, rather than real mufflers. Meanwhile, commercial media (particularly Hollywood) have done a great job of acclimatizing the rest of us to these noise trespassers who are using our commons.

But these overt and covert persuasion campaigns, often led by groups such as ABATE (American Bikers Aimed Towards Education) and the American Motorcyclist Association, don't begin to offset the harm that noise pollution inflicts on children, the elderly and others. Documented health effects include everything from hearing impairment to heart disease, immune-system changes and even birth defects.

Think about the noise that penetrates our homes and our places of worship, work and study. It's a form of trespassing, and it can certainly be reduced if not stopped. Don't let those arguing for more noise confuse the issue. Total silence isn't feasible, and there are situations when noise can be expected: construction sites, fireworks displays, Bele Chere, etc. But we as a community should be able to agree on when and where it's OK to make unusually loud noises. A biker putting out 100+ decibels doesn't cut it.

Stricter laws, though, won't help unless they're enforced — and right now, even the existing laws are routinely ignored. The way our government has been influenced by "bad seed" bikers is embarrassing; I believe a key to this problem is that too many public officials are noise offenders themselves. And with the dramatic increase in motorcycle ownership and certainly the rise of the boom car, the noise problem has exploded.

It's also time for local motorcycle shops to stop dealing in non-EPA-certified "straight pipes" and other harmful noise equipment. Even more than boom cars, the alteration of sound-muffling equipment on privately owned vehicles has altered Western North Carolina's (and America's) soundscape. "Bad seed" bikers tout loud pipes as "life-saving." But the only proven, legal safety measures for bikers are horns, lights and reflective gear — along with, of course, the rest of us really looking out for them and respecting law-abiding bikers. Department of Transportation experts could surely confirm that if City Council were to inquire. The "Loud pipes save lives" clarion call may in fact conceal the truth about motorcycle accidents. Thankfully, we can all look to those in the motorcycle community who do set a good example.

Motorcycle noise has been studied elsewhere, though I'm not aware of any local research. But for many communities in WNC, it may well be the single greatest source of noise pollution. Noise mitigation means ranking sources for harm value and responding appropriately to each type. The Asheville Quiet Zone project targeting the River District failed because it was too specific, excluding other parts of Asheville and noise issues other than train horns.

And since the California Air Resource Board has indentified motorcycles as a higher source of greenhouse gases than cars, there's all the more reason to beef up EPA standards for motorcycles. Until more stringent regulation is in place, all existing laws should be enforced at motorcycle rallies and elsewhere during routine patrols.

The National Park Service is beginning to pay more attention to motorcycle noise, and cities such as Denver and Chapel Hill are the models for modernized, comprehensive noise mitigation. Rep. Heath Shuler, a motorcycle rider himself, voiced support for curbing Blue Ridge Parkway motorcycle noise more than a year-and-a-half ago, but nothing has been done. Meanwhile, Asheville City Council may soon consider such policies.

It's time to tell our public officials that we want more peace and quiet: We deserve it. The Blue Ridge Parkway's 75th Anniversary Web site (www.blueridgeparkway75.org) solicits input on policy and community issues. This is a great opportunity to ask that noise mitigation and the protection of natural sounds be discussed. Of course, the Parkway is a roadway, but the balance with natural sounds is totally out of whack due to non-EPA-certified motorcycles; consequently, this issue is the top complaint among Parkway visitors.

Remember, this isn't the United States of Loud Bikers! The problem is nonenforcement of existing laws and lack of modern noise-mitigation programs. Expanded government noise-mitigation powers are unfortunately necessary.

Grant Millin lives in Asheville. For further information please visit: www.niceasheville.ning.com/group/lownoisewnc.

SHARE

209 thoughts on “The motorcycle community needs a tuneup

  1. David Shepherd

    When you mentioned the health effects from loud (mostly hoggy Harleys) motorcycles you neglected the deleterious effects on one’s nerves. When one (actually they always come in groups of 2,3,4, or more) is at a light and guns the engine it is all I can do not to revert to football days and tackle the SOB on his machine. I have this fantasy of doing one better than was done in Pee Wee’s Big Adventure and when I knock over one bike with rider it falls into the next and then that one knocks over another and so on and so on. Dominoes but better. I wish I was joking.

  2. Trey

    Angry old man shakes fist!

    Boom cars?

    Well, I’m convinced. I’m finally motivated to install that exhaust “cut-out” on my car… every time I pass a “place of worship” I shall flip the switch, then… BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP…boom..boom..boom.

    I think god likes the sound of my open down-pipe, and my 12″ subs.

  3. Kevin

    At least they pay a hwy tax to be on the road. They also pay a fee for a license plate to operate on the road. As well as stand inline to receive a drivers license. They must pass, a written test as well as a driving test to obtain this privilege. They are more considerate to other vehicles than peddle power.
    You should worry about the Peddle power jerks before you point to any other party that pays taxes and are licensed to be there. You fail to mention that licensed drivers will stop at a red light and at least move over to the side when they have traffic backed up to allow people to get to where they need to go.
    And “NO” I do not own a motorcycle.

  4. Cheshire

    You claim the AMA is “overtly and covertly” responsible for pushing loud pipes, but all I had to do was a quick google search to find their website, then type in “loud” into their internal search engine, found on their homepage.

    “Since its inception in 1924, the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) has maintained a position of strong opposition to excessive motorcycle sound. The AMA has funded information and public relations campaigns in support of quieter motorcycle use, and was the world’s first motorsports sanctioning body to regulate and reduce the sound level of racing vehicles.”
    Taken straight from the American Motorcyclist Association webpage.

    I wonder how many of your other “facts” are either obsolete data, misinformation, or blatently false. I understand that you don’t like the noise pollution. Neither do I, and I’m a motorcyclist. However, there’s no excuse for not doing your homework. You’re not doing anyone any good, and you’re continuing the spread of lies and tall tales in the name of your cause, which makes your cause lose ground when these things are brought to light.

  5. mark

    wow, lets take a look at things that are left out of this article.

    Motorcycles on the highway take up less room, there by making your commute quicker, and since we are worried about everyones aggravation and nerves, wouldn’t you prefer saving time each day on your commute ?

    While we are on the commute factor, I noticed a comment on enforcing laws. You are correct, lets enforce a few laws. We can start with those pesky cell phone laws that people ignore, along with texting.

    Lets also add on studies, since that seems to be brought up. Studies have shown that texting and or talking on a phone is as dangerous if not more than drunk driving, yet, even with laws in place, on a 15 mile commute on the highway, I can count 20 to 30 people on the phone.

    Now this does not add in the people eating, putting on make up, and reading the newspaper.

    Let me add some facts for you.

    5500 motorcyclists die each year
    85% – this is the number of deaths caused by car drivers who violate the bikers right of way

    4675 = number of needless deaths caused by car drivers

    You say you are disturbed in your home and place of worship, well, sorry, but me getting home in one piece is slightly more important to me than the 10 seconds you are disturbed.

    You mentioned noise pollution, I would respectfully bring up the sound of church bells on a sunday morning that I am forced to listen too,yes, you see, not everyone enjoys them.

    You call for more government intervention, how the intervention on people who allow their dogs to bark, thereby disturbing my peace and quiet.

    As you can see it is very easy to throw stones, and I have not even brought up the DVD players in cars that take drivers attention off the road.

    I have a deal for the vehicle drivers, we change a few laws, I give up my pipes.

    1) if you cause an accident by violating a bikers right of way, an immediate 2 year license suspension
    2) if a death occurs because you violated a bikers right of way, 3 year mandatory jail sentence and permanent license loss
    3) using a cell phone while driving, license suspension for 1 year, $3000 fine
    4) accident while on the phone, $10,000 fine 2 year license suspension

    I would also like to see audio video devices removed from vehicles, as I deem them unsafe.

    You made a comment that motorcycles are fine, its the riders that need to obey the laws.

    are you aware that even something as innocent as getting a jumper for your kids birthday, and having them play and yell inside it actually creates a level of noise that violates most ordinances ?

    are you aware that a few cars in a mix, such as a civic,corrola and lexus all driving by at the same time violates californias noise level ?

    what about high school football games with the loud announcers, care to take a guess at the noise level they create ?

    so the question is, is it motorcycle noise that bothers you so as you dont like them ?

    or is it noise in general you want to control ?

    Bottom line, until drivers are held accountable for their actions, I will light up my bike, and have louder pipes to make my ride safer from you.

    drivers have their statement prepared when they cause an accident

    ” They came out of nowhere, I didnt see them ”

    As someone who has attended more services in your place of worship than I care too, for accidents caused by drivers stupidity, I will keep my pipes thank you very much.

    If it saves 1 life a year, it is worth it.

    There is an old saying, people in glass houses should not throw stones, so when the general public is willing to be held accountable for their actions,and are willing to drive in a proper manner, then come speak to me.

    Until you are willking to put your freedoms on the line, and your rights, you really have no argument

  6. cfd007

    Grant, you don’t have a clue. Do some research before you start with the un-truths. Traveling on the road is a right, not a priviledge. The government, state or federal does not grant rights, but if you let them they will take them away.
    As far as noise is concerned, I don’t like it when you’re weed eating at 8 in the morning and please put a muffler on your kids.

  7. Grant Millin

    Well, Cheshire, I’m not sure there are many folks in the area who have researched this issue of noise pollution more than myself (gag!). I have no reason to embellish the facts. Many of the ‘facts’ actually work against the peace and quiet movement in that there are many laws on the books supporting EPA certified exhaust systems, and yet if you cite them officialdom passes the buck. Thus, is it is ‘fact’ that we have a solution in hand… but it is a false, empty solution devoid of action supportable by results.

    Noise bullies therefore can cite the same laws and AMA PR and claim they are not being prosecuted for their noise… therefore what they do is by default ‘legal’… but is it neighborly ethical and socially responsible citizen behavior? The rest of us can say ”No” and place the noise bullies and their friends in high places (many public officials and celebrities drive these obnoxious vehicles) in the same light as jerks and sources of real, measurable public harm.

    I have met with an AMA communications consultant. I asked him to join me in taking action on the issue. He basically said, “The AMA is looking at ways to back up the stated AMA position that non-EPA certified motorcycles need mitigation”. I asked for specifics on that and never heard anything further. So words without action are meaningless PR. It is a form of lying? As Orwell said, “Omission is the greatest lie.”

    Have you ever heard of a politician or other public entity making a promise, or presenting a perception of inferred future action, and then they blow off the issue a minute later?

    No one’s lying to you, Cheshire, and I dislike being addressed as such. There are indeed motorcycles on the road that can put out as high as 100 db (Washington Times) and it is harmful to the rest of us. Noises over 60 db aren’t good for people and the loud bikers on the parkway indeed disturb other natural life as well.

    Finally, a lot of people are interested in a solution to excessive, unnecessary noise pollution. Thus, I think the commentary on noise pollution indeed did some good.

  8. Dennis

    Grant, would you please cite the source for your comment in the article that “…the California Air Resource Board has indentified motorcycles as a higher source of greenhouse gases than cars…”

    It’s my understanding that motorcycles emit less CO2 (greenhouse gas emmissions) than other vehicles because of their greater fuel efficiency.

  9. Grant Millin

    People need to look out for motorcyclists, but BMW bikers have quiet bikes (the same ones used by NCHP) and are probably in the fewest wrecks. People can spread the issue of noise pollution out to too many birds chirping and coughing if they wish… but I suggest starting with the highest forms of noise harm risk and focusing there.

    Correction: The AMA representative I spoke with is not a liar either, he’s just doing his job.

  10. mark

    I’ll take your challange on research….and I have even spent time with a decibel meter checking things.

    where did you find that BMW riders have the least accidents ?

    I would love to see a site that lists it, and hopefully in percentages as BMW’s as far as sales in the U.S. dont have as many on the road.

    you are also focus on bikes only……there are many other noises that put out more than bikes.

    but saying bikes can put out in excess of 100db, and anything above 60 is harmful makes no sense.

    all the examples I previously listed can put out more than 100db

    it looks more like you have a dislike for motorcyclists

  11. Unit

    All motorcyclists would get more respect if they weren’t such nuisances. And yes, I’m talking about the noise.

    Safety is a big problem, and we all need to look out more for motorcyclists (and bicyclists and pedestrians too), but don’t use this as an excuse to be a public nuisance.

    Ride safe, ride quietly, and you will get respect.

  12. Boomer

    I’ve never understood why police don’t enforce existing noise regulations on those Baby-Boomer Mid-life-crises-Harley’s as they try their darndest to get everyone’s attention.

  13. Popsicle

    The last time I looked, the U.S. Constitution still protects the freedom of choice. Motorcyclist in the U.S. have the right to use the roadways in the country, the same as you. “”Bad seed” bikers tout loud pipes as “life-saving” because they are hoping to be heard since they are not seen. The majority of accidents and deaths of those on two wheels (bicycles and motorcycles) are due to the human factor of “INATTENTION”

    All of us who ride a motorcycle know that our # 1 danger is those who don’t see us. Please make an effort to see us. Please teach your children to see us. Instead of sticking in a video for your children to watch or giving them an electronic game to play while riding in a vehicle, play the “I Spy” game to help them become aware of their surroundings. Make a game of it with your spouse. Please do whatever it takes for you and yours to become more aware of what is around you while you are driving. Prepare your children to be aware of their surroundings for when they start driving. Awareness is the first key to learning everything.

    The next man or woman killed on a motorcycle may be the doctor you are depending on to save your life, the teacher that could make a difference in your child’s life, the fireman that was supposed to save your burning house, the attorney that was handling your legal matters, or the preacher that was to be there to turn you from your sins.

    The next driver of the car or truck that doesn’t see us may be you, or a loved one, that has to live with the fact that they killed someone simply because they did not see them.

    Loud pipes are used for a reason. The hope is to up the odds higher than fifty by gaining your attention. Your attention and awareness is what will save our lives!

  14. bobaloo

    Grant, would you please cite the source for your comment in the article that “…the California Air Resource Board has indentified motorcycles as a higher source of greenhouse gases than cars…”

    He won’t because he can’t, much like he won’t admit that motorcycles get much better MPG than a vast majority of cars on the road, nor will he advocate against lawn mowers, leaf blowers and so on and so on.
    Nor will he justify in any way the claim that BMW riders have fewer wrecks than those pesky burly bikers.
    Nor will he back up his claim that loud motorcycles increase the risk of heart disease and cause birth defects(?!?!).

    Just admit that you don’t like bikers and drop the pretense of some grand and righteous crusade.

    Now why don’t you find a cause really worthy of your time, like keeping those damned kids off your grass.

  15. bobaloo

    I’ve never understood why police don’t enforce
    existing noise regulations on those Baby-Boomer Mid-life-crises-Harley’s as they try their darndest to get everyone’s attention.

    We’re trying to get your attention so you don’t run us over, genius.

  16. Viking

    I do not have to provide references for any of the research I used in the commentary. MX commentaries are vetted and I was asked to provide the research already. Take your accuracy concerns to them.

    Better yet, I’d like the noise bullies to provide evidence as to why their noise is good for the rest of us; or failing that how offsetting the public health harm of noise pollution with charity and ‘patriotic’ events that come with loud motorcyclist PR efforts adds up to a rationale for people who like their rights to privacy and personal protection to give up on all that stuff. E.g. why on earth should we say excessive, unnecessary noise is a good thing?

    When I mentioned BMWs, the fact is BMWs are much much quieter than a non-EPA certified motorcycle. No arguments there? Great.

    I also added the qualifier ‘provably’ in my follow up statement …”BMW bikers have quiet bikes (the same ones used by NCHP) and are probably in the fewest wrecks.” I would be interested in the average number of wrecks per 1,000 BMW motorcycles sampled across the nation vs. motorcycles of other makes, and especially those other non-BMW motorcycles with after-market exhaust systems. I have no interest in pursuing that research myself, but I brought up an interesting idea. The reason I said that is that I do not read about BMWs being in wrecks very often.

    What is true is that whether its the DOT or other credible sources, none will support the idea that ‘Loud Pipes Save Lives’. Mentally and emotionally damaged bullies like the sound of their own rotten, obnoxious loudness. Sane adults use actual horns, reflective gear and lights in combination with safe driving to protect themselves on motorcycles, while notably respecting the health and privacy of others. Makes sense?

  17. Boomer

    [b]We’re trying to get your attention so you don’t run us over, genius. [/b]

    Yeah, those guys at the spotlight downtown are really in danger of some crazed pedestrian taking them out. Best to give my grandma a heart attack. Thanks.

  18. Bubbles

    Are you all a bunch of morons or what. If it weren’t for our loud pipes we would be run down on a daily basis by you blind as bats cagers (people in cars/trucks). Our loud pipes are for safety reasons, the slogan “LOUD PIPES SAVE LIVES” is a fact not fiction or just another reason to pay the high costs to have them put on our bikes. And further more why don’t you attack the jackass people who play their stereos with woofers and tweeters so loud that it causes deaf people to cover their ears. You need to wake up and smell the coffee and leave motorcyle riders alone.

  19. Carrie

    Grant Millin: “Think about the noise that penetrates our homes and our places of worship, work and study.”
    “…don’t begin to offset the harm that noise pollution inflicts on children, the elderly and others.”

    While I appreciate that you are passionate and I too get annoyed, what’s a few seconds? Is it really “penetrating” to your life? I assume they aren’t parked outside your house just to annoy you.

    You also lost me when you bring up the children and elderly, as if they’re all suffering from “Motorcycle Abuse”. Move to a mountain where there is no noise and you can be free from all the annoyances of living around other people.

  20. bluegrass_brad

    Actually Bobaloo he is right about the emissions. There have been several studies which confirm that motorcyles emit more greenhouse gas than cars. It has nothing to do with MPG, but has everything to do with the fact that while cars are required to have emmissions controls, motorcycles have widely escaped those requirements. Here is a link to on of many studies done on this issue. There are many more out there.
    http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es0481023?cookieSet=1&journalCode=esthag

  21. mark

    so, just so’s I understand this correct, and the people in the cheap seats understand it correctly.

    we have an article, with no sources listed, yet many things stated as facts.

    viking can do nothing but be insulting, and state he repeats things second hand but does feel a need to make sure they are correct ( btw viking, the national enquirer is probably the paper for you, apparently tom cruise is from mars).

    you want the noise bullies to provide a reason why the charity events and everything are good for the public.

    Probably the fact that bikers raise more money for charaties than runners,walkers, and other organizations combined.

    but hey, why dont you ask someone with diabetes how they feel about the major annual rides to raise money for research…..I am sure they will consider your desire to live in the perfect neighborhood more important

    now, we have changed our tune to you believe BMW motorcycles are safer, because you dont read about many accidents with them.

    so, by that rational, a lambourghini is one of the safest cars on the road…..oh wait, maybe they just dont have that many cars on the road compared to others.

    sorry, but my teachers in school taught me to think.

    you didnt bring up any interesting any idea as you stated, what you did is spout off uneducated, non informed garbage, and since you have no interest in following up any research, shows that you are just spouting off.

    your last paragraph I cant even comment on, mainly because it is ridiculous. I fas you say, the bike noise bothers you that much, then by the same token, you can hear us and notice us, which means it does save lives.

    so lets go back to my original idea, I will lose the pipes, if you are willing to have laws on teh books that if you violate my right of way,causing injury or death, its an automatic prison sentence

    all you have done with this article is mouth off a bunch of useless garbage. I would suggest in the future, you have more respect to what you put your name too.

    and while you are at it, maybe do some research on things you know nothing about

  22. Grant Millin

    An email from an EPA officer on motorcycle carbon and toxic emissions:

    Motorcycles emit the same pollutants as other internal combustion engines, hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, particulates. Also of great concern are toxics that are formed in combustion: Formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene. Other toxics that are present in the fuel but are not combusted: Benzene, toluene, xylene.
    These toxics are present in the hydrocarbon emission which is a category where motorcycle emissions are not good.

    This factsheet although a couple years old has some good information: http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/roadbike/420f03045.pdf It has some good comparisons of motorcycle emissions with cars/SUVs. Maybe this is the kind of info that was used to come up with the 200-300 times more polluting if the emissions controls are taken off a motorcycle. For example the table on page four shows a Yamaha that is about 100 times more polluting than a Subaru even without tampering.

    One other factor that makes motorcycles relatively higher polluting is that for the most part motorcycles carry one passenger, whereas other vehicle can carry 4 or more (although the vehicles with more than one person is usually around 20%)
    All in all it’s hard to make an environmental case for motorcycles.

    Jeffrey Kimes, P.E.
    Mobile Source Enforcement
    Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance, Western Field Office
    US EPA
    1595 Wynkoop St., 8MSU
    Denver, CO 80202
    303/312-6445

    Now if the EPA was only given the mandate to restart the Office of Noise Control and Abatement…

  23. bobaloo

    For example the table on page four shows a Yamaha that is about 100 times more polluting than a Subaru even without tampering.

    Point taken and appreciate the link.

    What you are neglecting to mention (or perhaps you’re just ignorant of this fact) is that the Yamaha listed is a sport bike which does not produce the big rumbling noise that you find to be such a nuisance.

    Again, surely if you’re so terribly concerned with the noise (and emissions) of motorcycles, surely you want to expand this to include the higher (and much more prevalent) noise and emission pollutions of lawnmowers, leaf blowers and weed eaters.

  24. Grant Millin

    Cheshire, bobaloo, my issue is that non-EPA certified motorcycles are both excessively noisy as well as being part of the carbon and other GHG and toxic emissions problem? Have I provided some data indicative of the same to your satisfaction(s)? I think so.

    People are welcome to try to disprove these points with research vs. bitching. Also, the actual causes of motorcycle accidents and credible safety remedies are other interesting points for research-based commentary others are welcome to investigate and write about. Enjoy that.

  25. Piffy!

    [b]Again, surely if you’re so terribly concerned with the noise (and emissions) of motorcycles, surely you want to expand this to include the higher (and much more prevalent) noise and emission pollutions of lawnmowers, leaf blowers and weed eaters. [/b]

    I’d love that.

  26. Viking

    pfff, it’s true that lawnmowers, leaf blowers and weed eaters are sources of noise and GHG emissions. The difference is that people usual don’t modify those devices to be even more deleterious than they come as is out of the factory.

    The aftermarket modification of motorcycles is 1) an absolutely unnecessary source of noise harm and 2) possibly (I have not research #2) increases GHG emissions for motorcycles by wasting fuel in attempts to gain more power.

  27. bobaloo

    my issue is that non-EPA certified motorcycles are both excessively noisy as well as being part of the carbon and other GHG and toxic emissions problem? Have I provided some data indicative of the same to your satisfaction(s)? I think so.

    No, your issue is with noisy motorcycles period. The emissions is just the icing on the cake and something you bring up to feel validated.

    I explained to you that the worst offenders for emissions are the much quieter sport bikes, so no it’s not both, and no you don’t argue against those. You’re willfully ignoring it so you can focus on your main grudge: noisy, burly bikers.

    Also, you’re intentionally not commenting on the 2-cycle motors that are the greatest offenders of noise and emissions so you can, again, focus on the noisy, burly bikers that irk you so greatly.

    So no, it’s not to my satisfaction.

    You ignoring these issues, and your smug attitude, point to nothing less than a personal vendetta against a particular lifestyle and a particular set of people simply because they offend you in some way.
    We aren’t a danger to your health, we don’t infringe upon your rights (any less than anyone else, at least)and the base of your argument is that the noise, which you encounter on probably less than 1% of your 24 hour day, really bugs you.

    Your prejudice is appalling.

  28. Cheshire

    You’re missing my point. My original critical post was pointing out that you’re using old data, claiming misinformation as fact, and mis-stating things to the point of falsehood.

    I posted a quote from the AMA that goes directly against what you said they were doing, proving the falsehood bit. You claimed the AMA SUPPORTED loud pipes, they are AGAINST them.

    You claim that now, in 2009, motorcycles in general are excessively polluting when this issue was addressed and resolved in 2003/2004…you posted the evidence that you’re using obsolete data to support your claims yourself. A little checking into the EPA will tell you that any motorcycle sold or legally imported within the past several years must comply to EPA standards.

    I’m not taking issue with your desire for not having your ears bleed. I’m with the AMA on that point. My personal take: having a distinctive note to your motorcycle’s exhaust that stands out can and does help others notice a motorcyclist’s presence, therefore aiding in avoiding injury. Notice I said DISTINCTIVE, not deafening.

    Like I said, my problem is your material, not your cause…although since a motorcycle has to be user-altered to obtain these high noise levels that bother you, I guess I do have a problem with you trying to outlaw all motorcycles just because of a few people. New laws aren’t going to help here. Rider education, peer pressure from within the riding community, and CARS PAYING ATTENTION is what’s going to make motorcyclists realize it’s safer to go quieter.
    Since you bring up accident causes, the majority of multi-vehicle accidents are caused by cars turning left in front of motorcycles. This is why the “loud pipes” argument persists so strongly.

    Put your money where your mouth is. Watch out for motorcyclists…maybe give a small wave or something when you make eye contact to let them know you spotted them and aren’t going to pull out into their path. If you’re getting ready to turn left across their path after they’ve gone past you, come to a COMPLETE STOP. I was taught to watch tires: much quicker input as to what the car’s doing. If your tires are moving, I don’t trust that you’ve seen me. How about this for a challenge? Join me in being one more person that pays attention when they drive. THAT’S what’s going to make a difference. Actions speak louder than words, after all.

  29. Piffy!

    so, i am making no claims about emissions. But i do get annoyed by those douches on their Yuppie Harleys being obscenely loud. I really see no functional value in that. Does that make me a horrible person who wants to take motorcycles away from everyone?

    Is it really all about making yourself visible to cars? In every instance? It has nothing to do with some wacky fad where guys get to feel all manly with their loud engine?

    Does this really have to be an “us vs them’ argument? Can’t we talk about this without demonizing people who drive ‘cages’ or those horrible ‘peddle pushers’? Is the motorcycle really that above reproach?

  30. bobaloo

    No, pfff, you’re quite right.
    There are obnoxious assholes who buy a $30,000 motorcycle to feel badass and look tough and rev up their motors to be as loud as possible for no real reason than to say “Look at me! I’m a tough guy.”.

    But I have had people tell me that they heard me before they actually saw me. My bike has loud pipes because it makes me more noticeable. I won’t lie and say I don’t like the rumbly sound it makes. But I also don’t sit at a red light and twist the throttle to look like a bad mofo. I, and everyone I ride with, try to give be respectful.

    I certainly admit that there are annoying “bikers” out there who only want attention, but it’s not fair to demonize the entire group because of a few bad apples.

  31. bobaloo

    Why did you delete the comment from the ABATE guy? It even went through moderation before you allowed it to post and there was nothing offensive in it.

  32. Bubbles First

    I don’t know why I can’t get published, I certainly did not say anyting offensive. Just want to know who the other Bubbles is?

  33. Jon Elliston

    bobaloo:

    We closed that comment because it should not have come up in the first place. The comment gave the writer’s home address — there’s no need to do that and we won’t leave up comments that do that.

    The writer is welcome to resubmit his comment without that information.

    Jon Elliston
    Managing Editor

  34. Anthony Jaime

    Mea Culpa! Since it was information your paper had already printed and it was in the public venue already, I saw no harm. My apologies and I will resubmit without the offending lines.

  35. Anthony Jaime

    I just finished reading the article “The Motorcycle Community Needs a Tuneup” by Mr. Grant Millin of Asheville, North Carolina regarding his views on loud motorcycle pipes and their alleged effects on the quality of human life. According to Mr. Millin, loud motorcycle pipes are the culprit responsible for many of society’s ills, not the least of which according to him are “hearing impairment, heart disease, immune system changes, and birth defects.” He further claims to have thoroughly researched the topic but within five minutes of Google searching, it became readily apparent that Mr. Millin likes to flirt with the truth. After all, the best way to tell a real whopper is to put in just enough of the truth to make your story plausible.

    As an individual with a degree in English, I have been trained to research many topics over the years and to support my position with facts when making written assertions. Thus, I decided to do a little research regarding both Mr. Millin and the topic of noise pollution. Mr. Millin would have been well served to do the same, especially since he is a graduate student, but then again, he is studying political science, and has political aspirations of his own since he is running for the Buncombe County School District Board. A 39 year old Democrat, Mr. Millin is a true politician in the making, and obviously well versed in the art of doublespeak and spin. In a recent campaign debate, when asked about the subject of creationism vs. Darwinism, Mr. Millin replied that “Religion needs to stay out of public schools. … Science is science. ” Too bad that he didn’t heed his own advice when writing his article on loud pipes.

    From Mr. Millin’s journalistic style, he comes off as a real life, modern day version of Melvin P. Thorp, the fictionalized do-gooder and crusading reporter from “The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas” with a liberal sprinkling of Bagdad Bob thrown into the mixture. From my perspective, Mr. Millin as a journalist is at best a socialist regressive, harkening back to the days of “yellow journalism” from the McCarthy years. At worst, he is a solipsistic fear merchant and egregious spreader of mendacious prevarications. I am only surprised that he didn’t blame ‘loud pipes’ for the recent outbreak of swine flu or claim that Saddam hid weapons of mass destruction in them.

    When Mr. Millin attempts to spin his side of this issue, he transparently distorts the true facts in an attempt to bolster his case. Worse yet, he engages in presumptions of fallacy, by which he attempts to win readers over to his side through the use of ad hominem attacks upon the biker culture at large and through the misrepresentation of certain facts, whose questionable introduction into his article demonstrate his willingness to say anything in order to make himself believable.

    With his use of the appellation “bad seed bikers” inserted in his article, Mr. Millin is just as guilty of the sin of stereotyping as the Hollywood media he accuses of “acclimatizing the rest of us to these noise polluters who are using our commons. ” Moreover, he accuses the AMA and ABATE organizations nationwide as engaging in “overt and covert persuasion campaigns” giving the impression that we are nothing more than extremist, fringe organizations that are only focused on terrifying innocent citizens everywhere with loud pipes. Nothing could be further from the truth. Maybe he has watched “Reefer Madness”, interspersed with “The Wild One” one too many times. That would explain his use of the term “bad seed bikers.” Which begs the question, what does he consider a “good seed biker?” Obviously, he considers anyone who rides a BMW like the NCHP above reproach. Score one for law and order, since Mr. Millin’s stated point of view is that “motorcycles are fine: their riders simply need to obey the law!” Maybe we should all go out and buy foreign made motorcycles to appease Mr. Millin’s sense of propriety.

    Additionally, in his highly skewed journalistic style, Mr. Millin attempts to marginalize bikers by making claims that aren’t supported by facts and he further attempts to make connections that simply don’t exist. Do we live in a society where there are issues about noise pollution? Absolutely! Are motorcycle pipes the sole contributor to noise pollution? Absolutely NOT but if you listen to Mr. Millin, he would have you believe that to be the case. His claim that the “overt and covert persuasion campaigns, often led by ABATE and the American Motorcyclist Association, don’t begin to offset the harm that noise pollution inflicts on children, the elderly, and others. Documented health effects include everything from hearing impairment to heart disease, immune system changes, and even birth defects.” Now there is a presumption of fallacy that is a slide down the ‘slippery slope with a Red Herring’ if ever I saw one. With that one statement, he actually has the gall to attempt to make ABATE and the AMA responsible for all of the problems caused by noise pollution in this country.

