[quote]
Originally posted by: Dragginbutt
"..I take it you two know each other..."

As you know, DB....you never really know somebody.... until the time comes for him (or her) <U>to have your back</U>.

I was told that you could have heard "a pin drop" when I walked out of that meeting and now know everyone in that room just a little bit 'better'. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

I'll get back on topic and thanks for the reminder.

 

I just spent a hr and a half responding to your [BB] posts and the internet failed to receive it,this pisses me off,because now I dont have the time..You made some very disturbing accusations,and I WILL find the time to put your *** back where it belongs,you can count on that.

 

How is everyone doing in here today? [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

 

THE ATVA AND WINDRCK?
EVERY State has the ability to adopt their OWN safety ordinances regarding certain safety issue's..If the ATVA and the CPSC did'nt agree on the safety issues' for Windrock',it still would have NO relationship WHAT SO EVER as to WHY the ATVA was in WV in the first place,so your comments make 000000000000% sense here.MANY other State do NOT follow the Concent Decree either when it comes to actually riding an ATV,yet the CPSC dont abolish these States from involvement.

WATERED DOWN PETETIONS?
Show me PROOF of even one?

YOU REVEALED THAT THE ASI WAS NOT INVITED TO OUR 'historic' SAFETY HEARINGS IN MICHIGAN?
First off,please PROVE to the readers that I claimed these hearings were HISTORIC?The State of Michigan does not beleive that a youth should ride an ATV that does not fit them.If an ASI instructor teaches a class,the following age/cc guidelines MUST be adhered to at ALL times,
AGES 6-11 yrs old---not over 69cc
AGES 12-15 yrs old---not over 90cc

The State of Michigan also makes it mandidtory that ALL ORV operators under the age of 16,must be ORV certified BEFORE they operate any type of ORV.The ASI cirriculm,along with the CPSC and mandidtory age/cc guidelines that must be followed to instruct this ASI class,actually IMPEDES training to our youth.So in 2000,in conjunction with the Michigan Department of Education,we put together some STATE certified ORV safety classes that DOES allow your youth to operate an ATV OUTSIDE of the age/cc recommendations set forth by the manufactures and CPSC way back in 1988.If your youth fit the ATV properly,the kids can get certified on it and earn his/her ORV safety certificate,thats ALOT more than the ASI safety course does for this States youth because 95% of kids under the age of 16,are not riding ATVs according to the manufactures guidlines,and in Michigan [and MOST states]they dont have to.Now John,if YOU want your 14yr old youth that is 5'8 and 180lbs to ride a 90cc,than I suggest you follow the CPSC age/cc guidelines that you so proudly seem to ponder as some type of milestone and historic mark on ATV safety,but most everyone I discuss this with,strongly disagree with the age/cc recomendations.

AND AS GOOFY AS THESE AGE/CC RULES ARE,YOU BECAME AN ASI INSTRUCTOR AND HAVE NO PROBLEM COLLECTING THE 100.00 PER STUDENT TRAINING THEM.
First off,just where the hell do you get off lying to our veiwers by telling them that I get paid 100.00 bucks per student to teach the ASI cirriculmn? AND even if I did get that much $$ per student,its NONE of your freaking bussiness in the first place.I dont go to your boss and tell him that he pays you to much $$ to fix pumps because its NONE of MY bussiness what he pays you,and YOU,should not be concerned with what they pay me either because not one penny of it comes out of YOUR pocket!

THE OTHER SLICK TRAINER THAT TRIED TO KICK OUT THE ASI AND WHY YOU RAISED HOLY HELL OVER NOT BEING ABLE TO TEACH THE ASI IN MICHIGAN?
At NO TIME did I EVER raise hell about not being able to instruct an ASI safety class if [insert name] got the monopoly of State certified classes and over thrown the ASI from Michigan,again,another LIE.What DID happen was that this individule[insert name] that got FIRED from the ASI for not following his ASI license agreement,and made it his personal AGENDA to not have an ASI certificate recognized/valid by LEO of Michigan..When I found this out,I become extremely UNGLUED and made it MY personal agenda to get this STOPPED,and I suceeded in doing so.