    It takes a real leap of faith here to make those connections solely to motorcycles as the responsible culprit. I have yet to find one documented case of any of these health effects listed that are directly linked to loud motorcycle pipes. Not one single birth defect can be found that is directly attributable to ‘loud pipes.’ Moreover, a visit to the North Carolina State Center for Health Statistics website reveals that not anywhere in their Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) is environmental noise pollution listed, which leads me to conclude that it is not considered to be as significant a problem as Mr. Millin would have others believe. Mr. Millin simply bandied these issues around as a means of instilling fear of motorcyclists and generating support for his axe grinding!

    In fact, according to Wikipedia and several other online articles regarding noise pollution, the primary source of noise pollution is traffic, of which motorcycles only comprise a fraction of the total number of vehicles on the road. Also included in the traffic category are aircraft and rail noise. Additional sources of noise pollution are car alarms, emergency service sirens, office equipment, factory machinery, construction work, groundskeeping equipment, barking dogs, appliances, power tools, lighting hum, audio entertainment systems, loudspeakers, and noisy people. Perhaps we should just muzzle the dogs and our noisy neighbors, and roll back a couple of hundred years of technological progress to serve Mr. Millin’s need for quiet. A simpler solution would be a set of earplugs readily available in most hardware stores.

    Another aspect of this issue is duration of the noise. According to most of the articles I reviewed, the negative health effects are the result of chronic, long-term exposure to loud noise. Are we to believe that Mr. Millin is constantly assaulted by loud motorcycles? He would almost have to live right next door to a motorcycle shop or biker hang out for that to be the case, in which case it was a poor choice made on his part. Poor urban planning is often cited as a factor in environmental noise pollution. Since a motorcycle is generally in motion, the duration of noise produced by a motorcycle going by Mr. Millin’s residence could not last long enough to produce the chronic effects he claims motorcycles are responsible for. Occupational safety organizations recommend that the maximum exposure to noise be limited to 40 hours per week at 85 to 90 dB(A). Mr. Millin neglected to inform us how often he is annoyed by ‘loud pipes’ or how long each incident lasts but somehow I suspect that his issues don’t extend to 40 hours of exposure a week. It therefore makes the generalities he cites quite suspect and furthermore, it makes Mr. Millin out to be someone with an agenda based upon his personal dislikes rather than actual facts. Sounds like he wants to give the biker community a “Hard Candy Christmas!”

    And yes, I will admit that there are occasions when some inconsiderate biker will cause a problem revving up his engine and frapping the pipes but I have to believe that is the exception and not the rule. Most bikers I know are some of the most giving, respectful, and polite people I know, although there are some in any crowd who cause problems. Mr. Millin’s published bio for his school board bid states he is a photographer. Should we ban all cameras because there are a lot of obnoxious paparazzi running around trying to get shots of celebrities, the pursuit of which have led to serious health risks for many of those involved. The most infamous of which would be the tragic accident that took the life of Princess Diana. Banning cameras on those grounds would be the same kind of restrictive thinking and discriminatory attitude being displayed towards motorcyclists in general by Mr. Millin.

    Another aspect not considered by Mr. Millin is the financial devastation such enforcement would wreak upon an American economy already reeling from the severe recession we are in. The motorcycle industry is suffering enough without adding to its woes by trying to eliminate a major market for aftermarket suppliers. Supply and demand being two of the primary forces at work in any capitalistic society, and the last time I checked, this was America and we are a capitalistic society. As Americans, it is high time we said NO to all of the snivelers and chronic complainers who want to restrict our freedoms of choice and lifestyle. We have far too many laws that have been passed restricting our freedoms and civil liberties as a result of all the Grant Millins of this world who have an axe to grind!

    The real conundrum here however is posed by Mr. Millin’s assertion that we need more government in our lives when in fact we need less governmental interference in our lives. The version of truth he espouses is that his right to enjoy a life free from hearing motorcycle exhaust takes priority over our right to produce it, and he wants new enforcement abilities to insure that we, the motorcycling community are brought into strict compliance with his narrowly focused world view. He is also one of those folks who just doesn’t get it when it comes to the concept of the pursuit of happiness in this nation. Today he wants to impose his narrow minded will upon the motorcycling community. Who will he go after tomorrow? It is too bad that people like Mr. Millin are so caught up in their own sense of self-righteous indignation that they are willing to employ mendacity to trample on the rights of others to see their own narrow ends served.

    Anthony Jaime
    State Run Chairman
    ABATE of California

  36. Piffy!

    [b]I certainly admit that there are annoying “bikers” out there who only want attention, but it’s not fair to demonize the entire group because of a few bad apples. [/b]

    Now, this obviously isnt as personal for me as it is for you, but the column above doesnt seem to demonize ALL bikers, at least the way i read it. I read it as an attempt to get the ‘bike community’ to say what you just did.

    I’ve never understood why the police dont enforce noise ordinances on those guys as they roll through town.

    as for the notion that wanting exiting rules to be enforced is some kind of slippery slope to facsim, as expressed in the comment above mine–puhlease, dude. How about you recognize that a lot of the population doesnt want to listen to yuppie a$$holes on their toy harleys. this isnt about civil rights. it’s about the community listening to each other. And it’s hard to hear with all [b]your[/b] self-righteous noise about how people are tryin to limit your rights to be a loudasshole.

  37. Anthony Jaime

    Well Mr. pfff, if you had read and understood my words correctly, you would have understood the slippery slope I was referring to was Mr. Millin’s attempt to lay blame for a series of negative health effects on loud pipes, along with ABATE and the AMA, where there is not one single shred of evidence to corroborate such a statement. If you go back and read, and I am assuming that you did read this for yourself, you cannot find the word fascism anywhere in my comments. Moreover, the manner in which he decended that slope of presumptive fallacy could also be construed as a ‘Red Herring” because he attempts to distract the reader’s attention from the actual facts with a glaring piece of misinformation that he uses to sensationalize his point. Since negative health effects from environmental noise pollution are acquired over a long period of time, it is quite obvious that the brief duration of a motorcycle’s passage do not fit the parameters necessary to produce those negative health effects listed by Mr. Millin. For him to list them as if it were the gospel truth is both treading down a slippery slope as well as being a Red Herring! Additionally, he specifically listed children, the elderly, and others. The biggest danger to children’s hearing today comes in the form of those cute little iPod devices but Mr. Millin neglected to mention that fact because he wants you to think loud pipes are more dangerous to children’s health. Moreover, if you had really bothered to read my comments, you would have come to the realization that environmental noise pollution comes in many forms. Are you as upset with trains passing through your community or diesel trucks or jet aircraft, all of which contribute as much if not more noise pollution than motorcycles? Or do you just want to single out motorcyclists, especially those who have enough affluence to purchase a Harley-Davidson, for the target of your personal rancor? And again, there are far more serious problems in our society to deal with such as moronic drivers who text on their cells phones while driving or drive distracted in any other number of ways that are dangerous to others, especially those of us riding motorcycles. Lastly, I would like to point out that reverting to the use of profanity to make a point is the last refuge of the incompetent.

  38. bobaloo

    pfff, I don’t know if we’re reading the same article, but Millin doesn’t single out some guy sitting at a red light laying on the throttle. He talks about all loud pipes and wanting them all done away with.
    Even if he were, he’s still singling out one particular type of bike and one particular type of individual. He still hasn’t addressed the sport bike being worse on emissions. I know this isn’t the issue with you, but it points to his prejudice.

  39. Viking

    To the Noise Bullies:

    Just so people know, for some ABATE stands for American Bikers Aiming Toward Education, but for other ABATE groups it means “A Brotherhood Against Totalitarian Enactments”. The second identifier sounds crazy and like some kind of domestic terror organization.

    The health effects I refer to, associated with established stress and hearing science covered in the Washington Times, NY Times, and in various journal articles, are real. Many of the contra arguments I see in this thread attempt question my command of science. I just reported and added my reflections.

    The argument that loud bikers and other loud vehicles pass by briefly and thus are safe for our hearing and REDUCE stress is an implausible one. In science, one analytical concept is that of CUMULATIVE EFFECT. Look it up. The NY Times indeed covered misused electronic devices with earphones as being a health hazard. The lack of corollary with my noise trespassing position and what noise bullies usually seem to posit is that people CHOOSE to buy those iPods for their kids and themselves. Loud vehicles represent involuntary, imposed and unsought health harms to its victims, even those who don’t know better. The remedy of “ear earplugs” is a childish, insulting, socially irresponsible bully tactic.

    I’d like the noise bullies to provide evidence as to why their mindless, unnecessary noise is good for the rest of us; or failing that how offsetting the public health harm of noise pollution with charity and ‘patriotic’ events that come with loud motorcyclist PR efforts adds up to a rationale for people who like their rights to privacy and personal protection to give up on all that stuff. E.g. why on earth should we say excessive, unnecessary noise is a good thing?

    I do not have to provide references for any of the research I used in the commentary. MX commentaries are vetted and I was asked to provide the research already. Take your accuracy concerns to them.

    The reason, if you folks must know, for my focus on non-EPA certified motorcycles is that they are prominent in the region. You all seem to cry out for negative attention and behavior modification. I wrote about cars, and loud pick-up trucks were mentioned, as in a similar recent Asheville Citizen-Times commentary, but MX cut that part (they edit rather poorly).

    Be real and criticize the science, increasingly law enforcement crackdowns and growing public rejection associated with vehicle noise… and more and more focused on motorcycles.

    I am also disturbed by motorcycle safety assumptions many promote erroneously, mainly the “Loud Pipes Saves Lives” argument, and hope that motorcycle safety stats will improve with more scrutiny of the motorcycle community… that seems to be asking for that analysis.

    If a good portion of motorcycle wrecks involve cars turning in FRONT of bikers… then how can using a illegal muffler used as a constantly turned on horn make a bit of difference? Where’s the research supporting that particularity empty and dangerous notion? So why not ban the after-market modification of ALL vehicle exhaust systems, since ALL are simply about the perverse enjoyment of some to bully others needlessly?

    Finally, I am never writing about this subject ever again in public forums. ABATE uses terroristic tactics against those who speak out on these matters and its up to others to do something about this. Mr. Jamie’s previous behavior was not the only thing they’ve thrown at me.

    Mostly it’s up to government to enforce our existing laws and modernize noise mitigation programs as needed. We need protection from these thug nuisances.

    So feel free to spend ya’lls time nitpicking this to… the cat’s already out of the bag and now more people in this region will be asking questions about the noise pollution status quo.

    If you all want to pick on me specifically, I can just repost this same text over and over and over again while the public and their representatives in government (at least the decent ones) come down on your noise. Otherwise I’m done.

    Intelligent noise advocates will somehow spell out why a right to peace and quiet, especially in our homes and places of worship, is wrong; how the DOT has certified that straight pipes are a legitimate safety measure; and why you all should be allowed to make your foolish noise unmitigated by God or anyone else.

    Cheers,

    Grant

  40. Stephen Chetsas

    A few counter-arguments I’d like to make in reference to Grant Millin’s article in the Commentary section of last week’s paper.

    One very important reason that many motorcyclists prefer to have ‘loud pipes’ is that they just might save the motorcyclist’s life. Yes, I believe there is

    truth to the ‘Loud Pipes Save Lives’ saying. It is a fact that most motorcycle accidents are caused by the motorcyclist being hit by the car (normally at an

    intesection) with the driver of the car being at fault.

    The most common excuse uttered from the non-yielding driver of the car is that “I could not see them.” Our headlights on, reflective vests and all , they

    just don’t see us. My wife and I have the broken bones to prove it. So maybe the noise we produce really could give us riders a fighting chance to enjoy

    the freedom of riding without having to sustain life threatening injuries.

    With regards to ABATE, I’m a past member and am not speaking in any official capacity on their behalf, but I must say that when I was with them in the 80′s,

    I recall the money we raised went to two things. We donated lots of money to various charities. We also raised money to help educate drivers to “start

    seeing motorcyclists.” The idea was instead of cramming more legislation down our throats (ie: forcing bikers to carry catstrophic insurance, etc) focus on

    the real source of the problem and educate those who keep running us down. It’s a fine organization in my opinion.

    Speaking of stricter enforcement of legislation, do we really want our police spending so much of their time mega-enforcing noise ordinances? I would rather

    have them out there keeping theives from prowling around my house, or keeping those that would do harm to our children out of the parks, etc. Not only that,

    stricter enforcement would ultimately lead to Asheville becoming known as a biker-unfriendly town. I want this town to be known for all the cool stuff which

    it has to offer, not as being against such a free spirited thing as motorcycling. Additionally, the business’ would be impacted negatively. Many bikers

    nowadays have money and are eager to enjoy themselves in our wonderful restaurants and shops upon arrival.

    As far as the documented health effects Mr Millin talks about… is this kind of a stretch? I mean, what kind of noise conditions did the unborn child have

    to be exposed to, to cause birth defects? Maybe riding on the back of a bike with drag pipes everyday while pregnant could pose a problem, but it seems hard

    to believe an occasional bike going past your house causes such a thing.

    At any given time that I’m riding, I am usually surrounded by 20 cars or so, rarely by other bikes. There aren’t THAT many of us. We generally only

    populate the roads in the warm months. So I guess what I’m really saying is, are you overly extreme in your anti-noise campaign? Are you blowing things out

    of proportion and maybe just a little too eager to get ‘the man’ overly involved in yet another facet of our lives? It seems that way to me.

  41. concernedcitizen

    All these arguments attempting to justify loud
    pipes is irrelevant to the problem. Loud exhaust
    systems are unnecessary,disturb the peace, and are
    illegal. People here in western NC are tired of
    this nonsense. They want the laws to be enforced.
    There are allot of comments here from those citizens
    and bikers. I’d like to hear from law enforcement
    and the city officials. I have a question for them.
    Why is this problem of illegally loud motorcycles
    allowed to go on and on? Why aren’t you enforcing the law?

  42. Viking

    Stephen and others, feel free to ignore the text I repost over and over again.

    Your (the Noise Bullies) problem is that it’s not just me… it’s the Blue Ridge Parkway, it’s Forsythe County, it’s Denver, Boston, the EU, and dozens of smaller cities and towns across the nation that are focusing on excessively loud vehicles of all types, makes and models.

    Otherwise, feel free to live in your self-centered worlds and force us to spend resources modifying your behaviors… that you all will contribute to in the form of traffic ticket fines.

  43. Ambushrox

    Well , it seems that our loud pipes seem to be working. With all this back and forth on the issue and all the people complaining about the ” Evil – Do’er Bad Seed Loud Pipe Biker” I will feel ALOT safer now when riding because now I know my LOUD pipes piss you off and you will KNOW I am there and you WILL see me and therefore I have a MUCH better chance of living then of dying while riding. I dont care if you are Mad or happy about it, I just want you to SEE ME!!!

  44. Viking

    We understand noise bullies don’t care how others feel, Ambushrox. It’s called sociopathic behavior.

    How does sight related to obnoxious noises? If your pipes are pointing backwards–and that portion of motorcycle accidents that are the fault of other vehicles happen too fast for anyone to identify where the noise is coming from (particularly since loud vehicles are coming at us all the time from various directions), and seem to rarely involve rear-end collisions to the biker–than isn’t this “Loud Pipes Saves Lives” nothing more than a dangerous urban myth that hides the true causes of motorcycle accidents? Think about it for minute before responding.

    No credible agency, scientific study or political body supports LPSL. Does anyone wonder why the only people who promote LPSV are the noise bullies? It’s doubtful they believe its… just a part of their aggressive, sociopathic patterns.

    The realities of motorcycle accidents should be of interest?

  45. Just Me

    I know of and see a lot of motorist who drive better on motorcycles then I see most cars/commuters in daily traffic. But having to make a fairly regular drive out to Hot Springs; the only time I can think of hearing a car or motorcycle before I see it is when it is exceeding the speed limit. And often as it gears up to get around me illegally because the driver cannot bear to go a mere 5 miles over the speed limit. I am not sure how this is suppsed to improve my driving? Especially since sometimes it proves more of a distraction and WTF moment. And, no I would not be meandering between lanes on a cell phone. Just driving.

    So, where are those hovercrafts and personal jet packs ‘they’ promised us by now?

  46. chops

    I’m with Cletus on this one…

    I think it’d be fun to see a monster truck on the road every once in a while. At least they’re interesting to look at. It beats those boring fire trucks, with all their noise.

    Wait a minute, I just got an idea. Mandatory sirens for all motorbikes (so people will see them). While we’re at it – let’s get ‘em for bicycles, too. And pedestrians! Anything less visible that a firetruck deserves it!!

  47. bobaloo

    Go ahead and bitch about it all you want. If they make my pipes illegal I’ll just blast the ridiculously loud airhorn (way, way louder and shriller than the pipes) I just installed every time I pass a car or come to an intersection.

    Or pass a church.

  48. Anthony Jaime

    Well, once again Mr. Millin or Viking or whatever persona you’re affecting today, you are once again running true to form with misrepresentations and lack of qualified research. In most states, the acronym ABATE stands for an American Brotherhood Aimed Toward Education, and our focus is to “Educate, Not Legislate.” There are a few states that do use the American Brotherhood Against Totalitarian Enactments but by and large, most state ABATE organizations conform to the former. Moreover, state ABATE organizations are firmly committed to working within the political process, have strong Political Action Committees and either pursue or oppose legislation through our lobbying efforts in state legislatures nationwide. Every ABATE meeting I have ever attended has begun with a presentation of the American flag and a simple recitation of The Pledge of Allegiance. Your efforts to construe ABATE organizations as “domestic terror organizations” are malicious, defamatory and nothing short of attempted organizational character assassination.

    Additionally, while I can’t speak for other state ABATE organizations, I can provide the following information regarding ABATE of California. ABATE of California is a motorcyclists’ rights organization dedicated to preserving individual freedom and promoting safety. We fully support rider training, safety and educational programs. Our members also raise funds for the less fortunate, through charity runs and benefits. We encourage our members to become active in their local communities. ABATE works to protect the rights of all motorcyclists through direct involvement in the political process. We have a full time paid lobbyist on staff and most of our members stay abreast of current events within our field of concern.

    Since joining ABATE seven years ago and becoming a charter member of the local of which I am a member, I have been one of the primary individuals responsible for adopting four to five families in our community every year during the holiday season and making sure that they have food baskets at both Thanksgiving and Christmas, along with Christmas gifts for their children. I have also traveled to Sacramento many times to attend bill hearings and meet with my legislators. How you can construe such activities as being bullying, thuggish, or domestic terrorism is just as far a stretch as many of the misrepresentations in your original article. Like a naughty child who has been caught red-handed, you attempt to shift the blame from own egregious mistakes and place it on others simply because they have a fundamentally differing perspective. Just as you blamed the newspaper for your lack of preparation and writing skill, you want to lay find fault and blame with others who do not ascribe to your extremely limited and ego-centric views.

    Sorry if it offends you Mr. Millin that we do not conform to your solipsistic world view. Many of my peers would categorize you as an eco-terrorist and bleeding heart liberal but my personal opinion is that you are just one more misguided crusader rabbit. I am further sorry that you find my suggestion of earplugs so distasteful but as a thirty-year member of the Electrical Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, (there’s that word brotherhood again, hope we aren’t labeled as domestic terrorists also) I, along with many of my co-workers have used earplugs on many occasions to mitigate ‘real noise pollution’ of sustained duration such as welding machines, jack hammers, cranes, grinders, powder actuated tools, hammer drills, and high pressure air, not too mention the background noise at many of the facilities we perform work in. It is a low cost, sensible alternative that many people who routinely deal with true noise pollution put to good use on a daily basis. Obviously that fact escaped your notice also or perhaps you would just prefer to overlook it altogether.

    Another fact that seems to escape your notice is that you claim horns are a safety device to alert others to motorcyclist’s presence so in reality you are admitting that sound is a way getting other driver’s attention. You are engaging in doublespeak on this issue and need to make up your mind which side of the fence you are going to be on. Unfortunately, for many riders by the time they hit the horn button it is too late. I’ll stand by the assertion that loud pipes do save lives and alert inattentive drivers to the fact that they are sharing the road with motorcyclists.

    Furthermore, as a former Marine who has heard many loud weapons fired, I would like to add that there is another overlooked aspect of noise pollution. The discharge of firearms can cause severe hearing damage if one is not properly protected but that is no reason to try and roll back our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. Firing ranges throughout the military and civilian life advocate the use of ear protection because weapons are some of the most offending culprits when it comes to noise pollution. Earplugs and headsets are the order of the day in such environments, and it is only common sense. I merely suggest such options because it is far simpler and far most cost effective than the alternatives you propose for what seems to be a localized and fairly personal problem.

    Nobody is trying to deny you anything in your own home or place of worship but I have a hard time finding that you experience the amount of environmental noise pollution as a result of motorcycle exhaust in those places to warrant the emphasis you have placed on restricting our freedoms. There are so many aspects of environmental noise pollution that you have ignored in your original article as to make the entire piece suspect and expose your own bias and prejudice, especially since you have to resort to name calling. And, as I previously commented to another poster in this thread, resorting to profanity or name-calling is the last refuge of the incompetent. Exercising my First Amendment rights of free speech and vigorous debate can hardly be construed as a terrorist act and you are sadly mistaken if you feel ABATE members and organizations are domestic terrorists. In fact, a large majority of us are veterans of the United States military who have born the cost of freedom and are tired of seeing our freedoms and civil liberties usurped or altogether trampled upon by misguided individuals with dubious intentions that have not.

    In closing, since in a previous reply you invoked the deity in a proselytizing manner, I would add that one place where our loud pipes are welcome is at the funeral services of American servicemen killed in action in Iraq and Afghanistan, especially when the wackos from Fred Phelps Westboro Baptist Church show up to disrupt and protest the funerals of these brave young men who have given the ultimate sacrifice. I have personally attended many services for these brave young men and it has been an honor to give them a ‘Rolling Thunder’ escort home to their final resting place. The Patriot Guard and the families we have protected from these sick religious zealots who would dishonor America’s dead heroes certainly know the value of loud pipes. I certainly hope you don’t oppose loud pipes on the basis of being associated with that church.

  49. “Go ahead and bitch about it all you want. If they make my pipes illegal I’ll just blast the ridiculously loud airhorn (way, way louder and shriller than the pipes) I just installed every time I pass a car or come to an intersection.”

    The air horn will also be illegal and just as dick like.

  50. chops

    If I were really concerned with safety, I wouldn’t choose to ride a motorcycle.

    Anyway, why should bikers have all the fun, while others have to deal with noise and awareness. (no fair!)

    What if I wanted to ride a ten foot tall unicycle, would it be fair for me to expect everyone to put pads on the roof of their cars? …to make it safer for ME?

    I would be essentially asking others to compensate for my choice to take a risk.

  51. Mister Blister

    You know MOUNTAIN EXPRESS you should really limit the word count people are allowed here. I really doubt anyone is going to read an 800 word tirade filled with misspellings and grammatical errors.

  52. Whoopee

    Seems like my first request was ignored. Bobaloo do you have any research that shows that sport bikes have higher emissions levels as you so claim?

  53. bobaloo

    Oh, and you weren’t ignored Whoopee, you just didn’t say “Hey bobaloo…”

    Blister: This isn’t twitter. If you’re attention span can’t handle it, ignore it.

    JMAC, so you want to ban the horns too? How about the lights on the motorcycles too? Does the glare during the day bother you as well?

  54. bobaloo

    I’d like to hear from law enforcement
    and the city officials. I have a question for them.
    Why is this problem of illegally loud motorcycles
    allowed to go on and on? Why aren’t you enforcing the law?

    Whoops, missed answering this one since our fine LEO’s haven’t chimed in.

    It’s because they’re on our side. It’s quite simple.

    It’s doubtful they believe its… just a part of their aggressive, sociopathic patterns.

    Y’know Viking, I couldn’t tell if you were being satirical initially mainly because you claimed MX posts were “vetted” thus you didn’t need to back up any claims you made (by the way, uh, no MX comments are not vetted, only checked for vulgarity, etc).
    Then you seemed quite serious until I realized you don’t actually know what “sociopath” means.
    Having a difference of opinion doesn’t make me a sociopath.
    I, and a vast majority of bikers with loud pipes, DO care how you feel which is why we don’t sit next to your car at a red light and lay on the throttle; which is why we don’t gun it through downtown.
    Attempting to punish the entirety of the biking community because of a few bad seeds fits the definition of stereotyping though (and tyranny, incidentally).

  55. “JMAC, so you want to ban the horns too? How about the lights on the motorcycles too? Does the glare during the day bother you as well?”

    If the horns serve as a means to be a dick then yes.
    no the lights make sense it actually increases the visibility, by the way loud pipes are sound and inherently do not increase visibility, any argument that obnoxious pipes increase safety for the motorcycle rider is silly. I really can not believe that any intelligent motorcycle enthusiast could convince themselves that insanely loud pipes are anything but a public nuisance.

  56. Grant Millin

    Anthony, ABATE, Noise Bullies, Et Al,

    What you’re saying is gibberish… and with that and because of that, those who don’t agree with your ideals (if they can be described as such) understand where your minds and ethics reside. It is perfectly clear, but continue to make your disrespectful, illogical, unneighborly and unethical points… for as long as you wish.

    We don’t have to communicate and do dialogues. We choose to ignore you and make contact with our elected officials, making use of the 1st and 10th Amendments… for once in the favor of reasonable community expectations of peace and quiet.

    Later,

    Grant

  57. Mark

    The loud Bikers are attacking Mr.Millin and feeling threatened that he is trying to make their loud pipes illegal. I’ve got news for them. Their illegally loud pipes are already illegal. Mr. Millin, like many citizens of WNC,just want the laws enforced. It is obvious that they have not been to any significant degree.

    The police must to learn how to identify illegal motorcycle exhaust systems. It isn’t that difficult,and you do not need special equipment other than an inspection mirror and a little bit of knowledge. As part of their training they should visit a motorcycle dealership and have an untampered with motorcycle,fresh from the factory,demonstrated to them. After hearing what a factory exhaust sounds like,it will be easier for them to spot loud motorcycles. Even the Harleys,notorious for their illegally loud exhaust systems due to tampering by their owners,are reasonably quiet when they are equipped with their EPA compliant exhaust system. The loud Bikers swap them out for louder after market motorcycle exhaust systems. This is illegal by Federal and State law. The loud Bikers have made it clear that they don’t give a damn about the law.

    No after market motorcycle exhaust systems are EPA compliant. Their manufactures,like the loud Bikers,ignore the law and do not bother to have their exhaust systems EPA certified. They make them as loud as they want and take advantage of the fact that mufflers for closed course competition use only,do not have to be EPA certified and have no noise emission standard to meet. Federal law does,however,require them to be labeled as “for closed course competition use only”. Their use on street bikes is prohibited. For example,none of the Vance & Heinze,CobraUSA and SuperTrapp,to name a few,exhaust systems marketed to motorcycle owners,are EPA compliant. None of these exhausts are of the type installed at the time of manufacture(EPA compliant)as required by North Carolina motor vehicle statute 20-128. When a police officer encounters a loud motorcycle,all he has to do is inspect the exhaust system visually. He knows that the exhaust system is in violation of 20-128 if he sees the after market logos,such as the ones mentioned earlier, or if he sees,”for closed course competition use only”,stamped on the muffler,or if he does not find the EPA label of compliance required for street motorcycles,or if he sees,”for export only” stamped into the muffler.

    The police need to do their homework and get on the ball. You need to pressure your city and county officials to direct the police department to do their job. The loud Bikers need to get rid of their illegal loud pipes and comply with the law for a change. They are not going to do that without being compelled to. There is a serious need for change here. If you continue to take no action there will be no change,but there will be allot of noise. Attend your city council meetings and bring up the issue. Educate them and the police on the issue and the solutions. Keep after them till they get the message and take action.

  58. Jennifer

    LOUD PIPES SAVES LIVES….end of story…for all the drivers who don’t abide by the law and take the time to look twice for caution, they can at least hear them. A life is worth more then your 10 seconds of your inconvienence.

  59. Viking

    Well said, Mark.

    The public representation process is started, but unfortunately the City of Asheville is stonewalling right now. They need to be “compelled” by the public. Not bringing it up during an election might work for some, and noise mitigation may not fit into politicians carefully crafted agendas… but this certainly seems like something on the agendas’ of average citizens who would like reasonable access to more peace and quiet in their homes, parks, and places of worship, work and study.

  60. “LOUD PIPES SAVES LIVES….end of story” of fabricated story maybe.

    There are no hard facts that loud pipes increase motorcycle safety, non!

    The “Loud Pipe saves lives” slogan is heavily supported by the people who make loud pipes and the people who have loud pipes. The aftermarket pipe manufacturers surely could do a survey of motorcycle accidents and quantify the numbers of accident bikes with loud pipes and without loud pipes, excluding of course motorcycles that caused the accident. If those numbers show a significant increase in safety then I personally will back the “Loud Pipe Save Lives” and work to change existing noise laws. The burden of proof is on the “Loud Pipe” crew.

  61. bobaloo

    We don’t have to communicate and do dialogues. We choose to ignore you and make contact with our elected officials, making use of the 1st and 10th Amendments… for once in the favor of reasonable community expectations of peace and quiet.

    Nice. The comment equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying “nyah nyah I can’t hear you!”.

    Here’s a clue: If you insist on generalizing and stereotyping a group of people because you don’t feel we’re being “neighborly”, then proceed to get pissy because we want you to back up absurd claims such as “loud exhaust causes birth defects and heart disease” while throwing in a red herring about greenhouse gases, all without honestly responding to anything then expect a little heat.

    As to the rest of you, I’ve tried to explain that a great majority of us don’t blast through residential areas and are actually very courteous and charitable but you don’t seem to care a bit. You just lump us all in one big shit pile of dicks.
    Sorry you feel that way, but it’s not true.

  62. Viking

    bobaloo, it’s already been vetted: meaning stress can result in any number of side effects. Research what stress does to people before saying otherwise! If noisemakers can prove noise pollution is a health benefit… well that would be just dandy!

    If a noisemaker waves hello while polluting the environment (anywhere others can hear); passes out cheap toys to kids in need of universal healthcare, quality diets, better public schools… and believe it or not, sanctuaries from stress inducers… then they are still noise polluters. There is no offset.

    No one is complaining about any vehicle owner, of any type vehicle, who is compliant with Federal, state and municipal (all largely unenforced in NC) noise mitigation laws. So mindless prejudice is not in play. So as you all curse the facts, keep all that in mind as you all mull over things.

  63. JWTJr

    Let’s assume that loud pipes save lives for a minute. Many could be half as loud and achieve the same thing.

  64. QuietRide

    Jennifer => “LOUD PIPES SAVES LIVES….end of story”

    If you want to believe that “pipe dream” go ahead. I ride and I know that the only time your pipes will be loud enough to be heard over other driver’s closed windows, air conditioning, radio blaring, kids screaming, cell phone to their ear, etc. is when you are “getting on it” and accelerating.

    If we don’t come back to reality and regulate ourselves we can count on the government to do it for us. And we know they always go for the minimum regulations when they make new laws, right? Not!

  65. JWTJr

    You speak the truth QuietRide. Regulate yourself before someone does it for/to you.

    From a former rice burner rider.

  66. bobaloo

    passes out cheap toys to kids in need of universal healthcare, quality diets, better public schools

    How very true. They don’t really need any “cheap toys” for Christmas.
    For poverty stricken children I’m sure loud motorcycles are high on their list of things that worry them.

  67. bobaloo

    Incidentally, the Cops for Kids Toy Run is this Saturday in Weaverville. Entry fee is $10 or a new unwrapped toy valued at $10 or more.
    All toys and donations go to the “Cops for Kids” Toyr Drive, which is used to help Weaverville/North Buncombe children and families.

    More info here:
    http://www.myweaverville.com/copsforkids/

  68. chops

    COPS for kids.

    This biking event is organized by the POLICE.

    No wonder there’s no law enforcement for loud pipes!!!

  69. Mark

    Chops,
    The reason they pass inspection is that they are
    not adequately inspected. Exhaust systems for all
    vehicles are only supposedly inspected for exhaust
    leaks and obvious signs of wear such as rusted holes and missing fasteners. They pay no attention to noise emissions. Next time you take your car for inspection see if the inspector even looks at your muffler. Or better yet, ask him if your muffler checked out all right. You’ll probably get a funny look from him but that’s about all. The state DMV laws and inspection procedures need to be beefed up.
    They are not doing the job when it comes to identifying and removing loud exhaust systems from our roads. For motorcycles they need to check for the EPA label of compliance and for signs of tapering. They could augment this with
    sound meter tests but are not likely to want to spend the money for the expensive equipment.
    It boils down to the state and the police not doing their job to get this problem under control. This will not change unless we citizens keep the pressure on them to get on the ball. Keep pressuring them.

  70. Carrie

    To all long posters with “the rules” – In very loud, bike language, I say… BLAHHHH!!! BLAHHHHHH!!! Hope I didn’t annoy you:) Let law enforcement do IMPORTANT things rather than deal with “noise”.

  71. Citizen 10

    So many dumb biker comments, does anyone have a clue? Let’s take Carrie’s comment – law enforcement pulls people over for speeding, yet they should ignore motorcycling scofflaws who intrude on the lives of many people inside their homes each time they ride? Maybe Carrie should take some time to read the many articles linking noise to very real harmful effects to people. Probably she doesn’t experience this noise like many other do, so she can’t relate to what a constant issue it is for many of us.

    Then you have these idiots shouting the misinformed meaningless phrase “loud pipes save lives” yet this is never supported by motorcycling experts (instructors). There are many articles that state very clearly why loud does not equal save for anyone on the road, and of course these selfish motorcyclists don’t consider for 1 second how their noise disturbs other people who presumably have “rights” to not hear motorcycle noise in their homes over any activity.

    Here is one of many such articles written by a motorcycle instructor: http://intrepidcommuter.blogspot.com/2009/09/loud-pipes.html

    One of the most idiotic comments made here is that motorcyclists have the “right” to make noise. What a joke. No one has a “right” to operate any motor vehicle. Operating any motor vehicles is a privilege that is gained by passing certain tests and making sure that your vehicle is properly equipped including legal mufflers.

    Motorcycles emit more air pollution, far far more air pollution than any automobile. I put the number at 80X more pollutants than an automobile, others put the number at 200X. Just do a search on the subject and look at the publications by the LA Times and California Air Resources Board.

    One of the best written and comprehensive explanations of Loud Motorcycles, written by a motorcycle mechanic and lawyer, can be found at http://www.noiseoff.org

    Loud Pipes Destroy Lives and Loud Pipes Violate Rights!

  72. Carrie

    Citizen 10: “So many dumb biker comments, does anyone have a clue? Let’s take Carrie’s comment – law enforcement pulls people over for speeding, yet they should ignore motorcycling scofflaws who intrude on the lives of many people inside their homes each time they ride? Maybe Carrie should take some time to read the many articles linking noise to very real harmful effects to people. Probably she doesn’t experience this noise like many other do, so she can’t relate to what a constant issue it is for many of us.”

    People ride their bikes inside your home? Well, you should for sure call law enforcement!! Unless they’re BMW’s. I heard they’re OK.

    I don’t experience the noise of cycles every day.. a few times a week, maybe. I do, however, live downtown and experience the sound of the fire truck going past, siren blaring once a night (2 on weekends). Maybe I should file some sort of noise complaint and ask them to keep it down so I’m not upset. can I get the number where to send that?

  73. Citizen 10

    I and many others experience the noise of illegally equipped motorcycles very often, inside our homes, in my case despite being 200ft. from the road in a well insulated home. On a warm Saturday or Sunday afternoon we can hear over 100 motorcycles within a few hours from inside our home. We can basically hear no other traffic noise inside our home, except for the many illegal motorcycles. We have regular loud motorcycle commuters who blast by starting at 5am every morning on their Harley’s.

    Comparing illegally equipped motorcycles that produce a safety problem for everyone on the road with emergency sirens? Maybe you could think about this more deeply if you are able?

    Here is another local article:

    Motorcycles ruin events, peace on Fairview farm

    I want to thank Mike McWilliams for his article, “Riders insist loud exhaust pipes increase awareness, save lives,” (AC-T, Sept. 13), on motorcycle noise. My family has lived for five generations at Hickory Nut Gap Farm in Fairview, along the curves from Sugar Hollow Road to Henderson County. We try to keep our farm beautiful for travelers in the mountains.

    Instead of beauty, we now live on a motorcycle racing track. The noise is intolerable, and is the worst public nuisance in the years I have lived here. It is almost constant on nice days. The crotch-rocket racers are now coming in late at night and racing, setting up cans in the road for obstacle riding. They speed around cars in the curves across double yellow lines. Several weeks past there were three motorcycle wrecks on one Sunday in our curves.

    Then we have the weekend Harleys, reveling in all the noise they can make downshifting through our curves. When we have weddings on our farm, the vows are often drowned out by the noise. I cannot understand why muffler laws are ignored.

    We would like to meet with the DMV, DOT, the Sheriff’s Department and the Highway Patrol to return U.S. 74A to a place of rural beauty, peace and safety.

  74. Citizen 10

    One of the most comprehensive and referenced articles on Loud Motorcycles can be found at http://www.noiseoff.org/pipes.

    This was authored by a motorcycle mechanic and lawyer and describes the health issues caused by loud motorcycles and the federal regulations that can be adopted by states local jurisdictions as an easy enforcement mechanism for law enforcement.

  75. Andy

    Grant, et al. The reality is, all motorists need to obey the noise laws, not just motorcyclists, and motorcyclists are not the only people who modify their vehicles to make more noise. So why the complete lack of objectivity then?

    Why too, the constant references to EPA certified equipment? Millions of automobiles utilize uncertified exhaust systems and yet amazingly, they are able to comply with noise regulations. Is there something magical about this EPA certification? Would you like to see all automobiles and trucks be subjected to the same requirements? Think about whether you want to pay Midas or Meineke $200 or pay your OEM $800 for a replacement exhaust system before you answer that question.

    There is a small fly in the ointment about your desire to crack down on the sale of competition systems, too. They are legal for competition use. The attention needs to stay on the street, not on the manufacturers and not on the retailers. Your wish to prohibit the sale of anything that can be abused is a dangerous door to open.

    What I really find interesting though, is your reliance on claims about greenhouse gases as a mechanism for bolstering your complaints of noise. But instead of relying in six year old data, you can find all the CURRENT data on EPA’s web site, where you will find several models of motorcycles – particularly in the last few years – that are in fact competitive with ULEV -rated automobiles.

    That’s correct kiddies – every year more motorcycles become available with multiple stage catalytic converters and all the other emissions controls typical to modern cars. So give the generalizations a break, please, including the “terrorist” remarks. If you don’t like your claims being scrutinized, don’t publish them.

    Meanwhile, you acknowledge “the problem is nonenforcement of existing laws”, but insist “expanded noise-mitigation powers are unfortunately necessary.” What is a power if not a law? If existing laws are not enforced, what is the point of making more?

    You mention lights as an additional safety measure but please be aware that any lights that are not DOT approved and part of the OEM’s vehicle design are illegal, and many states have further specific laws prohibiting them. Worse yet, motorcycles uesd to enjoy some uniqueness in terms of requiring daytime headlamps. But now that DRLs are required for all motor vehicles that small advantage is forever lost. As the final insult: While headlight modulators are perfectly legal throughout the entire United States, many ignorant law enforcement officers make up their own laws and cite users of modulators anyway, insisting on writing the summonses even after being shown print-outs of the laws.

    A final thought… While no studies have been able to prove the LPSL argument, no studies have been able to disprove it either. There have only been claims that they shouldn’t, but without anything substantial to back it up. The anecdotal and empirical evidence is difficult to dismiss in its entirety.

  76. Viking

    Smoking bans have made life healthier for non-smokers. There is no rationale for unnecessary noise pollution. Non-noise polluting citizens can expect freedom from the noise bullies’ behaviors, based on public health and trespass legal precedent.

    Thus, noise bullies are welcome to (and certainly have the ‘right’) to run their non-EPA certified vehicles at full-throttle in their soundproofed garages 24/7/365.

  77. bobaloo

    viking/Grant,

    you had already completely discredited yourself by calling ABATE a “domestic terrorist” organization that uses “terrorist tactics” against you, a claim which at best is completely ludicrous and at worst is libelous.

    Now you equate the occasional loud motorcycle to second hand smoke which, again, is absolutely ridiculous.

    You should probably quit before you make yourself look completely hysterical.

  78. Piffy!

    [b]
    Wait a minute, I just got an idea. Mandatory sirens for all motorbikes (so people will see them). While we’re at it – let’s get ‘em for bicycles, too. And pedestrians! Anything less visible that a firetruck deserves it!! [/b]

    Oh, HELL, yess!

    MAybe one of those siren hats! They should be required to wear Siren-Hats!

    [b]Siren Hats Save Lives![/b]

  79. bobaloo

    Oh good, so no real response to anything. That seems to be your MO. And I don’t seem to be the one doing the bitching.
    You’re all bluff and bluster, self-reverence and hyperbole Millin.

  80. Andy

    Folks like bobaloo shouldn’t be too quick to discount Millin’s remarks about attempting to compel government intervention.

    As you can see by now, even though Millin and his ilk know perfectly well that the issue boils down to enforcement, they are still positioned to drive more and more legislation.

    The nature of that legislation is repugnant to law abiding motorcyclists and the eagerness to promote that legislation in spite of its myriad faults, is downright frightening. The only reason we’re not all jammed up in legal nightmares is because of a vigilant bunch of riders ready to work just as hard to fight off bad legislation.

    Follow the links on Millin’s editorial and you’ll see where they get all their propaganda.

    You’ll find out they are trying to pass laws that would fail two thirds of perfectly legal, quiet motorcycles.

    You’ll find out that the EPA actually intended for automobiles to have EPA approved mufflers too. Odd how that never happened.

    You’ll find acknowledgement that the Feds screwed up by whacking ONAC and that the laws resulting from Noise Control Act were only one-third complete when all the work stopped.

    I’m just getting warmed up…

    You’ll find all kinds of deceptive allegations, such as: “A regulated motorcycle that has an exhaust system installed without the correct label … is in violation of federal regulations and section 4909a(2) of the Noise Control Act (NCA).”

    If you were to actually read the law you would discover that 4909a(2) governs tampering, but the label is specifically defined not a design element of a muffler and so is not governed by that law.

    You’ll find allegations that would be amusing if they weren’t so misguided. Such as: “The NCA … gives states and political subdivisions … the right to restrict the operation and movement of federally regulated motorcycles within neighborhoods, at times of day or night, or the number of federally regulated motorcycles operating together.”

    Apparently someone must think that USC 4905(e)(2) trumps your constitutional rights. Fascinating interpretation. Go read the law.

    I could write a book, there’s so much off-base crap there, but remember that Millin and his ilk consider that web site a definitive source and nobody reading it can be bothered to study the veracity of what is written there.

    Then they take this propaganda and feed it to politicians, who also can’t be bothered to check the sources. Politicians don’t even read their peers’ laws before they vote on them. Do you really think they’ll study the background on proposals?

    The best thing motorcyclists can do is watch these people like Millin. Watch them carefully. They are dangerous. Dismissing them is a foolish mistake.

  81. bobaloo

    Oh I certainly don’t discount his sincerity nor his dedication.
    He’s found a little niche cause concerning something that upsets his little world that he can latch on to and make himself look important at the same time.
    He acts as if he has the community’s interest at heart and at the same time has zero interest in honest dialogue with those he disdains to the point of using faulty data, incendiary language (I’m not a terrorist, Millin) and outright lies.
    If you’ll notice he hasn’t responded to any points I’ve made against his claims.

    Indeed, looking through the thread (keeping in mind Millin is using both his name and the moniker “Viking” as well) you’ll see that Millin is, to use his favorite term for bikers, being nothing short of a self-righteous bully.

    I recently found out that Millin is running for the Buncombe Cty School Board.
    I’m making it a priority to talk to everyone I know to make sure you never get elected Millin.

    Also, there is something more motorcyclists can do to keep someone like Millin from infringing on their rights. There are numerous motorcycle organizations that fight against his ilk.
    If you’re a motorcyclist in WNC, Buncombe County Concerned Bikers Association, a chapter of CBA/ABATE of NC is fighting for your rights. You can join them today.

    See their website or feel free to PM me for more information.

    http://www.buncombecba.com/

  82. Cheshire

    Several years ago, before I developed an interest in motorcycles, a gentleman living down the street from me and his friend left on their motorcycles to go on a ride or whatnot. Maybe they were going to work. Maybe the friend was visiting family and they were catching up. (I do that with my brother on occasion now.) Anyway, they gunned it down the street, rather loud, probably looking forward to spending time together and looking forward to the ride. It was middle of the day…not crack of dawn, not late at night.

    I had been dealing with a new puppy I had just brought into my house who had kept me from sleeping more than 2 hours at a stretch for a month and a half. I was exhausted, I was cranky, my nerves were shot. Loud noises made me HURT at that point.

    When I heard the motorcycles coming back up the road (it was a dead end) several hours later, I went out to the end of my driveway and flagged them down. I told them (very briefly) about my lack of sleep and asked if they would mind keeping the rpm’s down in front of my house. One guy (doesn’t matter which one for my point) flipped me off, slammed his visor shut, and rode away as loud as possible. The other just watched him go and shook his head. He grinned at me, wished me luck with the puppy, told me to get some sleep, and told me he’d talk to his friend.

    Some people don’t care. Those people are the ones that all the rules, laws, and finger-shaking in the world won’t change. If you make it illegal, you can implement new systems, raise the price of inspections to cover new procedures, regulations, required equipment…they’ll just present a legal bike to be inspected and go home and swap out for the parts they normally ride with. It’s a redirect, and the only people that it penalizes are the ones who actually try to FOLLOW the law.

    Some people do care. Those of us that do make the attempt to keep each other in line. My motorcycle isn’t a toy: it isn’t a play-thing, or a joyride. It’s my 2nd vehicle, and it’s my primary mode of transportation…half the reason I ride it is to keep myself sane. I don’t tear down the street on my way home from work late in the evening on my bike. I turn the volume down on my car’s stereo when I turn onto my street as well.

    What’s the point in penalizing those of us who do obey the law? New laws aren’t the answer. Has anyone looked at how much california pays (both autos and motorcycles) in inspection and registration fees lately? It’s nuts! Seriously…just TALK to each other. Don’t scream. Don’t give the sleep-deprived neighbor the finger. Don’t lay into the guy on the motorcycle just because of the heat of the moment.

    Honestly: just…talk. Call a cease-fire already. The golden rule isn’t “eye for an eye.” I think I’d be suprised if people actually tried to see another’s perspective…and tried to make things work for everyone involved. I’d love to see it happen…but honestly: I’d be shocked as !!!!.

  83. Viking

    bobaloo, (whoever you are) you’ll see that your information about the school board is outdated and is several years old.

    Noise bullies personally attack the rest of the citizenry who want their rights protected, when most excessive vehicular noise is illegal. Where’s the honor in any of that? The rest of us “civic bullies” don’t profile noise bullies; we just want your noise to disappear.

    We don’t care if you are on a motorcycle, in a pick-up, or on a moped. The reason motorcyclists get so much negative public attention is that there are many, many motorcycles producing over 80 db… in Asheville this seems to be the most egregious from of noise pollution. Charity, patriotic events nor economic activity do not offset the noise harms.

    Noise bullies are welcome to abide in whatever misconceptions they wish to promote… that they are the victims of unfair myth-making (i.e. noise is good for everyone, so they are in the right and their victims have no rights)… that the numbers who seek remedy for unnecessary noise are few, or one…

    Whatever, Man. Keep promoting noise pollution. It’s working, Noise Bullies.

    Smoking bans have made life healthier for non-smokers. Like second-hand smoke, there is no rationale for unnecessary noise pollution. Non-noise polluting citizens can expect freedom from the noise bullies’ behaviors, based on public health and trespass legal precedent.

    Thus, noise bullies are welcome to (and certainly have the ‘right’) to run their non-EPA certified vehicles at full-throttle in their new government designed soundproofed garages, or collectively purchase enclosed group ‘noise arenas’, 24/7/365 as a possible option in the near future.

    Feel free to rant about this. It’s tempting to respond, but as Cheshire says, cease-fire.

  84. mark

    so, after reading through all this, with gasrbage from both sides of the equation. What it all boils down to is this.

    you have someone who has found his little crusade, and cant see the forest becaus eof the trees.

    we have so many things going wrong in this country, but fixing motorcycle pipes will right all wrongs…….give me a freaking break

    why dont you put this energy into, I dont know, protesting excessive government spending ?

    helping the people without jobs ?
    helping the homeless ?

    no, like most liberals many of you can only focus on a small issue because you cant deal with life.

    I also notice no one would agree to my solution. As I stated, if you NOTICE motorcycle noise, then it stands to reason ( with all scientific rhetoric aside), that loud pipes save lives.

    simple logic, if you can hear it, and it bothers you, it makes you more aware.

    so, if you are willing to agree to the following, I can go along with personally getting rid of my louder pipes

    1) violate a bikers right of way causing an accident….immediate 5 year suspension of driving privelages

    2) violate a bikers right of way causing a death….5 years prison, with permanent loss of license

    my, logic and reasoning, backed up by actual numbers for this

    5500 = average number of motorcycle deaths per year

    85%= number of deaths caused by cars violating a motorcycles right of way

    4675 = number of deaths caused by lousy drivers

    so heres the deal, you can say we chose to ride when we can just drive a car, and only that is, is crap designed to excuse YOUR desire not to be accountable for your actions

    so, you take responsibility for your driving, by putting YOUR freedoms on the line, and be willing to take responsibility for your actions, I will do my part.

  85. Cheshire

    Viking, aka Grant Millin:
    “It’s tempting to respond, but”
    And you just couldn’t let it go. Always “but”. Like I said, I’d be shocked as !!!!.

    I wash my hands of this.

  86. Viking

    No one has to be bullied. Why should anyone get to say the crap bobaloo and others spew go uncorrected. Citizens deserve better from our government. We did not give our OK to this behavior.

    Otherwise, it is agreed that having to spend time and resources on this issue is a tragedy, Cheshire. Much of what you seem to say makes sense and is a needed POV.

    If there was any movement on the side of the noise makers, then there would be a civil discussion. Any real questioning of their ‘rights’ to generate noise pollution has to be viciously assailed, it would seem. Someone else is welcome to ameliorate all this.

  87. bobaloo

    Smoking bans have made life healthier for non-smokers. Like second-hand smoke, there is no rationale for unnecessary noise pollution. Non-noise polluting citizens can expect freedom from the noise bullies’ behaviors, based on public health and trespass legal precedent.

    Thus, noise bullies are welcome to (and certainly have the ‘right’) to run their non-EPA certified vehicles at full-throttle in their new government designed soundproofed garages, or collectively purchase enclosed group ‘noise arenas’, 24/7/365 as a possible option in the near future.

    Feel free to rant about this. It’s tempting to respond, but as Cheshire says, cease-fire.

    The first two paragraphs are near exact copies of your post on 10/15. Why are you repeating yourself?

    And I’d love it if you’d respond by actually arguing against me instead of just calling me a bully and trying to wash your hands of it.

  88. Andy

    Grant Millin says “‘civic bullies’ don’t profile noise bullies”. Isn’t the term “noise bully” profiling in and of itself? What about Grant’s characterizations of the AMA and particularly ABATE? And wasn’t it profiling when Grant used the term “terrorists” to describe the people who contradicted his allegations? How about when Grant wrote “mentally and emotionally damaged bullies like the sound of their own rotten, obnoxious loudness”? Or using the term “gibberish” to describe the responses of everyone who didn’t agree?

    Sure, no profiling at all…

  89. Becky

    FACT: 10 minutes at 100 dB = permanent hearing damage. All loud bike riders have some degree of deafness. To them it’s not as loud. A lot of them shout when they talk. I knew when I saw that headline, Millin would get attacked with the usual stuff (loud pipes save my life because I don’t know how to work my horn!) followed by the usual whiny finger pointing (wah wah what about leafblowers, why don’t you look out for ME on my MOTORCYCLE, hu?!?_) Leafblowers suck too. Making loud farting noises with engines is like going through the world with your middle finger up in the air. It says a lot about you. Whenever I hear an excessively loud, obnxious motorcycle, I think what most women do. Overcompensating, much?

  90. Anthony Jaime

    Grant or Viking or whoever he is today still has yet to prove his case with any definite measure of substantive proof. When we asked for science proving that loud motorcycle exhaust were the definitive cause of birth defects and all the other negative health issues he claimed motorcycle pipes were responsible for like Chicken Little claiming “the Sky is Falling, the Sky is Falling”, he waffled and changed the subject because there is no science to back up his claims. Moreover, he wants to conflate emissions issues with issues of alleged noise pollution in an attempt to bolter his shaky claims. And he then has the audacity to point to the California Air Resources Board as an authority he cites for proof of his extremely biased and unfounded claims. Sorry to break it to you Grant, but CARB’s credibility has been severely compromised in this area because one of their research authorities has been discovered to have lied about his credentials and his objectivity, along with CARB’s credibility is under scrutiny.

    Hien Tran, CARB’s lead researcher on the health effects caused by diesel emissions lied about having a Ph.d in statistics from UC Davis. According today’s blog by Lois Henry, staff reporter for the Bakersfield Californian, “draconian rules requiring all trucks and heavy equipment to retrofit their engines to reduce emissions containing particulate matter as small as 2.5 microns (PM2.5)” were implemented based upon Tran’s report. This is a very costly retrofit for the trucking, construction, and other related industries in California. And not only did Tran lie about his credentials, his objectivity, just like Grant’s is suspect. According to Ms. Henry, “The idea is to protect people from the effects of PM2.5, which is blamed by some researchers for killing off hundreds of Californians a year. At least that’s one side. Other studies have found little to no effect on mortality from PM2.5. Tran discounted those opposition studies. And the researchers whose studies he used have never opened their data sets to independent scientists to see if their results could be replicated, so I think it’s still highly questionable whether PM2.5 is as deadly as it’s been made out to be.” Just as Mr. Millin’s claims about loud pipes being responsible for negative health effects and birth defects are highly questionable.

    So what is obvious here is that even a governmental agency like CARB cannot be trusted to be completely objective and neither can Mr. Millin. And while we are on the subject of emissions, in an earlier post Mr. Millin alluded to the alleged fact that motorcycles are responsible for much more pollution than cars. The actual facts from California concerning particulate matter of 2.5 microns (PM2.5) and 10 microns (PM10) or less in diameter released by motorcycles are these. Motorcycles contribute a miniscule amount of air pollution in comparison to passenger cars and long haul trucks when examining the amount of PM2.5 and PM10 released daily into the atmosphere. The amount of particulate matter emitted by motorcycles equates to air pollutant factors of .49 and .33 tons per day, respectively. In contrast, cars produce 16.9 and 9.20 tons per day delivering 3448 % more PM2.5 and 2788 % more PM10 from cars than motorcycles. Heavy diesel trucks produce more in the amount of 43 tons of PM2.5 and 37 tons of PM10. That is 8776 % and 11212 % more pollution than motorcycles daily. As you can see, there is quite a differenced between the already “green technology” of motorcycles relative to passenger cars and diesel trucks, which certainly refutes Mr. Millin’s claims.

    Ever since Mr. Millin’s article appeared and I responded, I have made it point to perform an ad hoc examination every time a motorcycle with loud pipes was in my immediate vicinity. For instance, I was at a stop light in the right hand lane behind one other car yesterday and a motorcycle with reasonably loud exhaust was next to that car in the left hand lane. With my window rolled down, I could hear the motorcycle’s exhaust but not it was excessively loud and before the light changed, a large 4 wheel drive diesel pick up truck pulled along side of me completely drowning out the motorcycle. And the comment by Citizen 10, who I have to wonder is not another alias of Mr. Millin’s, complaining of hearing motorcycles inside their house from a road way 200 feet away is also a little suspect to me. My home is just about 200 feet away from a major thoroughfare and I rarely hear any noise from that distance except for emergency vehicles, and those are somewhat hard to hear depending upon time of day. I did hear the diesel rig used by the carpet cleaners my new neighbors across the street hired last week before they moved in but instead of throwing a childish temper tantrum at the noise, I went over and introduced myself and offered them a cold libation like a good neighbor. There are people who ride motorcycles all over my neighborhood and while I occasionally hear one, it is never an excessive amount of noise and always briefly transient. I rode to San Jose last week-end for a ABATE Board of Directors meeting, a distance of approximately 350 miles and traveled a large portion of that distance up Interstate 5 and returned down Highway 101 and during the entire week-end, I encountered less than 75 motorcycles up and back but the number of passenger cars, SUVs, pick-up trucks and diesel trucks numbered in the thousands. Most rides I go on the numbers are similar so I fail to see how motorcycles can be such a “noise polluter” compared to the amount of other vehicles on the road. Since California generally has better weather than North Carolina, and therefore on average more motorcycles on the road, it raises suspicion in my mind that Mr. Millin’s claims are exaggerated and over-inflated simply to bolster his agenda, which I suspect is rooted in something more than a reasonable desire for quiet.

  91. bobaloo

    Whenever I hear an excessively loud, obnxious motorcycle, I think what most women do. Overcompensating, much?

    Not the women who ride motorcycles. Jeez, aren’t you sexist.

  92. Viking

    bobaloo, Anthony:

    “FACT: 10 minutes at 100 dB = permanent hearing damage. All loud bike riders have some degree of deafness. To them it’s not as loud. A lot of them shout when they talk. I knew when I saw that headline, Millin would get attacked with the usual stuff (loud pipes save my life because I don’t know how to work my horn!) followed by the usual whiny finger pointing (wah wah what about leafblowers, why don’t you look out for ME on my MOTORCYCLE, hu?!?_) Leafblowers suck too. Making loud farting noises with engines is like going through the world with your middle finger up in the air. It says a lot about you. Whenever I hear an excessively loud, obnxious motorcycle, I think what most women do. Overcompensating, much?” – Becky

    We’re merely responding to the noise? We can respond in a civic way even more if you like.

  93. Anthony Jaime

    Grant Viking Becky . . . once more you all choose to engage in a fallacy of presumption and slide down that slippery slope. Just because exposure to noise at 100db CAN cause permanent hearing damage does NOT mean that it necessarily will. Moreover, it certainly does not mean that ALL riders whose bikes are “loud” have hearing damage nor does it mean they all shout. That is like saying Dennis Rodman dresses outrageously and is an excellent rebounder, therefore all people who dress outrageously are excellent rebounders. IT JUST AIN’T SO! That is most certainly a generalization without one shred of scientific evidence to back it up and further evidence of the lengths you will all resort to in order to garner support for your agenda. Please show us one scientific study whose results prove that loud pipes cause hearing damamge to their owners. You can’t and you know it! Just like you can’t link motorcycle pipes to birth defects and negative health effects! Moreover, it certainly doesn’t take a motorcycle 10 minutes to pass by a fixed point, so what it this point to the 10 minute exposure reference anyway? Anybody that would needlessly expose themselves to ANY noise pollution at that level for that length of time really has more problems than worrying about hearing loss. And Grant, you did bring emissions into this issue with your post from Jeffery Kimes of the EPA in this thread on October 1 at 10:38 so don’t try and waffle now that you are only concerned with noise. In spite of the fact that motorcyclist’s are only a small part of the driving population in this country, you want to single us out in an extremely biased and discriminatory manner as being responsible for all of the noise and or air pollution out there when in fact there are many more passenger cars with modified exhausts and long haul trucks out there who are are far louder and far more polluting than we are, yet your axe to grind is only with motorcyclists. Methinks your blade is not only dull with mendacity but beginning to rust from your inability to discern fact from fiction.

  94. bobaloo

    Aaannd you continue your non-response responses.

    You have no interest in answering any challenges or arguments. You’ve made it perfectly clear.

  95. Andy

    Mr. Millin, where is this survey – the one you failed to cite – that demonstrates that “all loud bike riders have some degree of deafness”? Where too is the investigation into why that would be, if it were true at all?

    Let’s try this…

    FACT: When you start mentioning the effects of sound pressure levels without mentioning the distance at which they are measured, you look ignorant and uninformed. One measurement is irrelevant without the other, and both must be considered when attempting to compare SPLs and their effects.

    PS, a recent study concluded that the owners of convertible automobiles exhibited higher than normal rates of hearing loss. Apparently just the roar of the wind alone is chiefly responsible.

    This is not a huge surprise to motorcyclists, who have long been using earplugs to dull the wind roar. Sadly, some states have laws which prohibit the use of certain types of earplugs while operating motor vehicles.

  96. Christopher Burgher

    Your comment about BMW’s being in fewer wrecks is very confused. The reason BMW’s are not in wrecks as often as other bikes is because not as many people can afford to own and ride a Beemer Motorcycle. The noise a motorcycle makes as it passes is really a minor problem in this city. Everyday I have to listen to firetrucks, ambulances and police cars screaming down Merrimon Ave. It wakes me up, it hurts my ears, and its damned annoying. But why do the firetrucks and ambulances and police cars use those hugely loud noises while driving? To get the attention of idiotic space cadet drivers who aren’t aware of their surroundings. Let the “burly bikers” keep their pipes and their lives.

  97. Viking

    ..per capita, Christopher. For every 1,000 BWM bikers (average national sample)–and even H-Ds with no modification to factory EPA-certified exhaust systems–how many bikers in an average national sample of 1,000 with loud pipes get in wrecks?

    And just so everyone knows, I do not want anyone getting in wrecks. However, safety measures must be legal and based on national (or international as applicable) safety standards.

    I’m not doing this research, but if it can be done in a verifiable and credible way it could prove the LPSLs argument. I doubt it.