ISNT IT FUNNY THAT THE RELEASING OF 4 MILLION DOLLARS AND THE POTENTIAL TRIPLING OF 3 TIMES THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY TO INSTRUCTORS HAS CAUSED THESE NON-PROFIT INSTRUCTORS TO SEE JESUS AND TURN THEIR BACKS ON THE SAME ORGANIZATION THAT EVERYONE OF THEM STARTED OUT IN?
Another LIE---In fact,of the 300 or so instructors we have in Michigan,very FEW of them started out with ASI,so get your facts straight.

THE ASI AND THE CONSENT DECREE.
Thats perfectly OK with me that the ASI chooses to stay within the Consent Decree agreement..But dont slam any State that chooses not to..The Consent Decree actually IMPEDEDS training to youth because of its redicules age/cc guidelines.I personally train more kids using the State cirriculmn in 2 days class,than I could train an ASI course of kids in a whole yr.So you tell me,WHO REALLY SUFFERS with the ASI youth course?Money did not trash our relationship with ASI,the consent decree did!ASI serves NO threat to ANY instructor of this State,because there is not a single non profit instructor in the State of Michigan that receives even ONE PENNY to help fund his/her safety classes[another LIE].

 

And as far as no one having the ***** to defend you at the last ORV board meeting?Nobody there with'maybe'the exception of me,even gives a damn to hear what you have to say in the first place,so WHY would they take the time to defend you.

And when you left the meeting?I could'nt hear a pin drop,but I seemed to hear alot of snickering though.

 

Why...just lovely...how are you?
(6 long yearsof the above was about all this "shoot straight or don't bother" hillbilly from the swamps of southwest Michigan could 'take' of these big city slicker Detroit area club members).

 

Im doing well, thanks for asking. You 2 seem to have a couple of disagreements in here. I, as a dirt bike rider am amazed to see 2 quad riders disagreeing. Shouldnt you 2 be attacking the dirt bike riders from mich?

 

LOL!!! [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

You know, I've spent so much time over the past few years simply fighting for the public's right to be heard (first with our atv representative to the board and then with our dirtbike chairman)...that the actual issues which today still separate us...have been given short rift! (which is a <u>great</u> strategy to impliment if you've got someone poking around or asking questions which may affect your "non-profit" club's cash inflow [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]).

We've had two major atv club leaders here in Michigan over the past few years. One was thrown off the board for obvious reasons and has just recently suffered his second major member exodus....the other was his "protege" who resigned his club's leadership position to join a multi-user group council that is harder to break into than the mafioso! (I mean these guys would have to kill you if they ever revealed what they do in a group that our own DNR ....<U>has never even heard of</U>!).

Great bunch of 'stand-up' guys! (lol) [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

 

Hmmm, seems like there has been a history here....

As an outsider, I must agree that MI has a forward view on putting together a program that allows youths to move up in class based upon the ability to demonstrate their skills. I believe that model is one that the CPSC could and should use to update a policy that is clearly long in tooth and out of touch with today's reality. IF the CPSC is unwilling or incapable of making the change I feel states should have the right to build upon their work, and impliment a more realistic model just like MI has done.

As for any organization, there is always going to be some bad blood, and some toes that get stepped on. It appears this argument is deep rooted, and the hatchet, although kept out of sight for a while, has been picked up again...

I kindly asked the two of you to put your personal distaste for each other behind you..and to concentrate on the issue of this thread, but it has fallen on deaf ears. I understand it is hard not to defend yourselves, especially in a public forum.. but please gentlemen, take it off line. I think we all get the point.

 

Nobody's arguing with this, DB; Muddy's just trying to divert the conversation away here from why the state had to take these classes away from them in the first place (how would you like to call someone up and have them tell you that it would be a hundy to train your kid and another 25 to sit in on their class????) as well as cover up the fact that these shysters were trying to "compromise" with the state at $90 per student (with a significant portion coming out of MY sticker money) when these negotiations first began.

If you want to defend these guys in their attempts to make this kind of money or raping parents to sit in on their own kid's classes...I'm fine with that. I just happened to be the only one in this state who got the word out to what was ACTUALLY happening here (sorry, but Bill traveled 3 hours to train kids in my backyard for $25 each and a $500 payday(twice)...<u>now</u> they're looking at $1200 per day ($60/student; the latest news) and that's with writing off all incidental expenses through their "non-profits"!!!.

and it's all "for the kids"......[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]