  98. Andy

    “…if [this research] can be done in a verifiable and credible way it could prove the LPSLs argument. I doubt it.”

    Grant, you are heading totally in the wrong direction here. But it is nice of you to acknowledge that no authoritative studies exist at the moment.

    I’m no fan of loud pipes and prefer a quiet bike, personally, but it is difficult to imagine that “noise visibility” could have no effect on the safety of the rider compared to one who has no such advantage. Sure, everone has horns, but by the time anyone – rider or motorist – is inclined or compelled to use it, the danger scenario has already presented.

    The problem is that you cannot subscribe to the notion that the sound is projected only backward – that simply is not correct.

    Folks who don’t care for the noise may be in for a rude awakening when they eventually are informed that loud pipes do indeed offer safety benefits. So for you to base your stance entirely on dismissing that possibility, is doomed to fail.

    The real argument – the TRUE ARGUMENT – the one that anti-noise activists everywhere can’t seem to grasp – is that freedom doesn’t mean you can do as you please. Freedom ends where it impinges the freedoms of others. So forget the LPSL debates and the futile attempts to bolster unsupportable arguments. It boils down to the fact that the Noise Control Act represents the government’s recognition of its citizens’ rights to relative peace and quiet. Loud pipes impinge upon that right. Period.

    Perhaps one day when the states decide to really clamp down on all forms of distracted driving and stop handing out driver’s licenses to anyone who can answer a few multiple choice questions in ANY language of their choice, pass an eye test that even Mr. Magoo wouldn’t fail and park an automobile without mounting the curb, then maybe the motorcyclists – narcissists or not – wouldn’t have to rely on the LPSL arguments either.

    But I ain’t holding my breath.

  99. Viking

    I agree with your points, Andy, and have presented such ideas previously. It bears repeating that the noise bullies have no standing. Don’t worry, LPSLs may have anecdotal effectiveness; but it is a outrageous way to prevent accidents. One only needs to look at the existing motorcycle safety standards and major causes of motorcycle accidents in order to figure out where the legitimate safety margins could be found. Not my job.

    I had to explain my theory on BMW vs H-D safety samples and how such an experiment might be set up. Again, not my job. I just want unnecessary noise pollution to be mitigated in a credible way. That job, and the job of enforcing legitimate traffic safety standards, falls to our elected officials. I try to emphasize that it is our representatives in government who need to hear from citizens who want more access to peace and quiet in their homes, places or worship, work and study. We have that right and should expect the freedom from unnecessary noise pollution entering our homes.

    Also, in many cases noisy machines mean other forms of unmitigated pollution.

    Theorizing on the validity of an illegal activity is indeed a moot point. If one day safety authorities make LPSLs the law of the land, then noise bullies will be free to ride about causing hypertension, aggravating vets with PTSD and tinnitus, and generally contributing to hearing damage. Again, many in the motorcycle community are guilty of violating Federal and state laws on noise pollution, but not the only noise bullies out there. These bad seed bikers just happen to be prominent in terms of volume and number of average regional noise incidents in Asheville and apparently elsewhere.

    North Carolina General Statutes § 20-128 Exhaust system and emissions control devices

    (a) No person shall drive a motor vehicle on a highway unless such motor vehicle is equipped with a muffler, or other exhaust system of the type installed at the time of manufacture, in good working order and in constant operation to prevent excessive or unusual noise, annoying smoke and smoke screens.

    (b) It shall be unlawful to use a “muffler cut?out” on any motor vehicle upon a highway.

    (c) No motor vehicle registered in this State that was manufactured after model year 1967 shall be operated in this State unless it is equipped with emissions control devices that were installed on the vehicle at the time the vehicle was manufactured and these devices are properly connected.

    (d) The requirements of subsection (c) of this section shall not apply if the emissions control devices have been removed for the purpose of converting the motor vehicle to operate on natural or liquefied petroleum gas or other modifications have been made in order to reduce air pollution and these modifications are approved by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. (1937, c. 407, s. 91; 1971, c. 455, s. 1; 1983, c. 132; 1989, c. 727, s. 9; 1997?443, s. 11A.119(a); 2000?134, s. 6.)

  100. Andy

    Thanks Grant but do you see what you have been doing?

    What you say is your “theory on BMW vs H-D safety” was presented before as fact.

    Then you back it up by statements like “the fact is BMWs are much much quieter than a non-EPA certified motorcycle”. First of all, what exactly is a “non-EPA certified motorcycle” and second, do you really think that no BMW owners have ever installed loud exhaust systems?

    You make a lot of assumptions.

    The fact that you keep relying on terms like “bad seed bikers” gives me the impression that you don’t necessarily find motorcycles to be the most prominent source of noise, just the most easily targetable or attributable. Otherwise we would also be hearing about “bad seed truckers” and “bad seed hot rodders”, etc.

  101. Cheshire

    Since this discussion started, I’ve been paying attention to other motorcycles when I’m out. I knew Buncombe county had a higher percentage of motorcycles than other surrounding towns, but hadn’t realized just how many.

    Interestingly, I discovered about half the time I had trouble discerning between something like a Ford F-150 and a cruiser. I had to resort to the actual note of the sound, and was suprised to discover that often the pickup truck was louder.

    Going back to the “necessary loudness” argument, I thought I’d mention that there’s a horn made specifically for motorcycles that’s gotten a very high reputation rated at 139 dB. Think about that. Why would such a loud horn be recommended as an almost-mandatory upgrade, just behind upgrading the stock headlight? The answer: because people don’t pay attention (or ignore) the stock horn. It’s louder to be more effective at, say, letting someone know they’re about to switch lanes and broadside a motorcycle or turn left in front of one.
    Before you scream about how that’s louder than any other vehicle’s horn, truckers’ horns are louder.

  102. Christopher Burgher

    Well really the study you would want to do is one based on the decibel output of the exhaust system rather than the make of the whole bike. Different Beemers and Harleys put out different levels of noise. So lets say you have a control group of bikes that put out less than 90 decibels. That would be a fairly quiet bike and within what are most state legal noise requirements where applicable. Then study groups of bikes with exhaust systems rated at increased increments of 5db up to 100 db, maybe a little higher. You would need to look at a lot of bikes all during the same season and in the same general area of roads. It would be best if all of the bikes in each group were the exact same and if it was known that the riders of every bike obeyed all speed limits and road rules. As you can see this actually gets so complicated that the factors become unpredictable. So really the question becomes, do loud pipes get drivers’ attention? I think this forum has done a relatively decent job of demonstrating that louder bikes (and loud vehicles in general) do indeed get a driver’s attention, thusly alerting the driver to the presence of the biker and reducing the chance for a collision.

  103. Anthony Jaime

    Grant, the beginning of credibility needs to start with YOU! That would begin with ending your distasteful name-calling and prevarications. You continue to make yourself look foolish with your repetitive use of the terms “noise bullies and bad seed bikers.” You have yet to establish that “noise bullies or bad seed bikers” exist or even to define that terminology. It is simply an ad hominem attack on a group whom you have lined up in the narrowly focused cross hairs of your extremely limited scope of expertise and tolerance. You further continue to make yourself look even more foolish by demonstrating your ignorance of the way government functions. For instance, the “job of enforcing legitimate traffic safety standards” does not fall to elected officials as you claim. Their job is to promote and pass legitimate and responsible legislation that is workable, enforceable and fair. Enforcement falls to another group of public servants altogether. Moreover, you have yet to establish that any of the existing laws already in place are being broken except for your declared opinions and theories, which are not scientifically proven nor admissible in a court of law.

    Through your efforts at profiling, you wrongfully label and characterize motorcyclists that you have no first hand knowledge of as “noise bullies and bad seed bikers” and legitimate organizations as “terrorist groups.” Through those words, your credibility flew right out the window Mr. Millin and you began to pollute our world with prejudicial and specious slander! In addition, your assumption and egregiously misleading statement that “theorizing on the validity of illegal activity is a moot point” presupposes that illegal activity has taken place. You further tried to underscore that point by alleging that “many in the motorcycling community are guilty of violating Federal and state laws on noise pollution” without offering one scintilla of evidence. I really hate to break this news to you Grant but there is what is known as a presumption of innocence in this nation, that actually is a right, along with the right to a fair trial before an impartial jury. People are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty and you have yet to make a definitive case that any laws or statutes have been broken by anyone, other than stating your opinions and assumed conjectures. And we all know about opinions, everyone has one! Just as you submit your opinion alleging that loud motorcycle exhaust is responsible for negative health effects, birth defects, hypertension, tinnitus, hearing loss, and the aggravation of PTSD in vets. The problem is that allegation is a complete fabrication employed by you in an effort to inflame anti-motorcycle bias through the use of unsubstantiated knee jerk rhetoric. We all agree that long-term exposure to loud noise can be detrimental but what we do not all agree upon is that motorcycles are the responsible culprits for any of the aforementioned negative health effects other than in your unqualified opinion. Please enlighten us as to what your professional qualifications are to render such a biased blanket statement concerning this issue and what are the case histories and research studies you base your ‘expert’ opinion upon? Oh, that’s right, “It’s not your job!”

    And Grant, please elaborate and tell us more about the alleged “noise bullies and bad seed bikers” in your life? Do they live next door to you or down the street? Do they come around during the day or at night? Do they come around before 6 am or after 10 pm? Do they come often or just once in a while? Are they always on Harley-Davidsons whom you seem to single out regardless of the fact that there are Yamaha, Honda, Kawasaki, Triumph, Ducati, and Victory motorcycles out there on the road as well? Are you sure it really is the riders who ride cruiser style street machines or is it someone with a sports bike or a two-stroke dirt bike creating your problems? How many times daily or weekly or monthly do you perceive that you have been bullied by someone creating noise you deem to be excessive? Can you state with certainty in a court of law that every instance of noise you perceive to be a loud motorcycle is in fact a motorcycle and not some other type of machine such as a diesel pick-up truck, a modified car, a semi-truck, a fire truck, a garbage truck or a Home Depot truck with attached forklift delivering sod or concrete block to your neighbors? We in the motorcycle right’s community want specifics and not generalizations and assumptions. Unfortunately Grant, regarding this issue you only seem to offer the latter while overlooking and ignoring the former.

    And lastly Grant, have you ever tried any approach to resolving your issues other than the rigid and antagonistic “I don’t negotiate with terrorists” posture you have assumed. Have you ever sat down and tried to work toward a solution with any legitimate motorcycle organization regarding your issues? Or do you just pick a target that you think is vulnerable to your cause and proceed to attack on the basis of propagating fabricated prevarications, laced with unproven theories and opinions? Your approach so far has been to stereotype and profile motorcyclists as unlawful scofflaws and in particular as “noise bullies, bad seed bikers, and terrorists” in your attempt to further burden us with excessive and unwarranted regulatory practices. It’s no wonder that you have met and will continue to meet stiff resistance to your draconian and odious socialistic liberal attempts to both marginalize and criminalize the motorcycling community at large. Regardless of your attempts to demonize us as bikers, the true fact is “We ride, we have families, we have jobs, we pay taxes, and we vote too!

  104. Anthony Jaime

    Ah Christopher . . . a voice of reason! It might surprise some on this thread to find out that the AMA has actually undertaken studies and formed study groups to address this issue. While Grant tried to dismiss his contact the with the AMA communication consultant early on in this thread as “meaningless PR” and “lying” through the sin of “omission” the actual facts are that the AMA has done some really good work in this area. Obviously not enough to suit Mr. Millin who would most likely prefer to overlook anthing not in agreement with his views. Here is the actual press release:

    The AMA has developed model legislation for use by cities seeking a simple, consistent and economical way to deal with sound complaints related to on-highway motorcycles within the larger context of excessive sound from all sources.

    The model legislation offers an objective method for municipal jurisdictions to evaluate motorcycle sound through science-based measurement. It’s based on the Society of Automotive Engineers’ (SAE) new J2825 standard, “Measurement of Exhaust Sound Pressure Levels of Stationary On-Highway Motorcycles.” The AMA produced similar model legislation for off-highway motorcycles several years ago.

    “Many cities and other jurisdictions already have excessive sound laws on the books, but when they get citizen complaints about loud motorcycles, they sometimes decide to single out the riding public with unfair or overly restrictive ordinances and laws,” said Imre Szauter, AMA government affairs manager. “We believe that motorcycles shouldn’t be singled out, but should be regulated as part of a comprehensive sound management policy that also addresses cars, trucks, leaf blowers, generators and other sources of excessive sound.”

    The J2825 standard, issued by the SAE in May, is based on a comprehensive study of a wide variety of on-highway motorcycles. It establishes instrumentation, test site, test conditions, procedures, measurements and sound level limits.

    “Too many times, jurisdictions responding to citizen complaints about excessive motorcycle sound create laws that simply don’t work in the real world,” Szauter said. “They either set an unreasonable decibel limit, leave it up to a police officer to subjectively decide whether a bike is too noisy, or come up with another plan that is arbitrary or unworkable. Our model legislation is objective, workable and fair.”

    The model legislation adopts the SAE J2825 standard for stationary on-highway motorcycle sound testing, specifies the type of sound meter to be used, and allows for each city to specify the penalties for violating the law. Szauter stressed, however, that the sound-testing procedures and decibel limits established in the SAE J2825 standard should remain unchanged to ensure that the law remains objective and fair.

    Under the SAE J2825 standard, decibel limits range from 92 dBA at idle for all motorcycles, to up to 100 dBA at certain RPMs for various motorcycles, depending on the type of engine.

    In 2003, the AMA organized the National Summit on Motorcycle Sound to bring together riders and user organizations, representatives of the motorcycle manufacturers, the aftermarket industry, racing promoters, government agencies, law enforcement and others to develop proposals regarding the increasingly controversial issue of excessive motorcycle sound. The creation of a new on-highway motorcycle sound measurement procedure was a top recommendation of the summit’s Motorcycle Sound Working Group.

    “The motorcycling community, local governments and police officers have sought a practical sound field test for streetbikes for many years, and now it exists, thanks to a collaboration between the Motorcycle Industry Council and the SAE,” Szauter said. “The next step is for jurisdictions struggling with motorcycle sound complaints to adopt fair and objective laws, and the AMA is providing the tool for them to do that.”

    Szauter encourages motorcyclists and government and law enforcement officials to download the model legislation from the Rights section of this website.

  105. Viking

    The Federal Noise Control Act sets the bar at 80-82 db, not 90-100 db.

    A variety of vehicles on NC roads are out of compliance with Asheville’s weak noise ordinance and the unenforced state NCGS 20-128 muffler law and the Federal Noise Control Act, not just loud non-EPA certified motorcycles. Loud motorcycles just happen to be the most prominent source of noise pollution; meaning the highest decibel levels per incident and the highest number of noise incidences, unless someone can identify a greater noise pollution source in the Asheville area.

    If these laws were repealed, then the position reflected by unregulated noise advocates can be the law of the land. Right now citizens who would like to be free from the trespass and public harms of noise pollution in their homes, places or worship, work and study have the law on their side. We should ask local, state and Federal government to either enforce noise mitigation laws in North Carolina and nationally, or publicly state they embrace unlimited noise pollution and will repeal existing noise mitigation policy since they have decided to do nothing about these kinds of nuisance issues.

    North Carolina General Statutes § 20-128 Exhaust system and emissions control devices

    (a) No person shall drive a motor vehicle on a highway unless such motor vehicle is equipped with a muffler, or other exhaust system of the type installed at the time of manufacture, in good working order and in constant operation to prevent excessive or unusual noise, annoying smoke and smoke screens.

    (b) It shall be unlawful to use a “muffler cut?out” on any motor vehicle upon a highway.

    (c) No motor vehicle registered in this State that was manufactured after model year 1967 shall be operated in this State unless it is equipped with emissions control devices that were installed on the vehicle at the time the vehicle was manufactured and these devices are properly connected.

    (d) The requirements of subsection (c) of this section shall not apply if the emissions control devices have been removed for the purpose of converting the motor vehicle to operate on natural or liquefied petroleum gas or other modifications have been made in order to reduce air pollution and these modifications are approved by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. (1937, c. 407, s. 91; 1971, c. 455, s. 1; 1983, c. 132; 1989, c. 727, s. 9; 1997?443, s. 11A.119(a); 2000?134, s. 6.)

  106. Andy

    Grant wrote:

    “The Federal Noise Control Act sets the bar at 80-82 db, not 90-100 db.”

    Grant, the numbers are meaningless without distance. This has been mentioned before, so there is now no excuse for your ignorance.

    Grant also wrote:

    “Loud motorcycles just happen to be the most prominent source of noise pollution; meaning the highest decibel levels per incident and the highest number of noise incidences, unless someone can identify a greater noise pollution source in the Asheville area.”

    In other words:

    “Unless someone fishes out actual research to the contrary, my prejudiced assumptions should be taken as facts.”

    GOTTA LOVE IT!

  107. MountainKing

    There has been allot of discussion about loud motorcycles lately. I would like to learn more about this. I have a question about the state law that has been posted here.

    20-128. Exhaust system and emissions control devices.

    (a) No person shall drive a motor vehicle on a highway unless such motor vehicle is quipped with a muffler,or other exhaust system of the type installed at the time of manufacture, in good working order and in constant operation to prevent excessive or unusual noise, annoying smoke and smoke screens.

    (b)It shall be unlawful to use a “muffler cut-out” on any motor vehicle upon a highway.

    I see that the state of North Carolina requires mufflers. How do the police enforce this? What type of muffler is installed on motorcycles at the time of manufacturer? If I were a police officer, I would like to know this. I have been thinking of buying a motorcycle myself to save on gas when the gas prices go sky high. I am thinking of buying a used one. As a future motorcycle owner I would also like to know what type of muffler is installed on motorcycles at the time of manufacturer? Since some of these used motorcycles have had the mufflers changed, I want to make sure it will be legal.
    Can anyone answer my questions?

  108. Viking

    There’s an EPA plate on factory mufflers, MountainKing. In the future people are hoping law enforcement and inspection stations will actually verify these plates. At least the Blue Ridge Parkway is developing a program to do so.

  109. Anthony Jaime

    Actually, you are wrong once Grant. There is no EPA plate on factory pipes. There is a stamp, located underneath that is not visible without removing the pipes or using a mirror.

  110. Andy

    Grant Millin wrote “There’s an EPA plate on factory mufflers … In the future people are hoping law enforcement … will actually verify these plates”.

    And there lies a perfect example of the problem with people like you promoting certain types of legislation…

    You have just made it perfectly clear that you have never even looked at the markings that you hope to use for law enforcement purposes. How can you defend such ignorance?

    You ought to scrutinize the NoiseOFF propaganda that you use for your opinions instead of just accepting it all as fact. In fact even they have pictures on their web site that show the markings are not on any kind of plate.

    In hundreds of motorcycles that we have inspected, only one used a plate for the OEM marking. Generally the EPA markings are embossed by the OEM into the outer surface of the muffler, and in a manner that is technically not in accordance with EPA laws governing visibility, contrast, etc. Worse yet, nearly two out of three otherwise perfectly legal, stock motorcycles which do conform to the noise laws, sport those markings in places which are difficult or awkward to locate without inspection mirrors and lights. In a few cases those marks are outright impossible to locate and view without partial disassembly of the motorcycle.

    The EPA label law is not necessarily a terrible idea but contrary to the propaganda, if you take the time to actually read and understand the current EPA law and the agenda behind it, you will discover that the law was intended to, but never made it to, a point where it would be suitable for field enforcement. The law itself is not the only obstacle. Also an obstacle is the fact that the OEMs have been misinterpreting or ignoring the visibility requirements for twenty-five years.

    Odd that your ilk would be reluctant to have police carry decibel meters but think it’s OK to have them carry inspection equipment instead, and have them on their hands and knees like mechanics in order to locate these markings you are so hyper focused on.

  111. Viking

    …So Denver PD didn’t issue several dozen noise citations to both motorcyclists and four-wheelers over the past several years, which were all upheld all the way to the CO Supreme Court? Denver authorities didn’t say anything about having to remove equipment when I spoke to them. They used label match-up there. Now the National Park Service is starting their noise mitigation program, including on the Blue Ridge Parkway. Many states, cities and counties large and small are working on noise mitigation now, and they are right to do so.

    The SAE decibel meter standards use a 90-100 db range. This is much too loud and no accommodation to unnecessary noise makers should be made available.

    This has been sort of fun, Folks. This isn’t a discussion any one citizen needs to deal with. It’s for our politicians.

    Try to enjoy this unnecessary noise while you can, Noise Bullies.

  112. Andy

    Grant, exactly which SAE standards are you babbling about?

    Do you have any idea?

    J331A, which permits 82dB @ 100 feet?

    J2825, which permits 100dB @ 20 inches?

    After all this time you still haven’t learned what a dB is or how distance factors into it?

    You go right ahead and tell your politicians how terrible that 90-100dB is, so we can go ahead and explain to them how foolish you are for thinking so. This is our fool mitigation program, which we are right to conduct.

  113. Viking

    …and feel free to keep on promoting noise pollution in this thread. We know how to respond and just keep getting better at it with practice. It’s all making this one of the more high visibility MX commentaries for 2009!

  114. Viking

    I just checked. This commentary is definitely in the Top Five in terms of the most commented on MX articles so far this year.

  115. Andy

    Grant,

    Precisely who do you think is promoting noise pollution? If by “getting better at it” you mean getting better at throwing ridiculous accusations that you can’t possibly support, then I suppose you are correct. But you’ve been an expert on that since you wrote your article.

    Your ignorance will not go unchallenged. Not here and not anywhere. Not on-line and not to politicians. Not at any level.

  116. Puzzled

    I’m puzzled Grant. How did Denver issue citations for EPA labels to four-wheelers? The Denver’s so-called EPA label law only applies to motorcycles!

    Did the same questionable “authorities” that told you they issued EPA label match-up citations to four-wheelers also tell you if they administered sound tests as the law allows?

    And do you have ANY idea what a decibel is?

    You keep going on about “90-100 db”

    At what distance, Grant??

    Here’s a free clue:

    http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-distance.htm

    Your claims that 90-100dB is excessive in a close proximity test are WRONG. Those numbers are actually LOWER than the fed’s guidelines!

  117. MountainKing

    I thank those of you who answered my question but I would like hear from the Bikers. According to what I have been reading from them those of you who want all these new laws not are not giving correct information. Yesterday I looked at some Harleys and there was no plate on the muffler. I saw some EPA stuff stamped into the metal under the muffler. I did take a mirror with me. The bikers were right about that. You do need a mirror. But who cares about the stamp? I would like to know how the cops in NC check mufflers on bikes. Do you really need the stamp? Do they care how loud the bike is?

  118. MountainKing

    I thank those of you who answered my question but I would like hear from the Bikers. According to what I have been reading from them those of you who want all these new laws not are not giving correct information. Yesterday I looked at some Harleys and there was no plate on the muffler. I saw some EPA stuff stamped into the metal under the muffler. I did take a mirror with me. The bikers were right about that. You do need a mirror. But who cares about the stamp? I would like to know how the cops in NC check mufflers on bikes. Do you really need the stamp? Do they care how loud the bike is?

  119. Viking

    Yes! Noise pollution is both legal and healthy, so sayeth “The Noise Intellectuals” . The “Noise Intellectuals” proved they are the only ones that are right.

    Keep going!

  120. bobaloo

    And you have yet to actually engage in debate or back up any of your extremely dubious claims and allusions such as “loud motorcycles cause birth defects”.

    I certainly hope you do trumpet this thread to those you hope to convince. It makes you look antagonistic, haughty and demeaning as well as hysterically inaccurate.

  121. Viking

    Please don’t misquote. Where did you get “loud motorcycles cause birth defects”?

    Noise stress does not cause health problems? Is that what the noise advocates are saying? I’m waiting to hear how noise pollution is good for us. Please, keep going on about your rights to generate unnecessary noise.

    http://www.nonoise.org/library/epahlth/epahlth.htm#noise and

    Noise: A Health Problem

    United States Environmental Protection Agency
    Office of Noise Abatement and Control
    Washington, DC 20460
    August 1978

    Noise and the Unborn

    “There is ample evidence that environment has a role in shaping the physique, behavior and function of animals, including man, from conception and not merely from birth. The fetus is capable of perceiving sounds and responding to them by motor activity and cardiac rate change.”
    Lester W. Sontag, The Fels Research Institute

    While still in its mother’s womb, the developing child is responsive to sounds in the mother’s environment. Particularly loud noises have been shown to stimulate the fetus directly, causing changes in heart rate. Related work also has demonstrated that, late in pregnancy, the fetus can respond to noise with bodily movements such as kicking.

    Just as the fetus is not completely protected from environmental noise, the fetus is not fully protected from its mother’s response to stress, whether it be caused by noise or other factors. When her body reacts to noise, the physical changes she experiences may be transmitted to the fetus. And it is known that the fetus is capable of responding to some changes in the mother’s body of the type produced by emotion, noise, or other forms of stress.

    In contrast to the more direct risk, this indirect fetal response may threaten fetal development if it occurs early in pregnancy. The most important period is about 14 to 60 days after conception. During this time, important developments in the central nervous system and vital organs are taking place. Unfortunately, women are often unaware that they are pregnant for much of this period, and are thus unlikely to take extra precautions.

    While very little research has addressed these questions, due to the difficulties of studying humans in this respect, certain suggestive human research has been done. A Japanese study of over 1,000 births produced evidence of a high proportion of low-weight babies in noisy areas. These birth weights were under 51/2 pounds, the World Health Organization’s definition of prematurity. Low birth weights and noise were also associated with lower levels of certain hormones thought to affect fetal growth and to be a good indicator of protein production. The difference between the hormone levels of pregnant mothers in noisy versus quiet areas increased as birth approached.

    Studies have also shown that stress causes constriction of the uterine blood vessels which supply nutrients and oxygen to the developing baby. Additional links between noise and birth defects have been noted in a recent preliminary study on people living near a major airport. The abnormalities suggested included harelips, cleft palates, and defects in the spine.

    Taken together, this information points to the possibility of serious effects of noise on the growth and development of the unborn child. While it cannot be said at what level maternal exposures to industrial and environmental noise are dangerous to the fetus, these findings do create some concern. It is known that extreme stress of any type will certainly take a toll on the fetus, but, in the case of noise, it is not known how much is required to have an effect. Whatever the effect, the risk of even a slight increase in birth defects is considerably disturbing.

    The fetus is not fully protected from noise

    Noise may threaten fetal development

    Noise has been linked to low birth weights

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_health_effects

    ^ a b Passchier-Vermeer W, Passchier WF (2000). “Noise exposure and public health”. Environ. Health Perspect. 108 Suppl 1: 123–31. doi:10.2307/3454637. PMID 10698728.

  122. Andy

    MountainKing,

    The fact is, the proponents of all these new laws know nothing about motorcycles or motorcyclists. In a perfect world if someone has an issue they are supposed to educate themselves on the issue in order to argue their case successfully.

    In this world however, the people having issues with motorcycle noise all get their “education” from a single source (NoiseOFF!). That web site cleverly mixes enough fact with its propaganda to lull its readers into believing everything written there is factual. The same people are too lazy to cross-examine the information so it is no wonder they can’t get their information right.

    In other cases the disconnect between law and reality can trip people up. This may be why Grant mentioned plates. Technically the law implies the use of a plate! In reality, good luck finding one.

    Sorry to be so wordy…

    As for how cops in NC check mufflers, perhaps the better question is whether they bother, or how often. The anti-noise activists naively believe that all police officers seek to enforce all the laws all the time and that some easily enforceable new law will magically have cops ticketing every noise offendor they encounter 24×7. In reality, particularly with “quality of life” issues, cops usually focus on one or two things at a time and rotate those things from day to day or week to week. No matter what, the activists will be disappointed.

    Federal law does not require the consumer to maintain the EPA mark after purchase, but does regulate the sound levels permitted from motorcycles registered for street use.

    Aftermarket mufflers, if made in the last few decades, will usually bear a mark that indicates what motorcycles it is tested for and the clause “Installation of this exhaust system on motorcycle models not specified may violate Federal law.”

    Note that the clause states “may”, not “will”.

    Aftermarket mufflers may instead be marked “This product is designed for use on closed course competition motorcycles only and does not conform to U.S. EPA noise emission standards. Used on motorcycles subject to EPA noise regulations constitutes tampering and is a violation of Federal law unless it can be shown that such use does not cause the motorcycle to exceed applicable Federal standards.”

    Read: illegal unless you can prove the sound output is indeed within Federal regulations.

    If you buy a used motorcycle equipped with non-original exhaust equipment it is your responsibility to test it for sound limit compliance and replace the mufflers with suitable equipment if necessary to achieve compliance.

    Most states pass laws which prohibit muffler modifications and set sound level limits similar to the Federal law. The Noise Control Act actually prohibits states from setting stricter regulations. NC law falls somewhat short by failing to specify any actual sound limits but the loudest offendors would fail the very simple “night-stick test”, which consists of probing the exhaust pipe (and perhaps checking with the officer’s tactical light) to check for the existence of baffles or cut-outs.

    The Federal sound limits can still be enforced but field enforcement takes substantial planning.

  123. Anthony Jaime

    Well Grant, generally I take no pleasure in engaging in a battle of wits with an unarmed individual but in your case I’ll make an exception. It’s not fun but it is necessary to protect the right to enjoy the lifestyle and freedoms of motorcyclists everywhere from the excessive and restrictive policies of those such as you, who can only stridently complain about issues of which they can demonstrate no true knowledge or understanding of the topic under discussion.

    When confronted with substantiated facts, you can only repetitively repeat your liberal socialistic accusatory mantra of “noise bullies” over and over again, like a bizarre broken record, simply parroting the same skewed disinformation time after time without bringing any true informed discussion to the table. You refuse to answer questions put to you or to document any of your alleged opinions. And you continue to make yourself look foolish with statements like “The SAE decibel meter standards use a 90-100 db range. This is much too loud and no accommodation to unnecessary noise makers should be made available.” Grant, your asinine assumption that YOU know more than the Society of Automotive Engineers is a flawed assumption in many ways, mostly stemming from your opinionated incompetence. First, your statement is nothing more than your opinion, plain and simple. And since this issue is so important to you, I can only question whether or not you were present to participate at the National Summit on Motorcycle Sound to give your input? If not, why not?

    Second, SAE J2825 was produced as the result of work done by the Motorcycle Sound Working Group, a group that was formed at the National Summit on Motorcycle Sound, which was organized by the AMA. It was comprised of riders and user organizations, representatives of the motorcycle manufacturers, the aftermarket industry, racing promoters, government agencies, law enforcement and others to seek workable, enforceable, and fair solutions to issues posed by motorcycle sound. What part of the fact that this was a joint collaboration produced by riders, the motorcycle industry, law enforcement, and governmental agencies do you not understand? Or would rather just ignore that fact and stick your head in the sand?

    Third, you once again showcase your ignorance when you say the “90-100 db range” since SAE J2825 was created using the dbA scale of measurement which integrates the weighing effects of SPLs (sound pressure levels) and also takes into account that the human ear can only differentiate a fixed range of frequencies. The term db is a logarithmic unit used to describe a ratio. It can be used to measure many other things besides sound level including power, sound pressure, voltage and intensity. According to the University of New South Wales, “Not all sound pressures are equally loud. This is because the human ear does not respond equally to all frequencies: we are much more sensitive to sounds in the frequency range about 1 kHz to 4 kHz (1000 to 4000 vibrations per second) than to very low or high frequency sounds. For this reason, sound meters are usually fitted with a filter whose response to frequency is a bit like that of the human ear.” One of the primary reasons SAE J2825 was developed was to create a set of standards that was objective, fair, and that could be applied by enforcement officials in the field, including specifying the meters to be used, as well as the system of measurement, which is the dbA scale and not the old db scale. Standardized tests, test equipment, and test criteria are the only way to achieve fair and objective tests for both riders and enforcement efforts. Anything less is a waste of time and resources. But we’ve already seen a demonstration of how fair and objective you are Grant! The bottom line is that you really aren’t very good at this Grant and the only pollution occurring here is coming from you as you attempt to muddy the waters with your unscientific opinions rather than proven research, methodically performed by experts in this field.

    Not only do you not know anything about motorcycles as evidenced by your lack of knowledge regarding the EPA stamp location, you also are woefully ignorant of some of the basic facts of sound propagation, and just as obviously have no real knowledge of the EPA mandates, noise mitigation, or the attendant issues enhancing noise pollution such a poor urban planning and location to major sources of noise pollution. You have neglected to address many of the other specific areas of concern such as Noise Barriers, Vegetation, Buffer Zones, Traffic Management, Building Insulation, or Design Considerations that are all related to the topic of traffic noise abatement. And I haven’t even started with some of the other issues you are neglecting to mention, like the distance the measurements are taken from when reading the sound levels. You’re too busy calling everybody “noise bullies” to be objective and are only concerned with advancing your agenda, as flawed and excessively zealous as it is in imposing your narrow minded perspectives on others.

    Oh, and Grant, one other item you and your other “noise freak” friends were wrong about is the time allowable for exposure to loud noise before harm begins. The 10-minute figure quoted is just a little out of touch with what the government had determined to be maximum time for exposure. OSHA has determined that “At a minimum, constant noise exposure must not exceed 90 dbA over 8 hours. The highest sound level to which workers can constantly be exposed is 115 dbA, and exposure to this level must not exceed 15 minutes within an 8-hour period. The standards limit instantaneous exposure, such as impact noise, to 140 dbA.” Those standards are a far cry from the hysterical claims you have been making throughout this thread. You totally lack any credibility at this point, but I encourage you to keep on digging, as the hole you’re in is getting awfully deep. As I said, you’re really not very good at this and I doubt any amount of practice will make you any better, unless it is in you learning how to better perjure yourself. “Nothing sucks more than that moment during an argument when you realize you’re wrong.”

    Addendum: Grant, no where is your prior post does it link motorcycle exhaust to the study of “Noise and the Unborn” you posted. There you go, sliding down that slippery slope again! Stay on topic and quit grasping at straws!

  124. bobaloo

    Where did you get “loud motorcycles cause birth defects”

    Right here. In your opinion piece.

    Documented health effects include everything from hearing impairment to heart disease, immune-system changes and even birth defects.”

    I’m not misquoting anything.

    Noise stress does not cause health problems? Is that what the noise advocates are saying?

    Did anyone at all say that? No. What we’re saying is that motorcycles are an extraordinarily minute percentage of “noise pollution”.

    You cherry pick your research. Indeed, you find things that have absolutely no real basis in scientific theory and tout them as irrefutable fact.
    Even your above article makes no bones concerning it’s flaws. Phrases such as “very little research has addressed these questions”, “this information points to the possibility”, “in the case of noise, it is not known how much is required to have an effect” and most importantly “While it cannot be said at what level maternal exposures to industrial and environmental noise are dangerous to the fetus” are clues to it’s unproven assertions.

    Even what little data they do use is from a study in Japan, where I don’t think rampaging “noisy biker bullies” are much of an issue. I’d be willing to bet they’re talking about metropolitan areas where there is a constant level of noise. But I wouldn’t know because your “facts” above omit where the research was done.

    In any case Grant/Viking, why won’t you address other, more pressing issues concerning noise? Do you really believe that motorcycle exhaust is so terribly detrimental to people’s health and such an epidemic that it warrants your crusade?

    I don’t think you do. I think you have a personal vendetta against louder motorcycles and this is your way of justifying it. It has no real basis in the public good. Because if you really did care about protecting the public you’d take up a much greater cause where you can find credible evidence and research as opposed to the red herrings and outdated data you misrepresent as facts backing up your case.

    Or at the very least you’d be just as concerned about the myriad other, more serious noise producers present in highly populated areas. But you’re not, are you?

  125. Viking

    Someone please prove bobaloo’s statement “… motorcycles (all? any?) are an extraordinarily minute percentage of “noise pollution” and I may consider responding one day. And of course you ignorantly misquoted again.

    Yes, “noise pollution” includes other sources beyond non-EPA certified motorcycles.

    Ref.

    “…But these overt and covert persuasion campaigns, often led by groups such as ABATE (American Bikers Aimed Towards Education) and the American Motorcyclist Association, don’t begin to offset the harm that NOISE POLLUTION (not EPA-certified motorcycles) inflicts on children, the elderly and others. Documented health effects include everything from hearing impairment to heart disease, immune-system changes and even birth defects.”

  126. Andy

    About the motorcycle vendetta thing…

    At this point I have zero confidence in anyone’s ability to even discern whether or not loud engine noise is actually coming from a motorcycle.

    During last Saturday’s Halloween party at a neighbor’s place there was some loud noise from outside and the hostess made a stink eye and a harsh comment about loud motorcycles. I wasn’t really sure either way and ignored it. My wife was on the balcony at the time and identified the noise as an import car with an illegal exhaust system.

    To crusade against noise is a TERRIFIC thing. No kidding. I really do mean that! But to engage in some sick, single-minded vendetta against a single source of noise with the only weapon in your arsenal being a corrupt interpretation of Federal law and advice from the person who wrote the propaganda, is pointless and futile.

    Grant, if you (and your peers) want to solve the problems you face then you are going to need to find reliable information and understand it before you try to utilize it. If you don’t have the energy to do that then you need to leave this endeavor to the people who do. All you are doing here is embarrassing yourself and guaranteeing future embarrassment, and accomplishing nothing for your cause or perhaps even setting it back!

  127. MountainKing

    Thanks Andy for answering some of my questions.
    The more I learn the more questions I have.
    Yes there was no plate on the bikes I looked at.
    The EPA message was embossed right into the muffler.It wasn’t that hard to find once you knew what to look for. There was also a sticker that sort of looks like a small plate on the front fork of the Bike that had more EPA messages and model number of the Bike on it. That might be why some people think that there is a plate. Anyway, so if the Bike has a different muffler that the stock one I have to make sure it meets EPA limits. Can you tell how to do that? I want to make sure I know how to do everything right before I make a decision.

  128. Viking

    Andy, Anthony, “Noise Advocacy Geniuses”, Et Al, what are you saying? It’s indecipherable, except that your ilk dislike being called out on your horseshit.

    Yes, “noise pollution” includes other sources (cars, pick-ups, etc.) beyond non-EPA certified motorcycles alone. That’s been said more than once.

    Feel free to make a list, but the Universal Noise Pollutant list needs to be harm ranked. From what I can tell, sources like aircraft and motorcycles are the most covered subjects nationally and internationally with the sharpest public attention.

    The concerned citizens seeking more peace and quiet are generally not noise mitigation experts, merely interested citizens observing the politics of this issue while looking for a remedy from our politicians. We just want more peace and quiet and we are beginning to ask questions about the status quo.

    While folks are welcome to pick that admission apart, the problem fro noise advocates is that noise mitigation experts DO EXIST, and none of the noise advocates commenting to this thread can DISPROVE any of the policy and health science indicators that have appeared here making the case for deeper noise mitigation policy. THERE IS NO VALID SCIENCE PROVING UNNECESSARY NOISE POLLUTION IS GOOD.

    Are you all saying non-EPA certified motorcycles produce healthy noise levels? What in God’s name are you all saying? You are like children about to have a toy or a privilege taken away by a parent. All the contra positions to the commentary and associated comments is just emotional content.

    Any other points? Because noise pollution is made out to be a tough subject to mitigate doesn’t mean it can’t be drilled down to the proper levels. That’s for the politicians and government agency leaders to work out, and this is the case.

    What I mean by this ‘working out’, for example, is that Forsythe County has banned ALL motorcycles from Tanglewood Park. That’s what happens when the technical waters get muddied. The consequences for such harsh measures in Forsythe County: None so far. If folks want to not visit Winston-Salem and spend their money there because they disagree, well guess what? …eventually the majority of all significant, modern communities will feature such policy. In any case such economic blackmail responses are not constructive given the recession/depression.

    Does the Forsythe County example mean we should ban everything from lawnmowers to public laughter? I guess if someone wants to bend over backwards and fight public laughter to appear ‘fair and balanced’ and not suffering from irrational “vendettas”, then they can do so. Otherwise, the public ‘vendetta’ should be to go through the major sources of noise pollution in a focused manner and see what can be done in terms of noise pollution risk management. If people think that’s evidence of ‘vendettaness’, then nothing could be said to fix that misperception.

    Maybe Forsythe County has been overrun by commies? I don’t know that either but haven’t heard anything to the effect. Any speculation on that one?

    Real arguments on the side of an ignored view (at least in WNC), supporting sources and other evidence have been provided in this commentary and comment thread indicating noise pollution is a real issue and people want some thing done about it. All that’s been presented in response from noise advocates are a slew of childish personal attacks, anecdotes and personal feelings.

    Someone please prove bobaloo’s statement “… motorcycles (all? any?) are an extraordinarily minute percentage of “noise pollution”. No one can provide any real evidence that nothing can be done about noise pollution and that noise pollution is a positive community contribution. I’m not sure what more can be said, except to repeat the same pro evidence and con ‘feelings’ when it comes to the case for real, deep noise mitigation in our communities.

    Call us corrupt lameos or whatever… WE ARE NOTICING THE NOISE AND FINDING ANSWERS.

  129. Anthony Jaime

    Grant/Viking/et al,
    I must say that after visiting the Noise Off site, I was immediately struck by how far from their letter writing guidelines you have strayed. In fact, you have broken several of their major commandments so I think we should have a review. Their first admonishment to would-be acolytes of their particular persuasion is to, “Write effective letters. Your letter reveals a great deal about you: your education and literacy level; your ability to communicate and persuade; your attitude and determination in resolving a noise problem. Your letters should be respectful, businesslike, and free from ambiguity or pretense. It will not help you to send poorly written letters for the sake of making a complaint.”

    Well, you sure fouled that up, didn’t you? Your ability to communicate and persuade is non-existent. Additionally, your attitude is extremely poor based upon your evasiveness and refusal to answer questions, and even worse, your refusal to enter into any kind of reasonable dialogue. And it only gets worse as most of your posts are extremely ambiguous and full of pretense, evidenced by your last post re “Noise and the Unborn.” You can’t get much more ambiguous than that when railing against motorcycle noise. There is not even a tenuous thread connecting a study of birth defects in Japan to your alleged complaints of motorcycle noise bullies here in the USA. They are completely disparate items of discussion and it doesn’t get any more ambiguous or pretentious than that. You should have taken their advice because it certainly doesn’t “help you to send poorly written letters for the sake of making a complaint.”

    Continuing down the list, it says specifically, “Do not use adjectives or name calling to slander or demean others.” So what did you do but start off calling us “noise bullies, bad seed bikers, and terrorists”! And compounding your transgressions, you have continued to do so throughout this entire thread.

    The list further instructs letter writers to “Present as much pertinent and detailed information as possible to prove your case. So we’re back to your ambiguous and pretentious use of “Noise and the Unborn” which does absolutely to prove your case, and neither did any of your other references such as “Documented health effects include everything from hearing impairment to heart disease, immune-system changes and even birth defects.” Compounding your sins here, you failed to adequately respond to questions regarding exactly what research or case studies documented any direct relationship of the foregoing referenced claims to motorcycle exhaust systems. That’s because they don’t exist and we all know that!

    The very next commandment on the list that you break is “Do not make a claim that you cannot otherwise back up with evidence.” Again, refer to the above referenced unsubstantiated claims you have presented as fact re motorcycle exhaust but which have no direct correlation to the issue under discussion. You have further tried to construe your own anecdotal opinions as proven facts but failed miserably. A case in point would your claim that many motorcyclists are guilty of breaking state and Federal noise statutes without one shred of evidence. How are we to view you Grant, when you can’t even follow the simple guidelines laid out by the propaganda machine you try to administer as the ultimate word on this subject? Well, we view you as a misguided fool engaging in a fool’s errand for no tangible gain except to attempt to besmirch and deceive others. Myself, along with others have stipulated that there are noise pollution problems present in our society but we all strongly disagree that that motorcycles are the primary culprits. You have offered no solid evidence to back up your claims, and what you have offered is either suspect or completely unrelated to the subject under discussion. Unfortunately, you continue to grasp at unconnected studies and anecdotal stories to bolster your untenable position. Your letters do indeed reveal a great deal about you and as I said previously, you’re really not very good at this and in my opinion, suffer from severe delusions of adequacy! My advice to you is to build a bridge and get over whatever particular crisis of life you have with the motorcycling community that compels you to single us out as if we are second-class citizens.

  130. Andy

    “Someone please prove bobaloo’s statement “… motorcycles (all? any?) are an extraordinarily minute percentage of “noise pollution” and I may consider responding one day.”

    Oh, please, Grant, you know you can’t wait to respond..!

    A survey by NoiseOFF member Arline Bronzaft from 2004 states that nationally, “respondents were most often bothered by lawn mowing, car stereos (or boom cars), barking dogs, and sirens.”

    http://www.etownpanel.com/pdf/Special Report_3_December2004.pdf

    This is a somewhat NYC -centric document but has several charts that break down the wide variety of complaints. You should find this document informative. Motorcycle noise bother ranks slightly above “rarely”, after neighbors, rowdy people and aircraft.

    Frankly I find some of that information deeply disturbing, such as considering birds and playing children among bothersome noise. But that’s just my opinion.

    I haven’t found any compilations of actual complaint statistics, at least so far. But based on conversations I have had with my local politicians, motorcycle noise complaints are very few, eclipsed by complaints about noisy establishments, neighbors, animals, car stereos and alarms, unnecessary horn honking and noisy trucks. I have also been told that city-wide, motorcycle noise complaints have been steadily declining each year.

    I’m sure that the frequencies of various noise complaints vary by locality. If you live on a scenic road I’m sure motorcycle noise complaints will be higher and if you live on a truck route the truck noise and jake brake complaints will be higher. But yes, as a whole, motorcycles are in fact a minute percentage of a huge noise landscape.

  131. bobaloo

    Again, Millin/Viking you avoid any real response to points made and instead try to make us sound like emotional children who have nothing relevant to say.

    Thank God for this thread, because Millin has shown himself to be evasive, abusive, and completely hysterical.

    In any case, unless Millin/Viking decides to respond in earnest to anything I challenged him on I’m checking out. It’s a beautiful day and there aren’t many riding days left.

  132. Andy

    MountainKing, if you are truly interested in making sure that your motorcycle meets the EPA regulations to the letter, then you must read Appendix I of Part 205 of the Code of Federal Regulations for details of the testing routine:

    http://law.justia.com/us/cfr/title40/40-24.0.1.2.11.5.17.26.12.html

    Alternatively, you may email the AMA for details on how to use the far simpler J2825 test routine, which was designed by the same organization that designed the J331A test in Part 205. It is supposed to be able to very closely mimic the objectives of Part 205, perhaps even more strictly than the original test.

    You will need to borrow or rent a calibrated sound meter. Most police departments should be able to fish one out for you. Local motor racing clubs and tracks should definitely be able to furnish meters and may be able to help with testing as well.

  133. Viking

    …there aren’t many loud vehicle riding days left on the Blue Ridge Parkway? You got it guys.

    The points of view on this issue in response to this commentary are clear and seem to have been covered, over and over again. Tit-for-tat, attacking language (which is truly difficult not to be drawn into)… but nothing from the noise advocates that admit they have a responsibility to be neighborly and follow NC laws (which are indeed poorly enforced right now) when it comes to noise. That means others have to regulate their behavior.

    Anything except bending over to their unnecessary noise is “evasive, abusive, and completely hysterical”. It’s been classic, really.

  134. Viking

    Thanks for the coda to this thread, JWT Jr.

    This cartoon animation is a classic summation on sociopathic noise pollution. “F-word” defined. South Park gives gay America a break in many ways in this episode, though name-calling and vandalism should never be condoned:

    http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/251889

    South Park Episode Player – The F Word

    The boys fight back against the loud and obnoxious Motorcycle Riders that are disrupting everyone in South Park.

    (Free video. Requires recent version of Flash.)

    Hysterical!

  135. Viking

    Thanks for the coda to this thread, JWT Jr.

    This cartoon animation is a classic summation on sociopathic noise pollution. “F-word” defined. South Park gives gay America a break in many ways in this episode, though name-calling and vandalism should never be condoned:

    http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/251889

    South Park Episode Player – The F Word

    The boys fight back against the loud and obnoxious Motorcycle Riders that are disrupting everyone in South Park.

    (Free video. Requires recent version of Flash.)

    Hysterical!

  136. Andy

    Grant, this is very interesting…

    You resort to remarks about “horseshit”, call everyone “children”, then accuse everyone else of emotional responses.

    You keep calling everyone (including me) “noise bullies” and “noise advocates” (speaking of emotional responses) but I never advocated noise.

    You accuse everyone of personal attacks but call us “terrorists”. You accuse everyone of relying on anecdotes and personal feelings, yet you are the only one here who can’t seem to back up his statements.

    You question our application of the term “vendetta” but look at everything you have written here and its utterly singular focus on motorcycles, and the terminology you insist on.

    You say our responses are indecipherable. If that is the case then you either need to research those responses and educate yourself, or stop wasting your time here. Richard sees you floundering and he is not pleased.

    You state: “From what I can tell, sources like aircraft and motorcycles are the most covered subjects nationally and internationally with the sharpest public attention.”

    So now you hypocritically again return to emotion, rather than facts or actual research results. Please see Arline’s document from the CENYC, which reveals that what you perceive to be the subjects of “sharpest public attention” does not correlate well to what survey respondents indicated were the most bothersome sources of noise.

    You asked “Are you all saying non-EPA certified motorcycles produce healthy noise levels?”

    The answer is that EPA motorcycles lacking an obvious printed indication of EPA certification are not necessarily in violation of the EPA’s applicable noise standards.

    A label does not a quiet vehicle make.

    If you find that indecipherable then please try to follow these five short paragraphs:

    Your automobile was required to pass the same exact test routine in order to be approved for sale here in the USA.

    Even though the Noise Control Act stipulated that virtually ALL sources of noise had to be labeled, the Office of Noise Abatement and Control was disbanded before they got around to instituting labeling automobile exhausts so your automobile’s muffler has no label.

    Does the fact that your automobile’s muffler lacks an EPA label mean that it was not certified by the EPA?

    Does your automobile’s lack of an EPA label mean that your automobile produces unhealthy levels of sound?

    If you then visit one of the many muffler repair shops to replace your automobile’s damaged or rusted muffler with a generic replacement, which also lacks an EPA label, does that imply your automobile will now produce unhealthy levels of sound?

  137. Cheshire

    Not many riding days left? Bobaloo!
    Get thee to your favorite MC shop and get some winter gear! About the only thing on me that gets cold in the winter is my fingertips, but a new pair of gloves is doing the trick so far.

  138. Andy

    Grant, you hit the nail squarely on the head.

    Congratulations!

    And the South Park video hits it pretty well too, but you probably don’t see it. Gotta’ love Matt and Trey though.

    You wrote “That means others have to regulate their behavior.”

    The key word here is BEHAVIOR.

    The laws you propose don’t address behavior at all. In fact taken quite literally, the laws which you and your friends at NoiseOFF have pinned your hopes on, don’t even address noise!

    And still you insist on the antagonistic labels while simultaneously accusing everyone else of attacking you. You wrote “noise advocates [refuse to] admit they have a responsibility to be neighborly and follow NC laws”.

    First, we are not noise advocates, we are merely opponents of ignorant laws based on propaganda, misinformation and ignorant opinions, designed to carry out an anti-motorcycle agenda instead of punishing only the people who ignore Federal regulations. Just because someone like myself wishes to separate you from your ignorance is no reason to assume that we are outlaws or that we advocate illegal activity.

    Second, there have been many admissions here that noise regulations must be conformed to. Just because one or two people have opined that loud pipes may indeed offer safety benefits is no reason for you to pretend that these admissions have not been made. It’s all here in clear English. Pretending it doesn’t exist is sheer madness – every reader with better than fourth grade reading comprehension should be able to see it.

  139. Viking

    I understand there are attempts at reasoning for the unreasonable in this thread from others. Meaning while regulations should be conformed to, there will never be any actual enforcement in NC (and apparently nowhere else despite the truth to the contrary) because doing so would be capitulating to “… ignorant laws based on propaganda, misinformation and ignorant opinions, designed to carry out an anti-motorcycle agenda instead of punishing only the people who ignore Federal regulations.” Not sure if this means motorcyclists get special waivers or what.

    It seems like the BAU/noise advocacy arguments are meant to throw peace and quiet fans off balance. Not very effective. I’m not sure what the contra positions to the idea of expanded rights to privacy and freedom of trespass in the form of reducing noise harms is meant to accomplish. Are people who want to be protected from noise trespasses and have our rights to privacy upheld and enforced with REAL, measurable remedies supposed to move over to the BAU/libertarian side of the noise pollution/default ‘do nothing’ POV? Based on what? The present absence of action from our more cheesy NC/AVL politicians?

    Any retaliatory pejoratives in the face of such negative inertia in this thread is well deserved. If anyone was offended, be assured that politicians and peace officers are the ones who execute these policies in a generally professional, polite and respectful way; should they ever decide to do so in NC (outside of Forsythe County). No one else needs to respect illegal noise nuisances. It’s like any other illegal activity.

    Taking time out for rebuttals to these indefensible positions in this thread is not important. We get that no one should speak out about noise pollution, unless one has a PhD in noise science. Of course it doesn’t take a PhD to recognize the problem and identify the various solutions being deployed around the nation and indeed internationally. The problem being 1) an absence of government behavior modification/education to some degree; but 2) more so very simple, targeted, intense–yet apparently fairly short-term/low resource–carrot and stick law enforcement remedies directed at noise polluters, i.e. Denver.

    We’ve heard in this thread that citizens should turn of their critical thinking and abilities to observe through their sovereign senses of sight and hearing when it comes to probably the average highest noise harm in Asheville Someone can hire a noise mitigation consulting firm to make sure) because “… as a whole, motorcycles are in fact a minute percentage of a huge noise landscape.” Thus, citizens are “ignorant” to ask for government intervention because they are mistaken and hysterical when they recognize the harm and ask questions about major sources of noise discomfort in our Asheville neighborhoods.. sources which include non-EPA certified motorcycles as well as other easily identifiable noise point sources.

    The Denver noise ordinance covers every noise source besides human voice. A person causing disturbances in Denver and elsewhere is a case of “disturbing the peace” versus an environmental/public heath harm. Otherwise, with a handful of actions, Denver indeed changed behaviors over the past few years.

    The definitions set forth in NCGS 20-128 are clear. No after market modifications to exhausted systems, whatever the vehicle type. It’s called ‘bright line law’, though due to similar impoverished politics and argumentations as has been seen by the libertarians/noise advocates in this thread, there is essentially no enforcement in NC. Shutting down the implicated aftermarket noise industry would be one of many just smashing remedies.

    That’s the situation. I hope more citizens stand up to their right to reasonable protection from unnecessary noise. Nailing the BAU politicians who facilitate the noise industry is another key elements to solving these matters.

    I hope everyone enjoys the fruits of these ‘Noise Polluters and/or Noise Advocates vs. Law Abiding Citizens Dialogs’.

  140. Andy

    Grant, what happened to “Whatever!”??

    You wrote: “We get that no one should speak out about noise pollution, unless one has a PhD in noise science”.

    Nice hyperbole but ridiculous. On the other hand you shouldn’t throw actual numbers around unless you know what they mean, and you should not be comparing technical technical procedures with absolutely zero understanding of those procedures just because Richard Tur deceives you into believing some procedure is somehow disingenuous.

    And since I’ve seen your web sites and your other writings and know that you have a fair grasp of energy science, my opinion is that you have no excuse for failing to (or refusing to?) understand the technical aspects of sound.

    You wrote: “We’ve heard in this thread that citizens should turn of their critical thinking”.

    Nothing could be further from the truth! In fact I encourage critical thinking.

    If you engaged in critical thinking you would have come across Arline’s noise study instead of me. If you engaged in critical thinking you could have argued your case without resorting to the NoiseOFF propaganda word for word, or falling back to accusations and name calling (even today, with your “Noise Polluters and/or Noise Advocates” remark) because of your inability to contradict any of my arguments.

    Back to brass tacks… You wrote: “there is essentially no enforcement in NC”.

    I’m happy to hear you mention this, because we have been saying all along that the issue is primarily one of enforcement.

    You wrote: “Shutting down the implicated aftermarket noise industry would be one of many just smashing remedies”.

    Three weeks ago I mentioned the problem with this right here, which is that competition -intended exhaust systems are perfectly legal for use in competition (off street). Your wish to prohibit the sale of anything that can be abused is a dangerous door to open.

    Grant, you wrote: “Denver indeed changed behaviors over the past few years.”

    Do you have any statistics from the city of Denver to back this up? Say, a breakdown of all noise complaints in the city of Denver over the last five or six years?

  141. John

    MountingKing,

    You have be cautious about the advice some members of the motorcycling community give you.There are no new laws being discussed here. They are already on the books. They have been for years.The motorcycle noise problem is due to a significant level of non compliance coupled with an unacceptable low level of enforcement. You should steer away from any used motorcycles that do not have OEM EPA certified exhaust systems.It is a violation of EPA regulations to operate such a motorcycle for street use. It is also a violation of NC law since such a motorcycle is not equipped with an exhaust system of the type installed at the time of manufacture. There is no way for you to prove that any exhaust system on your bike meets EPA noise emissions standards. The process for certifying any motorcycle system required by the EPA is a very comprehensive one and too complex for the user or law enforcement to carry out. The AMA endorsed J2825 test procedure is not the one required by the EPA for certifying motorcycle exhaust systems. It does not test the exhaust system as thoroughly as the one used by the EPA. It is not recognized by the state of NC either. It is not in the best interests of the community to have riders certify their exhausts for compliance. That should be obvious to anyone, even law enforcement. You already know how to identify an EPA compliant exhaust system. Even you as a new comer were able to check the EPA labels. I say labels, because as you found out, there is one on the frame of the bike printed with contrasting letters and one on the muffler that is an identical except it is embossed (stamped) into the metal. By identical, I mean that the EPA message you referred to is identical on both labels. These labels match hence the term “label match up”. Next time take a closer look and read what the EPA message says. You will also find a similar message in your owners manual. Federal law requires that the EPA certified exhaust system, including the labels of certification, be maintain by the end user. Detractors of the EPA regulations take issue with that but a call to the EPA will clear that up. Replacing the exhaust system with a non EPA compliant one is illegal. It is also likely that such an illegal exhaust system will be louder than the EPA compliant OEM system. We have seen many comments here from some riders who express their desire for loud exhaust systems. If you find a used bike with the proper EPA labels you should have a mechanic inspect the exhaust system for signs of tampering, such as removal or modification of internal baffles and other components. As you may have guessed, tampering with an EPA compliant exhaust system is prohibited. Any modification of exhaust components that increases noise emissions is illegal tampering. That means no drilling of holes in the baffles, or gutting muffler internals, or replacing them with non EPA certified components. Examples of modifications that are not considered tampering include minor cosmetic changes(repairing blemishes), replacement of mounting hardware, or temporary removal of the exhaust system that is necessary for maintenance or repair of bike, to name a few. My advice to you is to comply with the law and operate a legal and quiet motorcycle with a EPA certified exhaust system. As far as enforcement goes, some of the comments you read here are correct. There is little or no enforcement of the exhaust noise laws in NC. One reason is that it has not been given high enough priority. Another is that most law enforcement personnel have no idea how distinguish between a legal an illegal exhaust system. They don’t know the type installed at the time of manufacture. You ask if anyone cares about how loud a motorcycle is. The citizens of NC who are adversely affected by necessary and illegal motorcycle noise care. Those of you who want something done about this problem must demand that the law be enforced and educate your government and law enforce6ment officials about those laws. They are not likely to do that on their own. As you know, they haven’t thus far. It is pointless to debate with those who do not want to comply with the laws or have them enforced. Your energy must be directed to pressure the law makers and law enforcers into compelling the law breakers to comply with the law. It must be made clear to them that their privilege to operate a motorcycle in the state of North Carolina depends on it, as does your right to the peaceful enjoyment of your homes and community.

  142. Viking

    Andy, what are you doing? Do you want the last word? Do you think you are making some sort of important point?

    You like to focus on what I’m saying. Are you obsessed with me? You are welcome to believe that I do not have the inability to contradict any of your arguments. You and others like you are hard workers when it comes to promoting your views. ‘Thinkers’ even. I concede that.

    If all you are doing is looking for holes in noise mitigation policy, feel free to research that, identify the players and lobby for your position. Or just criticize the points in the commentary above and in this thread. You are welcome to waste your time pontificating ‘whatever’ it is you think you are doing?

    I don’t think I called anyone names in this posting. Does that help with your closure process with me?

  143. Anthony Jaime

    Grant, to put it quite simply, in the words of South Carolina Representative Joe Wilson: YOU LIE! And not only have you lied throughout this thread, you have refused to provide the documentation to back your claims, and you evade answering forthright questions put to you. You are reminiscent of the used car salesman in the commercial who keeps ignoring the request to show “Me the CarFax.” We keep asking you to show us the facts regarding your claims but you keep ducking the questions! In addition, you weakly attempt to engage in poorly orchestrated bully pulpit tactics in a futile attempt to deflect attention away from your own pernicious perfidy in accepting responsibility for your failures. Your pathetic attempts to regain the ground lost due to your blatant disregard for the truth are contemptible. You fail to take any responsibility for your actions and attempt to blame everyone else for your own incompetence and ignorance. In actuality, you have failed to make your case in a convincing manner and your only recourse is to resort to your “business as usual” tactics of more name calling, avoidance of issues you either can’t refute or substantiate, and changing the subject to issues you feel are safe ground. As usual, you again fall short of the mark and the truth is that it is you Grant, who doesn’t like being called to account for your lies and the only “horseshit” here is flowing from you because you continue to behave like a horse’s ass!

    That being said, let’s once again review your inconsistencies and illogical commentary. You term those of us who dispute your unsupported conclusions and opinions as “noise bullies and noise advocates” in spite of the fact that Noiseoff urges its followers to refrain from name-calling! Furthermore, nothing could be further from the truth, and it is just more evidence of your myopic worldview and dislike of people who confront you with differing perspectives, especially those of us who have taken the time to critically examine the issues. In not one of my postings can you find any evidence of me advocating more noise, or that claiming that extraneous noise levels are beneficial, or any reference to the anecdotal loud pipes save lives argument. Instead, what you do find is a very critical examination of your alleged facts, suppositions, unqualified opinions, and extremely poor writing skills, which are rife with presumptive fallacies. Moreover, if you go back and read carefully, you will find several instances where I stipulate that prolonged exposure to loud noise can be deleterious to health and have even cited OSHA regulations detailing this fact. So let’s cut the crap about me being a noise advocate or a noise bully. The fact is that I am a well-educated, well-balanced, reasonable individual with above average intelligence who has been trained to spot such illogical inconsistencies as the ill prepared and unsubstantiated propaganda you spew. And I have caught you in repeated instances of doing just exactly that and exposed you so that critical examination of your exaggerations could take place. I welcome anyone to look at these issues with a critical eye because as has already been stated, “every reader with better than fourth grade reading comprehension should be able to see it.”

    Many of the readers out there question why you keep inserting “Red Herrings” such as your dubious claims that loud motorcycle pipes are responsible for all many of health defects. No doubt about it Grant, you tried to be sly but it is there in plain sight in your original op-ed piece: But these overt and covert persuasion campaigns, often led by groups such as ABATE (American Bikers Aimed Towards Education) and the American Motorcyclist Association, don’t begin to offset the harm that noise pollution inflicts on children, the elderly and others. Documented health effects include everything from hearing impairment to heart disease, immune-system changes and even birth defects.

    Grant, you attempt to link ABATE and the AMA to issues that have absolutely no correlation to either organization. Neither organization advocates excessive noise nor are they responsible for the laundry list of ills you purposely inserted in a poorly disguised attempt to lay blame through association and innuendo. It’s apples and oranges and the apples you are using are rotten! What you fail to mention is that there is no documentation linking any of these health effects to the motorcycling community. And now you throw out another piece of disinformation called “Noise and the Unborn”, a study performed in Japan that has absolutely no correlation to the motorcycling community either here in the United States or in Japan. Excessive exposure to noise may very well be the culprit in may of the instances you cite but for you to attempt to lay the blame on the motorcycling community is completely ludicrous.

    So, what could possibly be the motive and agenda underlying Grant’s specious claims attempting to link excessive noise and health risks to motorcycles? Well, the plain truth is that he is attempting to link motorcycles to health risks and criminalize riders by innuendo because “according to the law, for an act to constitute a statutory nuisance, it must present a health risk or a nuisance.” Given that the nuisance value of enforcing a law is somewhat vague, and “when assessing nuisance, the law looks to balance the right of one individual to enjoy his or her land, without interfering with the right of their neighbors to enjoy theirs.” Furthermore, when assessing nuisance, guidelines that are often followed generally state, “a nuisance must cross a boundary (hence his continued use of the term trespass); it must be a substantial interference and not a trivial matter; and the time, duration, nature, and location of the nuisance must be taken into account.” It’s pretty easy to see then that enforcement efforts regarding motorcycle exhaust are easily dismissed under these clauses, especially the trivial matter clause. And rightfully so, since any motorcycle noise is briefly transient and per capita, motorcycles comprise such a small minority of the driving public. Since I am sure Grant is well aware of the demographics, and the standards for substantiating nuisance value, he is attempting to do an end around run by implicating motorcycles to health risks through innuendo, regardless of lack of proof or evidence substantiating his false insinuations. And he further attempts to categorize bikers as criminal scofflaws breaking the law with the same underlying motive. This is the underlying basis for Grant’s allegations and the cat is now out of the bag! Unfortunately Grant, your dog isn’t going to hunt and it is long past time for you to quit peeing on our legs and trying to tell us it’s raining!

  144. Anthony Jaime

    Here is a list of common sources of noise in our lives rated in dbA . . . and I would offer a mea culpa to my previous post, because it appears I did at least once refer to the LPSL anecdotal argument . . . my bad, and unlike Grant, at least I can admit my mistakes . . . however, that is not the primary reason I take exception to Grant Millin’s commentary . . . I take exception because he spins his side through the manipulative and dishonest application of “cherry picked” citations that have no bearing in fact or germane application to his defamatory anti-motorcyclist agenda . . . moreover, on further examination of Mr. Millin, it appears he is in the “behavior modification” sector which wants to globalize America under UN & EU mandates and turn this nation further into a community of sheeple who have no free will or freedom of choice . . . just follow along like obedient little sheep to be fleeced . . .

    I’d be surprised if after reading this list that Grant didn’t start a crusade to outlaw all alarm clocks . . .

    Personally, I’m thinking he probably ought to wrap his head in tin foil to keep out the stray RF and voices too . . .

    And as you read this list, think about how much more common most of these noise producers are than motorcycles . . . and if we listened to all the Noise Off proganda, we would all be living in constant fear of damned near every modern convenience in our homes . . . wow, that could sure cause a lot of sleepness nights . . . which would lead to anxiety and lost production and oh my, who knows what manner of societal ills and health issues could be blamed upon noise pollution . . . all without any definite correlation of cause and effect . . .

    I guess noise pollution is a far more common cause of stress than people worrying about the loss of their home, or their job, or their life savings . . . or whether they have health care or their children have enough food to eat . . . ???

    Funny how the Noise Off website seems to neglect all of these causes and only focuses on its favorite objects of displeasure . . .

    And it is extremely conspicuous by its absence on this list as a major noise polluter, but nowhere on this list is the television to be found . . . funny, how many people who would complain of other devices and machinery leave the unbiquitous tube on all night long, and in fact, go to sleep with it on . . .

    Sound Levels Generated by Various Sources of Noise

    Sound Level dbA

    Quiet library, soft whispers 30 dbA

    Living room, refrigerator 40 dbA

    Light traffic, normal conversation, quiet office 50 dbA

    Air conditioner at 20 feet, sewing machine 60 dbA

    Vacuum cleaner, hair dryer, noisy restaurant 70 dbA

    Average city traffic, garbage disposals, alarm clock at 2 feet 80 dbA

    Subway, motorcycle, truck traffic, lawn mower 90 dbA

    Garbage truck, chain saw, pneumatic drill 100 dbA

    Rock band concert in front of speakers, thunderclap 120 dbA

    Gunshot blast, jet plane 140 dbA

    Rocket launching pad 180 dbA

    Source: Deafness Research Foundation.

  145. Viking

    The following was not written by NoiseOff.org! No lie!

    Anthony, why are you calling peace and quiet advocates liars? Why are you so concerned about what I’m saying? Don’t you represent ABATE in California? How can one person’s observations on noise pollution create so much anxiety for you and form a national, indeed INTERNATIONAL, incident for you (in your mind at least)? Do you really think we expect total silence and that we want the Cuban Army to enforce these new silence laws?

    Are you one of those California wack jobs? Do you think are persuading people from not asking questions about noise pollution? Do you think people get confused when you pontificate the ABATE intelligentsia party line and it makes us want to agree with you people? Feel free to get out their and promote the ABATE position, Anthony. SHAPE THE DEBATE! Look in the mirror and tell yourself you’re a winner.

    Don’t you see, when you pound sand with your ludicrous statements like “…it appears (peace and quiet advocates are) in the “behavior modification” sector which wants to globalize America under UN & EU mandates and turn this nation further into a community of sheeple who have no free will or freedom of choice . . . just follow along like obedient little sheep to be fleeced . . .” it forms an image in which citizens view the ABATE leadership as narcissistic sociopaths who want to shut down the FREE SPEECH of others who nonetheless tearing apart the myths surrounding why law abiding currently have to endure unnecessary noise pollution without remedy.

    It seems like NCGS 20-128 should be enforced; the Denver Model should be understood in Asheville as to why it has been effective, and then we can see what else can be done. Or citizens who want a little more peace and quiet in their homes, places of worship, work and study, should just shut up and enjoy the unnecessary noise others force on us. The developing National Park Service noise mitigation program for the Blue Ridge Parkway is encouraging; and so to the various modern municipal efforts.

    If the ‘remedy’ modifies noise nuisance behavior through the threat of law enforcement regarding NCGS 20-128, then that’s our cops and politicians who you are complaining about (should they ever enforce NCGS 20-128). Citizens are getting the picture that the laws exist and more laws may be necessary, but more importantly that our politicians and law enforcement need to cut the relationship with noise nuisances and be held accountable.

    The ‘rights’ you idiots reference about unmitigated noise are not in the US Constitution nor Federal or the NC legal codes. WE UNDERSTAND THE MUFFLER LAWS. WE CAN READ!! It’s too late and we are pissed at our politicians for kowtowing to people like you. THE CAT’S OUT OF THE BAG!

    I could easily point to a Washington Times story that refutes your Deafness Research Foundation list in terms of motorcycles putting out an AVERAGE 90db, but certainly quite a few motorcycles louder than that. But Anthony, I don’t want to dialog with you on this thread forever; and we absolutely don’t owe you an explanation or any kind of apology.

    Do you just want the last word as well? Maybe you and Andy can work out who gets the last word? Then I will comment on your bullshit.

    So you agree motorcycles on average are out of compliance with the 80-82 db the NCA sets out for motorcycle manufacturers? Should the Noise Control Act reach beyond the factory walls. We know you folks think we should let POV owners make as much noise as they like, but why should the rest of us appreciate that noise, again? SPEAK UP, ANTHONY! You seem to be in another state, Winnie Boy. In my community, people really notice the non-EPA certified motorcycles… but there are several other sources of noise pollution in our area. Lawn mowing of course happens, but usually in the middle of the day. Should we build quieter lawn mowers? Can garbage trucks be quieter? Maybe. We’ll let others worry about that.

    That is an often repeated list and I’m not sure why you use it. THERE ARE NO ROCKET LAUNCHING PADS IN ASHEVILLE. No subways either. And while lawnmowers, garbage trucks and chain saws are noisy, people rarely modify them to be LOUDER. The problem is that NCGS 20-128 exists. Either we employ it, or not. This is not the case with a very noticeable group among the motorcycle community. “Trucks” as referenced are likely as not long-haul tractor trailer rigs. PEOPLE DISLIKE JAKE BRAKING AS WELL!

    Recently, WNC communities were asking that a concrete plant be made to muffle their noise pollution, actually with some success. You see, the concrete plant owners understood PR and their role as a community stakeholder. The AMA and ABATE do not. Thanks for reminding us, Champ!

    Were you trying to use relativity to reduce and belittle the concerns of ASHEVILLE citizens who noise vehicle noise pollution, and have for years, and have written numerous LTTEs in local media, and say to themselves “WTF!” whenever some loudass drives through their neighborhood with a non-EPA certified motorcycle, aftermarket modified pickup truck, ‘boom’ car or some piece of junk with no muffler (or even straight pipes, which are the opposite of mufflers) at all. Do you think we are unable to perceive the nuisance and the shit politics of all this?

    Why do you think citizens are going to become ABATE’s ‘sheeple’ and sign up to your crap? Are you paying us a nuisance offset fee? No? Then shove, Buddy! You’re trying to discredit this recognition among hundreds of Asheville citizens, but you’re failing miserably. But just keep going, Man. like I said, you guys are hard workers, but also a lot like some poor doggies on “Dog Whisperer” who need correction from good ol’ Cesar Millan. Shh!

    JUST FREAK OUT, ANTHONY

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/04/AR2007060401430.html

    Noise Pollution Takes Toll on Health and Happiness
    Everyday Noise Can Overstimulate the Body’s Stress Response

    By Rick Weiss
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Tuesday, June 5, 2007

    In the beginning there was silence, and it was good.

    From silence came sound, not all of which was good. And the sound that was not welcome was called noise. And there got to be more and more of it, because who wants to rake when you can blow?

    Let me be honest. I don’t get along with noise. I see it, or rather hear it, as the essayist Ambrose Bierce did around the turn of the last century: as “a stench in the ear.”

    And by “noise” I don’t mean only the noises that everyone agrees are bad for your hearing — those ear-splitting sirens and the stand-right-next-to-the-speaker heavy metal concerts. Even everyday noise eats away at my nerves.

    You may say I’m thin-skinned, but I have science on my side. A growing body of evidence confirms that the chronic din of construction crews, road projects, jet traffic and, yes, those ubiquitous leaf blowers, is taking a toll on our health and happiness.

    Providing scientific proof of this has not been easy — in part because noise, defined as “unwanted sound,” is to a large degree a matter of personal taste and sensitivity. The romantic hears a train whistle differently from the insomniac. And no small number of Americans pay good money to hear the same rock-and-roll music that was used to torture the holed-up Panamanian dictator, Manuel Noriega, and Waco’s David Koresh and induce cooperation from prisoners in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

    But study after study has found that community noise is interrupting our sleep, interfering with our children’s learning, suppressing our immune systems and even increasing — albeit just a little — our chances of having a heart attack. It is also tarnishing the Golden Rule, reducing people’s inclination to help one another.

    “Everyday noise is under the radar, yet it affects everyone’s life,” said Louis Hagler, a retired physician in Oakland, Calif., and an advocate for quiet, who recently published in the Southern Medical Journal a review of studies linking noise exposures to health problems. “We don’t say to people, ‘You just have to learn to live with sewage in your water,’ ” Hagler said in an interview. “Why should we tolerate sewage coming into our ears?”

    As I write — from home today, the better to concentrate, I told my editor — there is a person up the street blowing leaves and dust from one part of his property to another. To accomplish this task, he is generating a sound that is only a little less intense than the 85 decibels that the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health says is physically damaging over a period of hours, and more than loud enough to make it almost impossible for me to think.

    Leaf blowers may be my pet peeve, but it is modern transportation — cars, motorcycles, trucks and air traffic — that accounts for most of the background noise that disturbs and even sickens people.

    More than 40 percent of Americans whose homes have any traffic noise at all classify that noise as “bothersome,” according to the 2005 American Housing Survey, conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. One-third of those say the noise is so bothersome they want to move. All told, more than 100 million Americans are regularly exposed to noise levels in excess of the 55 decibels that federal agencies have recommended as a reasonable background intensity.

    Here in the Washington area, a battle over airport noise is posed to erupt this summer as the Senate considers adding as many as 20 new daily takeoffs and landings at Reagan National, a move opposed by neighbors already fed up with the steady roar of low-flying jets.

    A now-classic study conducted in the 1970s was among the first to indicate that such noise is more than an annoyance. It found that children living on the lower, noisier floors of an apartment building overlooking a busy Manhattan bridge had lower reading scores than those living on higher floors.

    But was noise really the major factor explaining that difference? After all, people tend to move away from extremely noisy neighborhoods if they can, and those who don’t are more likely to be poor, which by itself is a risk factor for delayed educational advancement and ill health.

    To answer such questions, scientists have taken advantage of unusual situations in which people’s exposure to noise changed over time while other factors remained relatively constant. In a study of students attending an elementary school near noisy train tracks in New York, for example, researchers showed that by the time the students reached sixth grade, those whose classrooms faced the train were a year behind those whose classrooms were on the quiet side of the building. After noise reduction materials were installed in the classrooms and around the tracks, reading scores in the two groups equalized, strengthening the case that noise was the culprit.

    Another clue came from a study of children whose schools were located near West London’s busy Heathrow airport.

    “We found a straightforward linear effect from aircraft noise and impairment in reading on standardized tests,” said study leader Stephen A. Stansfeld, a professor of psychiatry at Queen Mary’s School of Medicine and Dentistry in London, noting that the close correlation strengthened the case that noise was to blame.

    But it was a “natural” experiment in Germany that helped clinch the case, when the old Munich airport was shut down and a new one was opened at a distant site. Tests done on third- and fourth-graders — before that switch, soon after it and again later on — showed that students near the old airport initially scored lower than others on tests of memory and reading but improved after the airport closed, while their counterparts living near the new airport saw a decline in scores after the switch occurred.
    A Chronic Emergency

    Noise that invades a classroom may make it hard for students to hear the teacher, of course. But blood tests done on the Munich children helped reveal a more insidious biological mechanism through which noise wreaks much of its havoc. Children near the working airports had significantly higher levels of adrenaline and cortisol — the body’s so-called stress hormones.

    Those hormones are part of the body’s “fight or flight” response, which helps a person deal with sudden emergencies. Blood pressure and heart rate go up in preparation for action. The blood becomes thick with oxygen-toting red blood cells. And the immune system gets suppressed as part of the shift toward fulfilling short-term needs rather than longer-term health.

    That response can be lifesaving in an attack, but it is counterproductive when activated chronically. Over months and years it can literally corrode the body, eating away at blood vessels and other organs and predisposing a person to other medical woes.

    “This is the most disturbing thing about noise, because it means you are being exposed to this reaction all the time,” said Roberto Bertollini of the World Health Organization’s Special Programme on Health and Environment.

    As a result of that hormonal activation, children near the working Munich airports had significantly higher blood pressure than children in quieter neighborhoods — adding to their risk of having a heart attack or stroke later in life. Similar impacts have been documented among adults near Amsterdam’s Schiphol airport and Stockholm’s Arlanda airport, where chronic noise as low as 55 decibels correlated with more doctor visits, high blood pressure and treatments for heart troubles.

    Whether traffic noise actually increases one’s chances of having heart disease or a heart attack has been harder to determine, because such studies require large numbers of people. But the evidence for at least a modest effect is growing.

    A highly respected Dutch analysis combined the results from 43 studies that tracked chest pains, heart attacks and related problems with community noise levels. Using a statistical technique called meta-analysis, it concluded that there is “a slight increase in cardiovascular disease risk in populations exposed to air traffic and/or road traffic noise.”
    Face the Music

    Even if chronic exposure to noise is unlikely to kill you, it can simmer under the surface and take a toll on your well-being.

    Studies have shown that chronic night noise not only leaves you shrouded in a fog of fatigue, irritability and poor concentration, but also activates the stress response as you sleep. And while the number of awakenings per night may decrease as you adjust to the din, the increased heart rate, blood pressure and breathing changes persist.

    “The idea that people get used to noise is a myth,” the Environmental Protection Agency has reported. “Even when we think we have become accustomed to noise, biological changes still take place inside us.”

    The Health Council of the Netherlands found that high levels of mechanical noise, such as that from a hospital’s own air-conditioning equipment, can delay recovery in patients — a reflection, perhaps, of the immune suppression that comes with an activated stress response.

    Another insidious effect of noise is its cultivation of what scientists call “learned helplessness.” Children given puzzles in moderately noisy classrooms are not only more likely to fail to solve them but are also more likely to surrender early.

    “They just give up,” said Gary W. Evans, a professor of human ecology at Cornell University who studies noise and behavior. The implications of learned helplessness on a child’s success in life “are potentially pretty powerful,” he said.

    Perhaps most disturbing in these times of political and economic polarization is that noise undermines generosity.

    In one study, people were less likely to help someone pick up a bundle of dropped books when the noise of a lawn mower was present. Another showed that in a noisy environment, people playing a game were more likely to see their fellow players as disagreeable or threatening. Yet another found a drop in helpful behavior when loud “annoying music” was played.

    Interestingly, helping behavior increased when similarly loud “uplifting music” was played. Which gets to the weird thing about noise: its mysterious psychological component.
    Something to Yell About

    Researchers still know very little about how attitudes toward noise affect its impact on health. It may be that people with upbeat attitudes — people, for example, who do not believe that this blowhard up the street ought to be jailed — will live longer, healthier lives than I will. After all, anger alone is a potent producer of stress hormones. Am I killing myself by caring?

    Some research suggests so. People report being far less annoyed by noises they willingly accept or actively select (riding a motorcycle, for example) than by those they have no control over (the car alarm outside your window).

    On the other hand, the hormonal systems of even the mellowest of people in noisy places may still be quietly seething.

    After runway patterns were changed at an airport in Australia, researchers studied two neighborhoods — one that was now noisier because of the change and one that got quieter — both of which now had the same noise levels. People whose neighborhoods had become quieter were less anxious, angry and depressed than those whose neighborhoods had grown noisier. But the two groups’ stress hormone levels were indistinguishable, suggesting that a good attitude may not be powerful enough to save you — and a bad one won’t necessarily kill you.

    As an inveterate ranter against noise, I find that last point gratifying. It means I can complain as noisily as I want without losing the benefits of whatever quiet I win.

    Comments:weissr@washpost.com.

  146. Andy

    Grant, congratulations, finally a posting sans pejoratives!

    If it gives you a thrill to think I’m obsessed, please go with it. I would hate to deny you the simple pleasures. But it really just boils down to my reluctance to let ignorance go un-challenged. Not your ignorance and not anyone else’s either.

    Or, was that a hypothetical question?

  147. Andy

    John,

    A few legal clarifications are necessary in your advice to MountainKing…

    When you write that “It is a violation of EPA regulations to operate [a motorcycle without OEM EPA certified exhaust systems] for street use”, that is not correct.

    It is a violation of EPA regulations to operate a motorcycle that produces sound in excess of EPA regulations applicable to the motorcycle model/year. The EPA certification is the OEM’s and third party manufacturers’ responsibility only. Sound limits are the only factor that extend to the consumer’s responsibility.

    You wrote “It is also a violation of NC law since such a motorcycle is not equipped with an exhaust system of the type installed at the time of manufacture.”

    I have to question this and ask if you have any NC case law to cite which supports this interpretation of the state of North Carolina’s vague wording, especially since you point out “most law enforcement personnel … don’t know the type installed at the time of manufacture.”

    I agree that the EPA’s old test routine may indeed be more comprehensive or could be viewed as somehow more realistic. How realistic? I am not sure since many NoiseOFF members insist that European testing is /more/ realistic. The J331A procedure IS also relatively complex. It is not, however, “too complex for the user or law enforcement to carry out.” Many law enforcement agencies have successfully carried it out. But it does take proper planning and more of it than other typical LE procedures.

    You are also correct that the AMA endorsed J2825 test procedure is not the one required by the EPA or by NC for certifying motorcycle exhaust systems.

    On the other hand the designers of the J2825 test procedure – the SAE – are same exact organization who designed the EPA’s original test. The SAE’s work on J2825 was done according to a contract which demanded a test that would be as similar as possible in overall effect to the original J331A procedure but which could also be easily administered in the field and by laymen.

    If you are ready to dismiss the outcomes of J2825 tests then there is no reason for you to have confidence in the J331A test either, nor in EPA’s regulations in their entirety as they pertain to motor vehicle exhaust noise.

    My own tests with the J2825 routine show that stock motorcycles squeeze in under its limits with very little room.

    I find it stunning that you would insist that “It is not in the best interests of the community to have riders certify their exhausts for compliance.”

    Would you state the same about automobile owners, none of whose aftermarket exhaust systems require any kind of certification?

    Thank you for pointing out that the muffler labels are being embossed by the manufacturer and are not in contrasting colors. Have you noticed that Federal law requires the muffler’s markings to be in contrasting colors and readily visible?

    You wrote that “Federal law requires that the EPA certified exhaust system, including the labels of certification, be maintain by the end user.”

    This is absolutely incorrect. Federal law requires the maintenance of the labels of certification only up to the time of sale to the “ultimate purchaser” (retail consumer). After that the Federal law governing the presence of the labels is no longer applicable.

    If you research the legislative intent of the EPA section of the CFR you will discover that the eventual intent was in fact to update the Federal laws to support your idea. These changes to the law were never carried out, however, just as the eventual intent to require labeling of automobile exhaust components was never carried out. These initiatives all died with ONAC.

    The Federal law does not agree with what your hopes of the Federal law should have been.

    You also wrote that “tampering with an EPA compliant exhaust system is prohibited” but followed it up with “Any modification of exhaust components that increases noise emissions is illegal tampering.”

    It is the latter statement that takes precedence, as the EPA specifically excludes from their legal definition of tampering any modifications which do not increase noise emissions. You did mention examples of such modifications. You may find it interesting (disheartening?) to know that according to the definitions set forth in the Noise Control Act, the EPA label is not a device or element of design. It has no function – actively or passively – in the control of noise or other emissions. As such, consumer tampering with the label is not prohibited.

  148. Andy

    Andy,

    Too bad you’ve gone back to name-calling, profanity and now yelling, letting Anthony push your buttons.

    Once again you infer that the “Denver Model … has been effective” but I haven’t seen any evidence of that. Perhaps it has and perhaps it has not but I can’t seem to find any evidence either way. Can you, or are you just hoping people will assume you are correct?

    Once again you also highlight your failure to understand what a dB is (not db, by the way), trying to directly compare a list of sound levels that are normalized to a 1 meter measuring distance, to the numbers used in the Federal law, which are taken at more than 15 meters distance.

    You say you know the muffler laws and that you can read, but this persistent, steadfast ignorance of the scientific points of the law proves that your reading comprehension is insufficient to understand the muffler laws.

    Also interesting that you are ready to prioritize the information in a Washington Times story (which doesn’t seem to include the information you specifically referred to) over data from the Deafness Research Foundation and from one of your own peers, Arline Bronzaft.

  149. Andy

    …in case it wasn’t enormously obvious, the salutation in that prior post was supposed to be:

    “Grant,”
    :-)

    I hope everyone was amused!

    I need to stop rushing my proof-reading.

    I’ll still be here of course, waiting for the following items from Grant, Todd, John, etc.:

    1. Statistics from Denver regarding their motorcycle noise complaints.

    2. Case law from NC about whether “a muffler, or other exhaust system of the type installed at the time of manufacture, in good working order and in constant operation to prevent excessive or unusual noise, annoying smoke and smoke screens” can only be the exact same muffler as supplied by the OEM.

    3. Research (not editorial opinions or news articles) that shows motorcycle noise to be more harmful than anything else in the noise landscape.

    4. Proof that there are no BMW motorcycles with loud aftermarket exhausts.

    5. Statistical evidence that BMW motorcycles are involved in less collisions with other motor vehicles.

    6. A statement from the EPA indicating that the owner of a motorcycle is specifically forbidden to remove or obscure the EPA muffler approval stamp, with cites to the relevant Federal law, Federal or State case law and background.

    7. A current statement from the EPA asserting that there are no current motorcycles whose HC/NOx emissions are competitive with today’s automobiles.

    8. A statement from the EPA asserting that a motorcycle does indeed emit “far far more air pollution” than an automobile with similarly illegal exhaust and emissions equipment modifications.

    I’ll also be waiting for:

    An admission that either you don’t know a dB from a CB or that like David Delorey, you deliberately confuse the math in order to dramatacize a non-existent case.

    Admission that the SAE is not a special interest and that they have nothing to gain or lose over acceptance of the J2825 test procedure.

    Admission that the new test procedure’s goal is not an attempt to define a new and less stringent limit for noise, but merely an attempt to produce a test which can be more reliably enforced in the field.

    Proof that the first attempt to introduce local legislation based on the “EPA label match-up” idea pre-dated the talks to begin work on the new test procedure. Cites required.

    Admission that the AMA has never promoted loud exhaust pipes, has since its very beginning been promoting quiet riding and good behavior, and in fact has allowed a substantial amount of noise -related legislation to pass.

    Or…

    Of course you could all just continue to demonize motorcyclists by continuing to spread propaganda and responding to challenges by repeating the propaganda spiked with foul language, insults, pejoratives, stereotypes, etc., offering up smokescreens with tangential arguments and referring to opinions and wishful thinking as factual and self-evident.

    Richard will love it!

  150. Viking

    That’s amazing, Andy. I think your previous error where you address yourself is telling: you all are now talking to yourselves on this thread.

    You and Anthony are providing some comfort to those who want unlimited noise pollution. Otherwise, no one is reading these threads any longer. There are a lot of folks in Asheville who write LTTEs complaining about noise pollution and they have been doing so for years. People regularly are thankful for these inquiries.

    Do you people think you’re changing hearts and minds? And Andy, I know you think we are ignorant, but not so much in terms of adopting the SAE system which fosters the idea of legalizing vehicles with aftermarket modifications at a LOUDER than factory level (90-100 dB). The SAE standards may seem fair to implement from the noise makers perspective, but a decibel meter, a few questions from law enforcement, and EPA label match-up are what is used in Denver.

    Your theories aren’t a challenge, Dudes. Everyone knows people like you want to keep noise mitigation policy weak, technically ponderous to implement and/or essentially nonexistent on the road. In your ‘Anti-Ignorance Crusade’, try to consider that the people not aligned with your ruminations are not listening.

    What I suggest the City of Asheville do is contact the Rutgers Noise Technical Assistance Center. I hope Rutgers dismisses the SAE standard. I’m not that worried because it looks like the only groups endorsing or adopting SAE J2825 are motorcycle/motorcyclist lobbying groups; not the EPA or any entity in the public interest. Wasn’t SAE paid by the motorcycle lobby to create J2825?

    While the attacks on the above commentary writer needed to be rebuffed, that was done by several locals a long time ago. Demonizing motorcyclists and noticing a major source of unnecessary noise pollution via optional aftermarket equipment modifications in Asheville may seem like the same thing to some. I think it is more accurate to same many motorcyclists do not obey the law on this point.

    And Andy, while it’s really weird that you want to conduct a supreme court case online, but feel free to do that among yourselves. Repeating previously cited data doesn’t make much sense and I owe you people precisely nothing. It’s unfortunate that the EPA Office of Noise Control and Abatement is not available to act as a moderating force to the noise advocacy faction of the motorcycle/motorcyclist lobby so vocal in this thread. Call them or Rutgers with your questions.

    Nonetheless, folks notice things are louder in Asheville.

  151. Viking

    I think MX is trying to close this thread. Andy, I wrote extensive notes to break down your theories (once again) which were not posted by MX.

    The important thing to recognize is that at this point is that Andy, Anthony, and others who think alike, are communicating to each other within the motorcycle/motorcyclist lobby who lean towards the ABATE POV and tired to use this thread in a failed attempt to prove those who disagree have no standing… despite the law, trespass and nuisance theory, and any other ‘proofs’ they may need citizens to provide before using our First Amendment rights.

    No one else is reading these postings. We sure as hell don’t need to check in with you wienies!

    You all have failed miserably in terms of whatever ‘hearts and minds’ campaign you were trying to run in this thread. Asheville citizens who want something done about unnecessary noise pollution are clear on your arguments. Many of us write LTTEs like the one you all have been criticizing. Now we will go to city council.

    Have fun!

  152. Viking

    Correction: “The important thing to recognize is that at this point is that Andy, Anthony, and others who think alike, are communicating to each other within the motorcycle/motorcyclist lobby who lean towards the ABATE POV and tried (not tired) to use this thread in a failed attempt to prove those who disagree have no standing… despite the law, trespass and nuisance theory, and any other ‘proofs’ they may need citizens to provide before using our First Amendment rights.”

  153. Andy

    Grant,

    You wrote: “no one is reading these threads any longer.” If you feel that is so, then why bother responding?

    One thing IS for sure, which is that you aren’t reading them, at least not for comprehension. Otherwise you wouldn’t continue to state that the SAE is promoting louder standards.

    Someone with your background has absolutely no excuse for not understanding that the “(90-100 dB)” figures which you keep alleging are “louder than factory level” are measured at 1/2 meter while the 80-82 dB figures you are comparing them to are measured at 15 meters. 100dB at .5 meters is equivalent to just 71 dB at 15 meters, which is what most people would actually say is subjectively about half as loud.

    Go ahead and run it by Rutgers and let us know how that works out. We’ll be waiting.

    Also very clever is your attempt to re-write history. According to you a few days ago, Denver’s law was based entirely on EPA labels. Today you casually say it’s “a decibel meter, a few questions from law enforcement, and EPA label match-up”.

    All you need is to change “and” to “or” and you’ll be 100% correct!

    If you think our “theories” (which are actually facts – it is your writing that relies on theories) aren’t a challenge, then why haven’t you been able to challenge them?

    Funny that you would say “Repeating previously cited data doesn’t make much sense” when that data, from authoritative sources like other members of NoiseOFF, opposes your claims.

    You mention that “It’s unfortunate that the EPA Office of Noise Control and Abatement is not available”. That is true. Otherwise the EPA would have been able to fund updates to the motor vehicle noise measurement standards. Instead, those standards have languished for over three decades, leaving states and municipalities to fend for themselves.

    Look at how much the world has changed in three decades, how much we’ve learned, and in all that time the EPA’s noise laws haven’t evolved at all.

    Sadly, even when a US governmental agency IS still active and funded, evolution still crawls. For example, the NHTSA has made no significant improvements to their motorcycle helmet standard (FMVSS 218) in just as long. Safety conscious motorcyclists prefer SMF and ECE rated helmets, knowing the US DOT’s approval is barely an improvement over nothing at all. But back to the subject at hand…

    You bring up the funding of the J2825.

    The EPA /can’t/ do it sans ONAC. No choice.

    I haven’t seen folks from Richard Tur’s NoiseOFF or Ted Reuter’s Noise Free America forking over their money to revise the motor vehicle sound measurement standards. The /only/ tool in their chest has been the motorcycle -focused label match-up idea, which is fatally flawed also due to the premature demise of ONAC.

    So to answer your rhetorical question, the AMA and the MIC paid the SAE to design the new measurement practice. Exactly what are you really asking?

    The idea to go forward with a new measurement standard was a response to situations like the one in Carefree Arizona, which in 2004 passed a law (sorry, the law excerpts get a little long-winded):

    “It shall be unlawful for any person or persons to operate a motor vehicle, a motorcycle, or combination of vehicles, at any time, or under any condition of grade, load, acceleration or deceleration, in such a manner, either alone or collectively, as to exceed eighty-five (85) dBA based on a measurement taken at a distance of twenty-five (25) feet or more from the source of the noise. For purpose of this Section, “dBA” shall mean weighted decibel, a sound level
    measurement unit.”

    …and:

    “It shall be unlawful for any person or persons to operate a motor vehicle, a motorcycle, or combination of vehicles, at any time, or under any condition of grade, load, acceleration or deceleration, in such a manner that annoys or disturbs either:
    a.) two (2) reasonable people of normal sensory perception, not residing in the same house, or
    b.) one (1) law enforcement officer engaged in his or her official duties and responsibilities.”

    I know you’re pretending that science is not your strong point right now but that first part specified limits for sound levels (from all motor vehicles, notably) that contradicted the Noise Control Act and was therefore illegal. It also had the effect of interfering with constitutional rights to assemble. That portion of the law was in fact struck down a few years later, replaced by a chart of permissible noise levels for categories of individual vehicles.

    And just to harp for a moment on your continuing disregard for the science, That law’s recent revision specifically acknowledges the correlation between dB numbers and distance and states:

    “the noise limits established by this section shall be based on measurements taken at a distance of 50 feet from the center of the lane of travel within the specified speed limit. Noise measurements can be made at distances other than 50 feet from the center of the lane of travel. In such cases, the measurement shall be corrected to what it would be at the standard distance of 50 feet, for comparison with the standard.”

    The other part of Carefree’s law that I mentioned here, in spite of being unconstitutionally vague and ripe for abuse, is still in effect. I don’t know if it has been tested at all.

    In reality the MIC et al are doing municipalities a favor by handing them a fairly simple measurement standard and – according to a recent AMA press release – model legislation to go with it. I haven’t yet seen the legislation. But it should save local governments the expense of dreaming up their own legislation and the further expense of fending off lawsuits when their ill-conceived legislation is found to be repugnant, as has happened many times in many municipalities across the US already. It should also save citizens future agony while their elected officials hash out all the problems caused by their well meaning but awfully executed legislation.

    Have fun with your city council – we’ll see you there too!

  154. bobaloo

    try to consider that the people not aligned with your ruminations are not listening.

    You’ve made it abundantly clear that you aren’t willing to listen or debate in any way.
    Sooo, why are you still posting?

    Incidentally, no one else may be reading this thread, but every time you devolve into name calling and hyperbole it’s pretty much written in stone.
    So, please, keep ranting and discrediting yourself.

  155. Viking

    bobaloo, when you call issue Op/Ed writing and free speech ranting and self-discredidation, it warrants a response. I do not believe anyone else is reading this thread, but it’s fine if others want to try to make some point here. Then you guys can debate with the politicians later as well. I think that an endless, pointless, tit-for-tat ‘debate’ is part of the pro-noise lobby strategy.

    Your points are invalid from the perspective of Asheville citizens who want something done about noise pollution. We don’t have to answer to you people. We aren’t listening to a perspective that tries to invalidate the side that has the law in their favor, but still goes ignored in government. Courts, city councils and other credible organizations are shutting out the kinds of arguments bobaloo, Andy and Anthony have been making throughout this thread. Unfortunately NC is a hold out.

    Citizens who want more peace and quiet have been ignored for decades for the sake of the arguments that were torn apart in the above commentary. It may be that one day that side gets the last word in the the public forum, but I think that would be a continuation of the Stockholm Syndrome the rest of us endure when it comes to noise polluters and their relationship with NC politicians.

    I’m just describing what this ‘debate’ was about at this point so the thread ends with clarity.

  156. bobaloo

    Are you finished? Well allow me to retort.

    bobaloo, when you call issue Op/Ed writing and free speech ranting and self-discredidation, it warrants a response.

    No, I didn’t call your act of free speech discrediting to your character, I’m referring to your hyperbole, name calling and generally bad manners when you address people who disagree with you.
    Also, I find it amusing that you 1)have actually responded and 2) respond with the EXACT same blather you’ve posted 50 times in this thread, yet won’t respond, even now, to any point by point refutations and arguments against your “free speech rants”.

    Then you guys can debate with the politicians later as well.

    No, we have honest discussions with them.

    I think that an endless, pointless, tit-for-tat ‘debate’ is part of the pro-noise lobby strategy.

    If by strategy you mean engaging people we disagree with and attempting to change minds through “tit-for-tat debate”, then yes, you are correct.

    We don’t have to answer to you people.

    The simple fact that you address those of us that disagree with you as “you people” is telling. It says you think you’re above us, superior in some way.

    We aren’t listening to a perspective that tries to invalidate the side that has the law in their favor, but still goes ignored in government.
    Two points here:
    Are there any laws, any at all that you disagree with? Do you ever speed? Jaywalk? Break any law in any way? If the answer to any of these questions is yes, then your point is moot.
    Second, just because we don’t agree with a law doesn’t make our points invalid. You see, disagreeing with a law and fighting against it is how you get unjust laws changed.

    Citizens who want more peace and quiet have been ignored for decades for the sake of the arguments that were torn apart in the above commentary.

    Really? Asheville has been inundated for decades with motorcycle gangs tearing through the streets, disrupting your daily prayers?
    No? Then what HAS been the major source of noise pollution for decades?

    It may be that one day that side gets the last word in the the public forum, but I think that would be a continuation of the Stockholm Syndrome the rest of us endure when it comes to noise polluters and their relationship with NC politicians.

    Good Lord what a drama queen you are.
    Grant: You are not being oppressed. You are not being held hostage. You are not the victim of some heinous tyrant that has kept you under his thumb.
    We don’t have a special relationship with NC politicians. What kind of power do you think we have? We’re not the tobacco company or health insurers. We’re people who ride motorcycles.

    I’m just describing what this ‘debate’ was about at this point so the thread ends with clarity.

    No, you’re trying to have the last word because you’re a control freak and you want to end this discussion before you lose any more credibility.

  157. Viking

    bobaloo, so that’s it then? You’re an obnoxious bully? What else is your point? Your team worked their asses off to shut down anything that varies from your absolutist nonsense in this thread. Doing it more may be exciting for you all, but it’s not helping your ‘justice’ arguments.

    Your team’s ‘issues’ PR is really just about attacking people who fail to adopt AMA and ABATE’s precepts, basically? Say what you your side has been saying (maybe it will be Andy or Anthony next) three more times so we all understand you and your pro-noise friends have the market cornered on reason and maturity… like that will happen.

    You don’t oppress me, Champ(s). That’s obvious. But we do see the politics of all this. Politicians and public officials in NC, and elsewhere unfortunately, continue (embarrassingly) to side with the ‘do nothing’ approach to rational, even minimal, noise mitigation. Buncombe County Sheriff Van Duncan is a motorcyclist, and so is Rep. Shuler. It’s unknown if they have straight pipes (aftermarket exhaust system modifications). Since Duncan won’t reveal if he has illegally modified his bike, it stands to reason he’s part of the problem.

    Media promotion of noisy vehicles and government passivity in cities like Asheville concerning laws like NCGS 20-128 have given the behavior previously cited the upper hand for years. State legislators have no comment when asked why NCGS 20-128 collects dust and can’t be modernized.

    Everyone understands what the status quo is. Thankfully APD did an extremely backwards study on noise pollution recently and they revealed their bias.

    Your kind just generates public nuisance that will eventually get put in its place. You all may have been attempting to ‘change minds’ in this thread, but no one outside your team bought in… at all, or there’s no evidence of it at least. I think it just drives you people crazy when the rest of us notice and speak out as to where the noise pollution primarily comes from in Asheville.

    Go have a pro-noise rally in the new Pack Square Park? It may be just the thing. Rev those unmuffled engines some more, Noisemakers.

  158. Anthony Jaime

    On 11/08/09 Grant Millin wrote:
    >>Anthony, why are you calling peace and quiet advocates liars?< <

    Grant, I not calling peace and quiet advocates liars. I am calling you a liar! There is an entire world of difference. And this is a pristine example of the methods you employ to lie and spread disinformation. You excel at taking things from the specific out of context and warping them to the general to suit your purposes. In my very first post, I stated that the very best way for someone like yourself to lie is to just tell a little bit of the truth and then embellish that fact with untruths, which is exactly what you did here. Yup, I called you a liar but I was specific with that and added nobody else to that fact claim. You did, and by attempting to attribute words to me that I did not write, you therefore lied again! The fact is, I have been politely calling you a liar since the beginning of this thread but you were too much of an obtuse dullard to even notice.

    I could go through this entire thread, beginning with your original Op-Ed, picking out your outright lies, innuendoes, slurs, and instances of name calling and it is you Grant who place first in all of the categories listed here. I could further go through picking out the salient points that are germane to the discussion that are backed by demonstrable and credible research and it is you Grant, who comes in dead last in that category. First at telling lies and last at backing up your claims really does cast aspersions on your credibility. No too mention the way you avoid answering question like a used car salesman with a liberal dose of inbred politician thrown in for ill measure. Let’s examine a couple more of your recent untruths and ill-conceived attempts to deflect attention from your incompetence and impotence as an unconvincing representative of the noise freak conspiracy theorists.

    On 11/03/09 Grant Millin wrote:
    >>We know how to respond and just keep getting better at it with practice. It’s all making this one of the more high visibility MX commentaries for 2009!< <

    Followed by:
    >>I just checked. This commentary is definitely in the Top Five in terms of the most commented on MX articles so far this year.< <

    On 11/07/09 Grant Millin wrote:<< You’re trying to discredit this recognition among hundreds of Asheville citizens, but you’re failing miserably.

    On 11/10/09 Grant Millin wrote:
    >>No one else is reading these postings. We sure as hell don’t need to check in with you wienies!< <

    So Grant, which is it? Either this is one of the most highly visible and commented on MX commentaries of 2009 read by hundreds of Asheville citizens or no one is reading it. Which one is it Grant? Actually, it is another example of Grant twisting the facts at his pleasure to suit whatever temporary moment of lucidity he is experiencing and more of his lying! And Grant, please tell me you didn’t use the “w” word! Damn, you hurt my feelings! Both of them! What an ineffective, juvenile, and obsequious sycophantic little noise freak trying to curry favor with Richard Tur you are Grant! Come on and show us a little imagination. “Wienies?” You have got to be kidding me!

    And Grant, here’s a hot tip for you. When you attempt to reply to those of us who employ logic and developed writing skills in our questioning of your assertions, you might want to spend a few of the dollars that you obviously didn’t spend on quality home insulation and purchase a dictionary with a thesaurus. You lack any originality and only plagiarize and parrot many of the terms and phrases used by others and myself in your lame, inane, and ineffective retorts. And you really need to work on your insults because frankly, I’ve been called a lot worse by far better people than you.

    On 11/07/09 Grant Millin wrote:
    >> Feel free to get out their and promote the ABATE position, Anthony. SHAPE THE DEBATE! Look in the mirror and tell yourself you’re a winner.< <

    Grant, thank you so very much for encouraging me to exercise my First Amendment Rights. How very condescending of you! And also thank you very much for acknowledging my contributions to the exchange of commentary in the discussion, because in case you haven’t noticed, I have very much helped shape the debate that has been occurring here. And I have no problem whatsoever with looking at the face in my mirror because I am a very successful individual in life! Nor do I have any problems sleeping at night in my home because it is well insulated and quiet and I am not obsessed with my neighbor’s behavior and if something occurs that warrants my intervention, I go over and discuss it with my neighbor like a real man and not like a snake in the grass who goes behind my neighbor’s back and files needless complaints in the manner prescribed on the Noise Off website! That has to be one of the lowest and most gutless forms of behavior that I can possibly imagine. To advise people to not speak to someone about an issue and instead to go file a complaint alleging a criminal infraction or misdemeanor is low class behavior indeed and would seem to be more of the problem than anything else. Unless of course, you have noise freak control issues, such as those displayed by Grant Millin and lack the intestinal fortitude to speak to your neighbors face to face.

    Let’s look at a couple more of the illogical inconsistencies displayed by Grant recently. On 10/07/09 Grant Millin wrote: >>Lawn mowing of course happens, but usually in the middle of the day. Should we build quieter lawn mowers? Can garbage trucks be quieter? Maybe. We’ll let others worry about that.< <

    Well Grant, thank you for acknowledging that lawn mowing occurs. But you also admit that time of day plays a role in defining whether or not the alleged offending noise occurred can actually be classified as a nuisance. I recall specifically asking you questions regarding the time of day when the alleged offenses took place that bothered you and you neglected to answer but it now becomes important for you to use that information to make YOUR point! Additionally, it might happen in the middle of the day in your neighborhood but where I live, mowing starts at 6 am. Furthermore, you rhetorically ask if we as a society can build quieter mowers or garbage trucks, and YOU answer “maybe” yet the incident rate at which these two noise producers interact with the average human life is on a scale far greater than the incidental and briefly transient nature of a motorcycle passing by. And as an offending source, lawn mowers are far more common, and generally operate for a longer time duration as opposed to a motorcycle just passing by, so which is really the greater offender and poses the greater risk of danger according the narrow limits of “10 minutes of exposure” already offered by you. Depending upon the size of the lawn, most lawnmowers are in operation for at least a minimum of 10 minutes and usually far longer. And if it’s lawn care day for your neighbor, generally leaf blowing, weed-eating, and other types of yard maintenance are also occurring so your exposure time for “loud noise” far exceeds the occasional motorcycle driving by. If the reduction of unnecessary noise were truly your goal, you would address the far more common sources of noise pollution rather than to “let others worry about that” as you state Grant. It is an ABSOLUTE clear cut example of your hypocrisy and systemic attempt to demonize the motorcycling community at large and subject them to your own specious, unfounded, and irrational attempts to control others who you view as beneath your station in life.

    On 10/07/09 Grant Millen wrote: >> Or citizens who want a little more peace and quiet in their homes, places of worship, work and study, should just shut up and enjoy the unnecessary noise others force on us.< <

    Grant, here is another example of your inability to discern the area of responsibility for your own level of comfort as regards this issue. There are plenty of sound reduction materials available to all to install in their homes such as double pane glass, sound proof paneling, drapes, and other noise mitigation products. Why do you insist that remedies must come from the government when you have the power to bring about the changes and remedies you desire for yourself with a trip to Lowes or Home Depot? Oh, that’s right, you couldn’t control others that way, which is really what this entire issue is about for you. You want to attempt to force your irrational, unscientific, narrow minded prejudices and perspectives on us because you thought we would be an easy target. And when you say you want MORE peace and quiet in your places of worship do you mean those modern churches with the hi-dollar sound systems replete with 36 channel Mackie boards, racks of 1000 watt Crown power amps, and dazzling arrays of JBL loudspeakers hung from the ceiling that allow hi-decibel Christian rock and roll groups to perform, along with hours of loud proselytizing shouting, and allow other worship activities such as line dancing for the lord to take place in the aisles? Are those the places of worship you are referring to Grant where you want a little “more quiet?”

    And Grant, what does it matter what state I reside in? Your original article came to me from a national forum that I belong to that monitors anything motorcycle related. Once again giving lie to the fact that no one else is reading these posts. I have a hot news flash for you; this thread has attracted national attention among many of the motorcyclist’s rights organizations. And if we followed the illogical state of confusion you are in, it would be okay for you to invoke what happens in Denver and Washington but not accept any input from California, simply based upon your skewed filtering system. Not today buckwheat! Ignorance and intolerance must be challenged at all levels and throughout the nation. Remember that phrase, “one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” That describes the right of all of us in the nation to participate in the process, and not just those who you might want to select based upon your narrow parameters and moreover, the First Amendment guarantees our right to speak freely throughout the nation.

    On 10/07/09 Grant Millin wrote: >> Do you think (you)“sic” are persuading people from not asking questions about noise pollution?

    Is that another rhetorical question Grant or are you once again trying to be satirical and failing? The last thing in the world I am attempting to do is discourage people from asking questions and I have asked a great many questions of you, which have either been avoided or ignored as is your trademark modus operandi! The whole purpose of my commentary has been to get people to ask questions and I see that many other beside myself have done the same but in your typical avoidance mode, you have evaded those questions as well. Your inability to answer direct questions put to you has completely destroyed your credibility level. You can’t blame me, or Andy, or Bobaloo for your failure to communicate answers to the questions asked. You have only yourself to blame so pony up and be a man for once.

    And if clarity is the end result you desire, then stand up, be truthful for once, and admit you have been following the agenda laid out by Noise Off and other organizations to demonize motorcyclists, which have been evidenced by your repeated use of demeaning names and comments employed by you to describe us. Moreover, your own words are an implied admission that you specifically are targeting the motorcycling community at large. Come on Grant, quit lying to yourself and be a man about it because we already see what you’re about and you aren’t fooling anyone here. Your strategy to tie motorcycle exhaust noise as a cause of health effects has already been exploded; your allegations about motorcycle emissions have been refuted; and your ability to be objective throughout this dialogue is extremely suspect, to the point of being completely debunked.

    We will see you in the state legislatures, city councils, and any other place you want to attempt to marginalize us and restrict our rights in favor of your own based upon your lies Mr. Millin! That’s how we came to have to a helmet law in California; Dick Floyd lied to the legislature to get the law passed and even admitted later on that he lied! That is why MRO’s coast to coast stand ready to combat such nincompoops as yourself who would burden us with unwarranted and unnecessary nanny-crat and safety-crat regulations that threaten our way of life and systems of belief which are just as valid as any of yours Grant!

  159. Viking

    Well, MX seems to not be allowing me to respond in kind any longer in this thread. The good news is there has been at least a few voices in the Asheville public forum in recent years making the point that our NC politicians are sitting on the sidelines when it comes to noise mitigation.

  160. Andy

    Grant,

    Great idea! Clarity is great way to wind this down. When you write things like “you wienies”, “you people” and “your kind”, it helps makes the issue fairly clear to everyone.

    I am also getting great laughs from your “dog ate my homework” claims about MX not posting – twice so far(!) – your “extensive notes to break down [our] theories”.

    My question to you is, what exactly do you think is the “ABATE (or AMA) POV” and do you really believe that everyone arguing against you here subscribes to that POV?

    To me it seems that perhaps you think everyone who is against your /approach/ to noise mitigation is a proponent, advocate and/or source of noise. This is not an accurate judgment. I subscribe only to my own POV. I do not let other people or organizations control my thoughts or constrain my ideals, and I object to your attempts to lump “[our] kind” into your convenient, bigoted stereotype.

    I have absolutely no objection to the citizens’ desires (in NC or anyplace else) to mitigate noise, and my cars and motorcycles are all quiet and unmodified. My only objections are to your (read: NoiseOFF’s) proposed methods to mitigate motorcycle noise via ill-conceived and repugnant laws governing EPA labels.

    Now as far as the matter of EPA labels…

    You state that that you “aren’t listening to a perspective that tries to invalidate the side that has the law in their favor”.

    Yes, you do have the law in your favor. You have the Noise Control Act, The Quiet Communities Act, the Federal EPA regulations governing noise limits, the right to freedom from trespass, etc. The law governing EPA labels is not in your favor however, and while you wishfully write that “courts, city councils and other credible organizations are shutting out [our] arguments” and that “NC is a hold out”, the reality is that the numbers don’t agree with you:

    Laws based on the premise of motorcycle EPA labels were rejected in NYC, Chicago, Detroit, Lancaster, Hingham, Beverly, North Reading and Portland, just to name a few. They were also dismissed by the NPS and _repealed_ in Albuquerque and Myrtle Beach. The law in East Greenwich was allowed to expire (after being passed unconstitutionally), the law in Boston remains unenforced and Denver’s law allows sound testing in lieu of the label. That leaves what, Green Bay? Anyplace else??

    You are critical of our insistence that people like you (Viking), Todd Koenings (Citizen 10), et al should be able to substantiate the claims they make. The First Amendment is a wonderful thing and you do indeed have the right to make claims and express ideas that you can’t possibly substantiate or defend. I would not dream of prohibiting you from doing that, but the same First Amendment rights also allow us “wienies” to insist that you substantiate your claims.

  161. Grant Millin

    Btw (if anyone else were to read through this lengthly thread besides the remaining authors at this point), out of the ‘Noise Intelligentsia Tag Team’ of Andy, bobaloo and Anthony Jaime (an ABATE executive way out in California)–part of a movement that wants people to engage in their tiny world views that noise pollution does not exist, and if anyone says otherwise they just needs to get earplugs–only Anthony can be identified in terms of their full names. The other two hide in anonymity while enjoying an ability to identify the people they disagree with by name, versus keeping with MX user name ID tags.

    No one who likes access to more peace and quiet understands or respects ya’lls POV? Maybe MX will let me say this.

  162. BigWayne

    The motorcycle community needs a tuneup

    ——— yup . . .

    Let’s curb unnecessary noise pollution

    Motorcycles are fine: Their riders simply need to obey the law.

    ——— or, the cops need to enforce the laws they’re paid to enforce . . .

    No one has an inherent right to generate unnecessary noise pollution. …The problem is enforcement, and we need expanded government noise-mitigation powers, since what’s on the books now has failed to remedy the situation.

    ———- why not ask the cops why they don’t enforce noise laws ? . . .

    …charity runs predictably featuring an alarming number of “exhaust systems” that aren’t Environmental Protection Agency-certified, …

    ———- the epa certifies only that the muffler/motorcycle combination met the laws in effect as of the time of manufacture . . .

    But these overt and covert persuasion campaigns, often led by groups such as ABATE (American Bikers Aimed Towards Education) and the American Motorcyclist Association, don’t begin to offset the harm that noise pollution inflicts on children, the elderly and others. Documented health effects include everything from hearing impairment to heart disease, immune-system changes and even birth defects.

    ———– well, that covers about everything. why are the cops doing nothing ? . . .

    Stricter laws, though, won’t help unless they’re enforced — and right now, even the existing laws are routinely ignored.

    ———– seems like you ought to be writing about the cops falling down on the job, eh ? . . .

    It’s also time for local motorcycle shops to stop dealing in non-EPA-certified “straight pipes” and other harmful noise equipment.

    ———- seems like you ought to be writing to the legislature . . .

    Thankfully, we can all look to those in the motorcycle community who do set a good example.

    ———- the VAST majority . . .

    And since the California Air Resource Board has indentified motorcycles as a higher source of greenhouse gases than cars,

    ———- one motorcycle generates more greenhouse gases than one car . but there’s at least 95 cars for every one ‘cycle, so cars generate AT LEAST ten times as much as all motorcycles combined ! . . .

    Until more stringent regulation is in place, all existing laws should be enforced at motorcycle rallies and elsewhere during routine patrols.

    ———- as long as you do the same at car rallies and elsewhere during routine patrols, too, eh ? . . .

    It’s time to tell our public officials that we want more peace and quiet: the Blue Ridge Parkway’s 75th Anniversary Web site (http://www.blueridgeparkway75.org) solicits input on policy and community issues. This is a great opportunity to ask that noise mitigation and the protection of natural sounds be discussed.

    ——— so, put in . . .

    The problem is nonenforcement of existing laws and lack of modern noise-mitigation programs. Expanded government noise-mitigation powers are unfortunately necessary.

    ———- rock on ! write your legislator… just apply the rules equally on cars, suvs, and trucks, too . . .

    BigWayne

    …freedom isn’t free: its price is eternal vigilance . . .

  163. Grant Millin

    Most cars don’t put out 90+ dB, BigWayne. I mentioned ‘boom’ cars and pickup trucks, but feel free to write a commentary of your own. It’s just that many citizens happen to notice the motorcycles in their neighborhoods and our off-highway common areas in terms of volume per vehicle and numbers of such vehicles.

    There’s no doubt most vehicle pollution comes from cars around the world. I did not state otherwise, though MX did a terrible job of editing what I submitted to them. Per wheel, most motorcycles do not the have things like catalytic converters and therefore can certainly not be called zero emission vehicles? I think that’s what CARB had in mind? Give them a call if there are questions.

    NCGS 20-128 does not pick on motorcyclists alone, but that doesn’t mean citizens aren’t noticing the noise from the straight pipes. There are some cars and trucks with illegally modified exhaust systems (illegal at least in NC), but they are abound on too many motorcycles.

    People are asking for Asheville to modernize its noise ordinance. That means covering a lot of sources, not just motorcycles.

  164. Anthony Jaime

    On 11/12/09 Grant Millin wrote: “out of the ‘Noise Intelligentsia Tag Team’ of Andy, bobaloo and Anthony Jaime (an ABATE executive way out in California)—part of a movement that wants people to engage in their tiny world views that noise pollution does not exist, and if anyone says otherwise they just needs to get earplugs”

    Grant, you really are a piece of work when it comes to prevaricating ( a polite word for lying). First of all, Andy & Bobaloo are completely unknown to me, we belong to no anti-noise movement, and for damn sure, each one of us has acknowledged repeatedly throughout this thread that noise pollution issues are part and parcel of modern society. Very simply, what we disagree with you about are your unsubstantiated allegations regarding motorcycles and the people that ride them. And we further disagree that more stringent laws and regulations are necessary when there are perfectly acceptable standards that have been developed to deal with this issue. Moreover, the motorcycling community has taken steps to perform that “tune-up” you clamor for with J2825 but that is not good enough for a zealot such as yourself. Your main ability seems to lie in the area of blaming others for your woes. Furthermore, you continue to lie, and attempt to de-humanize and demonize those of us who would disagree with you. And I must say, earplugs are the remedy of choice in the workplace, since most employers aren’t willing to spend huge amounts of money on this issue, which should give some indication of the priority it has with them, not too mention the reality that loud noises are common throughout the workplace.

    On 11/12/09 Grant Millin wrote: “only Anthony can be identified in terms of their full names. The other two hide in anonymity while enjoying an ability to identify the people they disagree with by name, versus keeping with MX user name ID tags.”

    Grant, would that be like the “Viking” moniker you use? Seems kind of curious to me why you would need two different identities to post under on this forum? It didn’t take us long to figure out that Grant & Viking were one and the same but the why would seem to be the question? Were you trying to make it appear that you enjoyed more support than you actually do? Perhaps you have multiple personalities? But most of all, why do you point the finger at others for something you yourself are guilty of?

  165. Viking

    Guilty of… I’m guilty of joining others who wonder why little, if anything, is being done of noise pollution.

    I’m bored. Can the noise lobby please pay me at minimum $20-$50 to respond to your individual postings, please? I might as well be paid to facilitate this mindless, manic, pabulum.

  166. Andy

    Grant,

    I thought I’d give you a few days and see if your dog would barf up your homework, but all you can do is complain of boredom. If you are so bored you should spend some time figuring out how to challenge the statements I have made, or answer some of my questions.

    Or you could study how sound intensity decreases over distance so that you would understand why your complaints of “90+ dB”, etc., are irrelevant. PS, cars DO emit that much sound.

    Or, you could simply stop trying to defend yourself and move on to something productive.

  167. Viking

    Andy, Et Al, I’m not defending myself from your side. I’ve simply tried to acknowledge your needs and those of the Noise Intelligentsia. The way you all try to run over legitimate citizen complaints deserves rebuttal, as many times as needed so politicians and the public alike can see what it’s like to do myth busting on noise pollution issues. I’m not sure how I can help you any longer. You all keep addressing me and I try to perceive your many and varied questions.

    By “myth busting” do I mean that one person has all these answers: No, I do not. Myth busting is about presenting facts, but not always about a perfect scientific theory or legal case. A lot of it is about building the mass confidence needed to take the next step in doing things differently. In both these situations what really matters in science or law that enough of the right people adopt the advocate’s theory.

    Andy, do you and the Noise Intelligentsia Team feel like there are cracks forming in the world you all want others’ to adopt and facilitate for you sakes’? I think the fear of change in those regards are what many of these now essentially pointless postings to this thread are really about. I’m looking forward to noise mitigation change. Indeed, I relish and embrace the change. Reflect on my words more and eventually you all will adopt the change as well.

    In any case there’s no logic or scientific inquiry process to the postings from you all. What the difference is that your theories seem to always try to disprove that noise pollution exists; or can’t be pinpointed to specific risk sources and ranked for risk, thus nothing should be done? It’s just that you all want to shout down perspectives different from yours, clearly by attempting to fight over factoids and misquoting. This is all stuff you guys can bring up with government. Try explaining it all to them? There’s no point in regurgitating your side’s ‘beliefs’ over and over again in this thread?

    For example, Andy, are you saying ALL cars “DO emit that much sound (90+ dB)”. Because if you read the way I word things I’m not writing to write an academic paper on these matters, just reflecting some opinion shared by many. I use qualifiers like “usually”, “often” and “significant” versus peer reviewed primary research language. For example, would you want to cite the physics of sound and the history of science there regarding your statement that “sound intensity decreases over distance”. I don’t disagree the physics of sound, in fact the fact that high intensity, close range sound can be harmful is the point of the commentary. Cumulative harms from long-term exposure to multiple loud noise point sources (i.e. the variety of aftermarket modified or poorly maintained POVs traveling through many communities) is also the point.

    You all seem to be focused on academic study of these matters, while using inferior logic. It’s not much of a debate since our goals are not in sync at all. I think the way you all do things deserves illumination and clarity, but I have no need, and don’t see why, I have to provide any information you all request; especially without payment.

    I’m an amateur noise pollution researcher, but fairly adept commentary writer. If I were to provide a researched document answering all your questions in an irrefutable manner, you probably would not be pleased even then because that’s not my job. Find a research group to do pro-noise research and make sure they slant things exactly the way you want them. The rest of us have to do what we can because there’s no government agency really working on this and the funding for noise mitigation research isn’t producing a whole of of ‘volume’.

    You all are welcome to race against the clock to reflect on what I’m saying once again. Feel free to identify as many cracks and contradictions in my speech as you want. It’s easy to simply criticize my frank dialogs, because they aren’t meant for noise fans. These communications are about bucking up the voices advocating peace and quiet. The point for the rest of us is simply that we want something to be done about noise pollution and are presenting that request to government. We then blame them if they don’t use the models that do now exist in Denver, Boston and smaller towns and cities.

    MX checks commentary sources. The people who needed to read the commentary read it and it is now part of the community record. I suggest you all take your advice and “move on”. I don’t mind continuing to monitor this thread every now and again, but it seems like there really isn’t anyone else reading these since the commentary is almost two months old now?

    Is there any logical, sensible reason for noise fans to post another comment to this thread? If so, what could that possibly be? To show that you all ‘won’ something? Just look in the mirror and tell yourselves “We/I won” three times before bed. Maybe that will help with your closure processes.

  168. Andy

    Grant,

    There you go again with the lies, accusations and name-calling.

    We have never “run over legitimate citizen complaints”, so there is nothing for you to rebut. Nor have we ever tried to “disprove that noise pollution exists” or that it “can’t be pinpointed to specific risk sources and ranked for risk”. In fact, not only have I explicitly acknowledged noise pollution and expressed concern for affected people, I even presented authoritative sources (from an active NoiseOFF member, no less!) that pinpointed AND ranked the risks.

    Just because you can’t even agree with your own peers’ analysis is no reason to dismiss their existence or my ever having mentioned them.

    It is very interesting that today you wrote:

    “Myth busting is about presenting facts, but not always about a perfect scientific theory or legal case.”

    Make up your mind Grant. Either you want facts or you want theories. Theories are not facts. What we have presented are facts and proven science. What you have presented are theories and biased interpretations. The myths are all yours.

    What makes this even more telling is how you followed up that sentence:

    “A lot of it is about building the mass confidence needed to take the next step in doing things differently. In both these situations what really matters in science or law that enough of the right people adopt the advocate’s theory.”

    Now the truth comes out!

    All you wish to do is perpetuate your propaganda (which you call “theory”) in the hopes that you can fool enough people into believing it.

    Good luck there, because we will not let you get away with your lies and propaganda. Not here, not anywhere.

    You write things like “there’s no logic or scientific inquiry process to the postings from you all.”

    This is transference. You have repeatedly ignored proven science and clear pertinent logic.

    You accuse us of misquoting. I defy you to find one example. The nice thing about this forum is that posts cannot be edited. The truth is here for all to see.

    You claim you “have no need, and don’t see why, [you] have to provide any information [we] request; especially without payment.”

    Your payment would be in the form of believability. Right now your only tool for believability is your repeated claims that “MX checks commentary sources”. This is not correct, and it is also not relevant to the follow-up comments being posted by everyone here including yourself.

    Per MX’ web site:

    “Submissions being considered for publication will be reviewed and edited in accordance with Xpress standards. Writers citing facts will be expected to use them responsibly and to indicate the sources of the information; an editor will communicate with the writer concerning these and other questions.”

    MX expected you to cite facts responsibly.

    How disappointing.

    Please tell us what your source was for the AMA’s and ABATE’s “overt and covert persuasion campaigns” to “[acclimatize] the rest of us to these noise trespassers”.

    And how interesting that you would want to nit-pick my wording in my “90+ dB” response when your original article cited outdated CARB information and made equally unqualified remarks about greenhouse gas emissions.

    Look in the mirror yourself Grant.

  169. BigWayne

    “…what really
    matters in science or law (is…)that enough of the right people adopt the
    advocate’s theory.”

    ——– isn’t that what brought mussolini into disgrace ?

    Big

  170. Viking

    More tit-for-tat, Andy?

    The perspective on AMA’s and ABATE’s “overt and covert persuasion campaigns” to “[acclimatize] the rest of us to these noise trespassers” is my own orginal thinking. I can tell you truthfully and plainly that I do not need to check in with anyone in order to form an opinion and express it. Are these organizations not in the persuasion business, at least in part?

    Your asking me to prove my perspective? My opinion that noise pollution at the community level exists and something should be done about it is a lie? Why would I answer to people like you, Andy? These responses are provided so that this thread is not left to such nonsensical spin.

  171. Andy

    Grant,

    You wrote in the context of fact that the AMA and ABATE are leading campaigns to acclimate the public to “noise trespassers”. I see no mention that this was your opinion or even implying that it could merely be an opinion. You only say now that it is your “original thinking”.

    You don’t need to prove anything that you don’t feel a need for anybody to believe, Grant.

    For someone who doesn’t think you’re answering to anyone else here, you sure are doing plenty of answering.

  172. Cheshire

    “The perspective on AMA’s and ABATE’s “overt and covert persuasion campaigns” to “[acclimatize] the rest of us to these noise trespassers” is my own orginal thinking. I can tell you truthfully and plainly that I do not need to check in with anyone in order to form an opinion and express it.”

    I’ve posted it before: The AMA’s position on excessive sound. (against it)
    http://www.ama-cycle.org/legisltn/positions/sound.asp

    Yup…you’ve made it clear, “truthfully and plainly” that you don’t need to check with anyone…not even to research the ones you’re forming an opinion about…to form an opinion.

  173. Viking

    Hey Cheshire,

    When you people try to discredit me or paint me as a tyrant, or whatever, you do so without having known me personally or knowing how I’ve come to know what I do know. It’s really interesting why you all put some much credence on what I say. I think your side wants me to read off your scripts?

    Why would I do that? And why would you all be so worried about changing one person’s mind? No one is checking these postings any longer except me, MX and a few noise fans.

    Can’t a political/lobbying organization have a favorable view from one group and an unfavorable view from another? I’ve met with one of the AMA’s communications consultants to problem solve. I say what I say after that meeting and after reading the AMA position on noise.

    It just seems like the AMA is doing something about noise pollution. The noise is still there, right? Does the AMA promote label match-up or endorse Denver or Boston’s noise mitigation programs?

    I have no reason to cut noise makers a lot of slack. I hope citizens ask their politicians to stop bending over backwards to make the noise pollution faction of POV owners (even commercial trucking) feel at ease. Again, others in the community are concerned about noise from sources like outdoor gun ranges and concrete plants. I let those folks work on those issues, but there are many, many citizens asking questions about the overall issues of noise pollution from different angles.

    I’ve gotten parking tickets before. There may be many reasons to argue against a parking ticket, but I’ve paid them. If someone is violating NCGS 20-128, then they should expect a ticket as well instead of a parade permit?

    Thanks,

    Grant

  174. Cheshire

    “You people”, “you all”, “your side”. Whatever you may think, I’m not part of any organization. My side is just me.

    Grant, you misunderstand me. I don’t like noise. I also don’t like people passing fiction they pulled out of…thin air…as fact. I know how you’ve come to “know what you do know”. I also know you aren’t using correct, unbiased, OR current information. Your reply itself shows you are wearing blinders. Have a nice day.

  175. Viking

    Hey Cheshire,

    I think your representatives in government are the right people to do all the fact checking folks want and to do it in a way that pleases them. That’s not what I have to offer. Proving my critics points is of no interest to me. If by ‘blinders’ you mean inflexible, probably so. I see all the arguments for doing nothing and demand otherwise from government.

    You seem to know everything on this subject and have the right approach in mind, Cheshire. One’s opinion is likely to be biased, but once, again (the 4th or 5th time) MX checks the sources when outside information is cited in commentaries. Please write the ideal noise mitigation commentary, Cheshire. And I mean this with all sincerity.

    I promise to read it and not just attack it with unnecessarily harsh language if there’s parts I disagree with, but I will use some contra language if I don’t that shouldn’t be too terribly offensive. I’m sure I’ve done that in this thread, but after hearing some really lame ideas and criticisms. Of course, I won’t know if you did write such a commentary because we don’t know your real name.

    It’s just amazing this thread is approaching 200 comments. That’s way past any other commentary in MX… or probably in the Asheville Citizen-Times. (Please note the qualifier of PROBABLY.)

  176. Andy

    “once, again (the 4th or 5th time) MX checks the sources when outside information is cited in commentaries”

    Oh, I understand perfectly now…

    As long as you don’t fake your cites or conspicuously misquote from them, you’re fine. If on the other hand you simply make things up without any reference, there is no way for MX to check.

    Clever!

    Too bad they don’t fact-check anything at all in the comments here.

  177. Anthony Jaime

    Of interest to motorcycle emissions, here is a related article that is at least as relevant as “Noise & the Unborn” . . . the relevant part would be that motorcycles only comprise 3.5 percent of the vehicles in the metropolitan Phoenix area . . . anybody know what the percentage is in Buncombe County or the major metropolitan Asheville area ???

    http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/11/16/daily35.html

    Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 3:11pm MST
    Arizona asks EPA to exempt motorcycles from emissions tests
    Phoenix Business Journal – by Mike Sunnucks

    The state of Arizona is asking the federal government to lift emissions
    testing requirements for motorcycles in the Phoenix metro area.

    The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality on Wednesday petitioned
    the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to exempt motorcycles from such
    testing.

    The ADEQ said Wednesday motorcycles make up only 3.5 percent of vehicles tested in the Valley and not only are emissions failure rates among
    motorcycles down, repairs to put them in compliance do not substantially
    help air quality.

    The state said Phoenix is the only major metro area in the U.S. where motorcycles are required to be tested for emissions.

    The EPA requires metro areas and regions of the U.S. with air pollution and air quality problems to test cars, trucks and other vehicles for
    emissions. Vehicles with excessive emission are required by the government to be repaired. EPA would need to approve an exemption before
    next July for it to take effect.

  178. Viking

    If my opinion and manner of organizing research to make a point is “something I make up”, I guess that’s true. When I write an opinion piece, I use my views to paint the context. That’s advocacy writing.

    I call it critical thinking and free speech, but an opponent will look for fault. Others thanked me for writing the above commentary. There’s a number of opinions on noise pollution and several ways folks would like the issue to be presented. I’m not sure how anything I’ve written on this subject can be called lying, but folks may want to react with such language and have clearly done so.

    You seem to need to discredit me, Andy. You don’t like what I have to say; or at least how I say it. Believe me, this is a nuisance issue I hope no one will have to talk about a few years from now because the City of Asheville will have produced a legitimate remedy.

    I think there is a way of presenting information that suits you when it comes to this subject. Like I said to Cheshire, feel free to write the ideal commentary on noise issues. Doesn’t that take care of the situation for you, Andy?

    I assume “Andy” is your actual first name and I look forward to reading your views as well. You may want to find the research that supports your version of things.

  179. Viking

    If my opinion and manner of organizing research to make a point is “something I make up”, I guess that’s true. When I write an opinion piece, I use my views to paint the context. That’s advocacy writing.

    I call it critical thinking and free speech, but an opponent will look for fault. Others thanked me for writing the above commentary. There’s a number of opinions on noise pollution and several ways folks would like the issue to be presented. I’m not sure how anything I’ve written on this subject can be called lying, but folks may want to react with such language and have clearly done so.

    You seem to need to discredit me, Andy. You don’t like what I have to say; or at least how I say it. Believe me, this is a nuisance issue I hope no one will have to talk about a few years from now because the City of Asheville will have produced a legitimate remedy.

    I think there is a way of presenting information that suits you when it comes to this subject. Like I said to Cheshire, feel free to write the ideal commentary on noise issues. Doesn’t that take care of the situation for you, Andy?

    I assume “Andy” is your actual first name and I look forward to reading your views as well. You may want to find the research that supports your version of things.

  180. Anthony Jaime

    hmmmmmm . . . wow, who’da thunk it . . . ???

    http://rosevillept.com/detail/135140.html?content_source=&category;_id=&search;_filter=&user;_id=&event;_mode=&event;_ts_from=&event;_ts_to=&list;_type=&order;_by=&order;_sort=&content_class=1⊂_type=&town;_id=
    Ask the DMV: A horn is for emergencies, not because you’re mad
    By George Valverde, California Department of Motor Vehicles

    Q: Are there actual dos and don’ts to horn honking?

    A: Yes. One great reason to use your horn is when it is necessary to avoid an accident.
    In contrast, a bad reason to use your horn is because you are upset with another driver.
    For complete information about appropriate and inappropriate horn usage, visit the California Department of Motor Vehicles’ Web site at dmv.ca.gov. From the home page type “horn honk” into the search bar in the upper right hand side, click go, and lastly click on the first link in the search results.

  181. Anthony Jaime

    OMG . . . run for your life Gnat . . .

    look boss, da rumbla is comin, da rumbla is comin . . .

    http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/10/26/nypd-amps-up-street-noise-with-the-rumbler/
    NYPD Amps Up Street Noise With the “Rumbler”
    by Brad Aaron on October 26, 2009

    As if constant engine noise, gratuitous horn honking, booming stereos and screeching car alarms weren’t enough of a collective imposition on millions of New Yorkers, NYPD is about to escalate the street-level aural arms race with the “Rumbler,” a souped-up siren designed primarily to pierce the cocoon of obliviousness enshrouding city motorists.

    Expected to be installed in over 100 police vehicles this week, the Rumbler emits a low-frequency signal transmitted through subwoofers similar to those used by car audio enthusiasts. According to manufacturer Federal Signal, the siren has “the distinct advantage of penetrating solid materials allowing vehicle operators and nearby pedestrians to FEEL the sound waves.”

    “In other words,” says Richard Tur, founder of Queens-based org NoiseOFF, “this ear-splitting noise will be heard and felt by motorists, pedestrians and people in their own homes at a level that can cause permanent hearing damage and seriously disrupt their lives.”

    As noted on the NoiseOFF website, Federal Signal warns Rumbler users to wear ear protection to guard against hearing loss. Yet, says Tur: “The NYPD purchased and installed the equipment with no oversight, no public hearings, and with no evident liability for the massive noise pollution they are about to inflict on New Yorkers, all in the name of public safety.”

    Though a 2007 article in the Times, when the department was testing the Rumbler, at least touched on the possible downsides (“To experience it is to feel a little earthquake beneath one’s feet”), media have largely treated this week’s roll out as a novelty.

    “People assume that noise pollution is an irritant or an annoyance,” Tur says, “but noise pollution is a public health issue, and it is adversely affecting residents.”

    There is little doubt in these quarters that excessive traffic noise poses a significant hazard, though Streetsblog regular ddartley comments that his experience with the Rumbler — at least from a few stories up — hasn’t been all bad.

    I was worried when I heard that some ambulances in NYC were Rumblers. The low frequencies are audible up in our apartment, but are not ear-splitting, adrenalin-spiking terrors, like all the higher-frequency sirens are. If emergency vehicles would rely almost exclusively on the Rumbler and not the high frequency sirens, perhaps (PERHAPS!) that would actually be a public health improvement?

    Another consideration: When police worry about drivers not clearing a path, is it because their sirens are insufficient, or because the street is so packed with other cars that there is hardly anywhere to go?

    Coming next to Boston or Denver perhaps . . . ????

    Maybe even Asheville . . . ????

    wonder what frequency level motorcycles resonate at . . . ????

    they certainly aren’t “ear-splitting, adrenalin-spiking terrors, like all the higher-frequency sirens are.”

    who’da thunk it . . . ???

    the rumbler, NOW THERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF ORIGINAL THOUGHT Gnat . . . !!!!

  182. Anthony Jaime

    here is article about deer causing motorcycle accidents . . . and fyi, i had a good friend killed when a deer actually jumped from the roadside onto his superquiet Honda Goldwing . . . but it wan’t a BMW, sorry Gnat . . . deer never do that when they can hear the motorcycle coming, so I guess this “is ONE instance” of LPSL . . . who’da thunk it Gnat . . . and damn those deer, they’re polygamists too . . . oh sorry Gnat, is that too anecdotal fer yer solipsistic world view . . . ??? do you have deer in NC . . . ???

    http://www.carrollcountytimes.com/articles/2009/11/04/news/local_news/3_deer_accidents.txt Study: Deer accidents peak in November

    By Bryan Schutt, Times Staff Writer Wednesday, November 04, 2009

    Deer-vehicle collisions peak in November, according to a recent analysis, so local enforcement agencies are urging motorists to be on the lookout for deer on the roadways.

    An affiliate of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety recently studied insurance claims for animal collisions from January 2005 through April 2008, and it showed animal collisions are nearly three times higher in November.

    The number of collisions has jumped in recent years, with the majority occurring at dusk or dawn, according to the IIHS.

    “Crashes in which people are killed are most likely to occur in rural areas and on roads with speed limits of 55 miles per hour or higher,” IIHS’s Senior Vice President for Research Anne McCartt said in a release. “As with other kinds of crashes, safety belts and motorcycle helmets could have prevented many of the deaths.”

    Maj. Thomas Long, of the Carroll County Sheriff’s Office, said the collisions spike this time of the year because deer movements increase in the fall. Deer are disturbed and become more active because of hunting season and harvest. Plus, deer mating season occurs in October, November and Deceber.

    To prevent collisions, a sheriff’s office recommended several tips including slowing down on roads, paying close attention to animal crossing signs and scanning for reflective eyes. If one deer is spotted, expect to see more.

    Brian Eyler, a spokesman for Maryland’s Department of Natural Resources, said the state’s deer population has hovered within the same range in the past five years. Currently it is just shy of 230,000.

    The population has leveled out because hunters have responded to increased bag limits for deer, especially females. Last year, the total harvest topped 100,000 for the first time, Eyler said.

    “Deer are polygamists … and female deer are where to concentrate reductions if you’re trying to control the population,” Eyler said.

  183. Viking

    Hey Anthony,

    I already admitted there are a variety of noise sources, but they need to be risk ranked in terms of the highest to least harmful sources… in Asheville. Also, I want motorcyclists to have safe rides… even the ones with non-EPA certified exhaust systems.

    I just think LPSLs is an inaccurate safety myth unsupported by US DOT or NC DOT. And since there are better ‘least harm’ solutions that fit into community needs (in terms of what non-bikers experience), those other safety measures need to be promoted instead. I just want the noise to be mitigated. Others will have to identify what the real issues with motorcycle safety are, not that I’m not interested in our politicians doing so.

    If you think “rumbler” sirens and deer-caused accidents are major issues, then write a commentary on that.

    I do not believe the City of Asheville is thinking about putting rumblers on emergency vehicles. I am focused on Asheville issues, except if noise mitigation policy and research conducted elsewhere applies here.

  184. Anthony Jaime

    On 11/16/09 Gnat Millin wrote: “If my opinion and manner of organizing research to make a point is “something I make up”, I guess that’s true. When I write an opinion piece, I use my views to paint the context. That’s advocacy writing.

    I call it critical thinking and free speech, but an opponent will look for fault. Others thanked me for writing the above commentary. There’s a number of opinions on noise pollution and several ways folks would like the issue to be presented. I’m not sure how anything I’ve written on this subject can be called lying, but folks may want to react with such language and have clearly done so.”

    Gnat, we believe that you believe what you believe; it’s just that we don’t believe what you believe! And that is perfect example of the type of doublespeak you use as in “or knowing how I’ve come to know what I do know.” Moreover, no one here disputes your right to express your opinion. It’s just that we are unwilling to drink from your poisoned jar of opinionated kool-aid! The problem is when you present that opinion as fact when it is not! Try using the qualifier, “In my opinion” and you might receive a little more respect and lend credence to you ideas. When you conflate issues with your written words “to paint” a picture that is deceptive and get caught at it, you lose credibility. Or when you tell just a little snippet of truth and then add uncorrelated data to your “organization of research” that you then engage in errors of logic, known as fallacies of presumption, of which I have pointed out numerous examples throughout this thread; that is the point at which your words betray you. Three of the more common fallacies of presumption you engage in are the Red Herring, the Slippery Slope, and Ad Hominem arguments.

    Moreover, when you present your theories and opinions in this manner, it is a form of untruth and therefore can be called a lie. Furthermore, call it what you will, it lacks any semblance of “critical thinking” and merely becomes an exercise in free speech more commonly known in professional circles as the “crank letter.” You lack any command of the basic principles of argumentation, much less any of the finer nuances of the employment of rhetoric. Basically, you let your mockingbird mouth overload your hummingbird ass, and compounding injury to insult, you are so poor at it that it is painfully obvious to everyone but YOU!

    When someone who is well-versed in argumentation reads the poorly constructed opinions and theories your attempt to present as being factual, it is easy to “employ critical thinking skills” to expose and shed light on the illogical inconsistencies which characterize your writing. Since I have explained this many times throughout this thread, in my opinion, I am beginning to suspect your problem may be rooted in a reading disability, of which there are several. Perhaps you may want to see a professional and have that checked.

    As to my qualifications to render such opinion, I possess a B/A in English with a minor in sociology from Cal State Bakersfield where I am published. Additionally, I was one of two 1998 Outstanding Students of the Year in Social Science at Cerro Coso Community College where I also had poetry published and spent 2 ½ years as a peer tutor working with learning disabled students as a writing tutor. In high school, I was member of the debate team, so given the foregoing qualifications, it should be obvious to all but the most obtuse of individuals that I posses the necessary skills to discern fact from fiction, as well as spot such glaring presumptions of fallacy as those present in your writing.

    Additionally, the Marine Corps trained me in the field of communication-electronics and in the proper use of weapons. I spent 30 years as an IBEW member where I worked in the electrical construction field where exposure to noise pollution was a constant issue, and earplugs were the remedy of choice, as were they when on the firing range in the Corps. And sandwiched between my military time and my years as an IBEW member, I worked for the Department of the Navy as an electrician, an overhead lineman, and spent nearly three years as an experimental electrical test mechanic where I worked at S.N.O.R.T., the Supersonic Naval Ordinance Research Track where I wired, staged, and fired rocket motors used to test bombs, ECM counter measures, and missile fuzes, and ejection seats, often times for an Asheville, N.C. company called Stencel Aero Engineering. Safety was a major component of my work history, including addressing exposure to loud noise for extended periods of time. I have also been a professional musician most of my life, and have shared the stage with such notable acts as the Doobie Brothers, so I have a fair understanding of sound and the manner in which it travels and the relationships between sound pressure levels, intensity, frequency and distance.

    So you see Gnat, unlike you, I am a professional and not an amateur. I have both the practical experience in the industrial, military, and performing arts environments where extended exposure to noise was an issue constantly to be dealt with, coupled with the excellent academic background I have compiled to read your commentary and render qualified judgment on it. If you are unable to understand anything I have written here, please let me know and I will attempt to re-phrase it in language that even you can understand.

    Cheerio,

    ~anthony~

  185. Anthony Jaime

    hey Gnat, here’s some more food for thought . . . !!!

    What’s All the Racket Over Airport Noise?

    “Why are the potential benefits from government noise regulation so low? The answer is quite simple: Because people are free to live where they wish, they sort themselves according to their preferences. Thus, people for whom noise would be the most costly simply don’t live around airports and other noise generators. In contrast, noise lovers congregate not only at rock concerts; they also live in major flight paths, relatively unconcerned with the roar of passing jets. And because the sounds are of less concern to them, the benefits of government policies to reduce those sounds are small relative to the costs.”

    “The good news, then, is that had the market been left alone, it would have produced an outcome vastly superior to that produced by social regulation.”

    By Daniel K. Benjamin

    Given the racket that people raise
    over airport noise, one would think
    that the social benefits of regulating
    airport noise must be great.

    Pollution comes in many forms. One of the most ubiquitous is noise–from truck and automobile traffic, neighbors’ stereos, barking dogs, and for some people, takeoffs and landings of commercial aircraft. So far, the federal government hasn’t sought to regulate the decibel output of Metallica or Fido, but it does restrict the noise that airplanes may generate.

    Given the racket that people raise over airport noise, one would think that the social benefits of regulating airport noise must be great. In fact, they are not. According to recent research by Steven A. Morrison, Clifford Winston, and Tara Watson (1999), regulating airplane noise has cost $10 billion–twice as much as the most generous estimate of the benefits.

    Internal combustion generates noise, and the combustion needed to get a loaded 727 off the ground is considerable. In the early 1970s, prompted by homeowner complaints of noise near airports, Congress gave the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) authority to set noise standards for new airplane designs. In 1977 the FAA designated three stages of aircraft, judged by their noise levels. For example, the Boeing 707 is a Stage I aircraft–the noisiest; the Boeing 727 and DC-9 are somewhat quieter Stage II planes; and the Boeing 767 is a relatively muted Stage III aircraft.

    The agency also established deadlines for meeting the second-stage noise requirements. This process was abruptly accelerated by the 1990 Airport Noise and Capacity Act (ANCA), which mandated the complete elimination of even Stage II aircraft from all U.S. airports by the end of 1999.

    Airplane noise tends to reduce the value of land located in the flight paths around airports. By cutting noise, ANCA has generated benefits–higher land values–for homeowners in areas affected by aircraft. But the law also has generated costs for airlines and their customers. In effect, ANCA shortened the useful life of planes flying into U.S. airports: Airlines either had to replace Stage II aircraft with quieter ones far sooner than they would have, or they had to retrofit the planes with expensive “hush kits” that could meet the Stage III noise standards. Airlines have chosen a mix of strategies, depending on the routes they fly and the vintages of the Stage II airplanes they owned.

    When ANCA was passed, fully 55 percent of the U.S. fleet was comprised of Stage II aircraft. As I write, all of these planes either have been scrapped, sold to foreign airlines at substantially discounted prices, or retrofitted with hush kits. The cost of meeting the ANCA Stage III noise requirements for these planes has been $10 billion–the equivalent of about $700 million per year forever, or about $1 for each passenger enplanement every year.

    There is an extensive literature on the effects of noise on property values. The authors draw on this literature to estimate that the ANCA rules have raised property values near airports by at most about 5 percent, or about $5 billion. So, the net effect of ANCA–costs minus benefits–has been to destroy $5 billion worth of resources.

    The authors go on to ask and answer another intriguing question: Even though Congress got it wrong with ANCA, how much could we have benefited if Congress had done things right? An economically sensible policy would have hit airplane noise with taxes as great as the damage done to nearby homeowners; or it would have established noise permits that took into account both the benefits and costs of noise reduction. Such a policy would have been far less costly than ANCA, turning a multi-billion dollar social loss into about $15 million per year in net benefits.

    Even so, $15 million per year is only about two cents per passenger enplanement. Why are the potential benefits from government noise regulation so low? The answer is quite simple: Because people are free to live where they wish, they sort themselves according to their preferences. Thus, people for whom noise would be the most costly simply don’t live around airports and other noise generators. In contrast, noise lovers congregate not only at rock concerts; they also live in major flight paths, relatively unconcerned with the roar of passing jets. And because the sounds are of less concern to them, the benefits of government policies to reduce those sounds are small relative to the costs.

    The good news, then, is that had the market been left alone, it would have produced an outcome vastly superior to that produced by social regulation. Free to choose, individual market participants would have almost completely eliminated the potential net losses from airport noise pollution. The bad news is that Congress didn’t get the message, and its choices have wasted $5 billion worth of our scarce resources–by compelling air travelers to provide homeowners near airports with a level of quiet that is worth only a fraction of its cost.

    Another way to think of this is that every time you get on a plane, you are throwing away a buck so that nearby homeowners can enjoy 50 cents worth of the quiet life. And what happens to the other half of the dollar? It gets lost in the noise.

    REFERENCE

    Morrison, Steven A., Clifford Winston, and Tara Watson. 1999. Fundamental Flaws of Social Regulation: The Case of Airplane Noise. Journal of Law and Economics 42(October): 723-43.

    ——————————————————————————–

    Daniel K. Benjamin is a PERC senior associate and professor of economics at Clemson University. His regular column, “Tangents-Where Research and Policy Meet,” investigates policy implications of recent academic research. He can be reached at: wahoo@clemson.edu

  186. Jon Elliston

    Anthony,

    Please desist from calling Grant “Gnat.” Let’s all try to be grownups here.

    Thanks,

    Jon Elliston, managing editor

  187. Viking

    bobaloo, I think it was especially your thoughts that were the least effective in terms of promoting noise.

    Let’s all pray for a quieter and more peaceful future; for everyone’s sake.

  188. bobaloo

    Maybe, but it was my pleasure dissecting and challenging your pompous viewpoints, fabrications, assumptions, hyperbole, name-calling, obfuscation and question dodging.
    And if I’m not mistaken, you couldn’t care less about what us bullies say anyway, so you’re the last person whose judgment I care about.

    Let’s all pray for a proper sense of priorities in what really matters in our city and region, as opposed to one man’s misguided and pathetic self-serving crusade; for everyone’s sake.

    I’ll check back tomorrow for what will certainly be your attempt at a self-aggrandizing last word.

  189. Viking

    Dude(s), you do not challenge me in the slightest… though you clearly need to say you did.

    That’s how I criticize you folks: It’s about helping to reveal the news that people in Asheville are looking for government intervention on noise pollution (apparently including non-EPA certifiable motorcycles) is now in the air. I think this communications/PR problem makes ya’ll poop your pants.

    Whatever else you folks feel like saying against me personally, that larger point is completely out of your control now. If it was just me I’d like just not speak out at all.

    I care about the safety of motorcyclists, about the same as I care about the rights of citizens to reasonable access to peace and quiet–and of course noise health harms–especially in our individual personal spaces. At the personal level that’s it when it comes to any noise polluter segment opinionation.

    What your bitching and crying to me is about from your perspectives of insult and bullying is something I really want each of you to shove…

  190. Viking

    Andy, you as well have proven your obtuseness at least a dozen times in this thread. Do you really need to continue this repetition?

  191. bobaloo

    Like clockwork. Can’t help yourself can you?
    Grant Millin, champion of the oppressed!

    What your bitching and crying to me is about from your perspectives of insult and bullying is something I really want each of you to shove…

    I’m not sure what this sentence really means as it’s nearly indecipherable in it’s incoherence, but if you want to talk about insults, bullying, crying and bitching I’ll happily go back through the thread and find the multitude of instances where you did just that you ridiculous hypocrite.

    Keep digging, Champion.

  192. Viking

    Meaningless? I started out with an argument about noise and its chief source in Asheville with solutions. I can see how noise makers would take it personally and want to attack the commentator personally.

    You all did and I simply choose to respond to the childish attacks. It seems to aggravate you all, but I am pleased to continue the same message… ? Does that help?

Leave a Reply