Tallahassee/Crawfordville PGR mission Wednesday for Silver Star Vet

The family of S/Sgt Stephen Simmons, US Army has asked us to join them in welcoming him home. He is returning from Afghanistan, his 4th combat tour in 6 years. Sgt Simmons was awarded the Silver Star today.
Mission:
October 22, 2008 - Wednesday
Stage at Texaco corner of Blountstown Hwy and Capital Circle 6:45 PM
Brief at 7:00 PM
KSU at 7:10 to ride to Tallahassee Airport
We will form a welcome home flag line at the airport then escort Sgt. Simmons to the VFW hall in Crawfordville, FL.
We will not have law-official escort in Leon County. There will be Wakulla Sheriff escort at the Wakulla County line.  If this is your first mission be sure to introduce yourself to the ride Captain.
This is an American hero. Let's stand for him!!!
Mike Donohoe
Assistant State Captain, FLAdd to Technorati Favorites

IRON RAVENS POKER RUN for Swamp AND Riverfest

It was some good times and we got some good pics.  We just don't have them up yet due to one of them "why the hell did I get out of bed days".  Hope to have em up tomorrow.  Needless to say, the Ravens
Benefit for Swamp demonstrated what can be accomplished through brotherhood.  A lesson  for some I hope.

One for the sportbikers, Old "bikers" can relate, note I said "Bikers"

Riding the Balance Point:
Stunt riders are always looking for a new twist on an old trick. C.J. Harris and Tawny Hoff show off a variation of the tandem wheelie.The Future of Street Bike Freestyle
Two years ago, the street bike stunting scene appeared on the verge of going big. Stunting was not just becoming mainstream, it was becoming corporate. Major manufacturers like BMW and Kawasaki were officially sponsoring stunt riders, using big names like Christian Pfeiffer and Kane Friesen to market their products to a younger, more performance-oriented crowd. Wheelie-popping, tire-sliding sportbike riders kept the fans entertained at large public events, performing in front of crowds of thousands. Competitions were being organized to make the activity safer and more legitimate, giving stunters a way to stay out of jail and make a living at the same time. Street bike stunting's future looked as bright as the ground-off side of a well-used wheelie bar.

But life in the stunting world is tough and it's been a long two years since street bike freestyle was balanced, like a perfect stoppie, on the edge of becoming motorcycling's next big thing. Florida is a hotbed of sportbike activity and I thought Biketoberfest would be the perfect place to see where the scene had gotten to. I expected to take my pick from a host of stunt shows that would be performed during the four days of festivities. I could find only one.

The Daytona Flea Market is the site of a Biketoberfest swap meet. Behind the rows of tents selling take-off chrome, helmet stickers and OEM Harley mufflers, a section of the concrete parking lot had been roped off with yellow caution tape. Inside, the stunt riders were warming up for their first performance of the day.

At the center of the action is Tony Levesque, a high strung twenty-something with the smile of a mischievous prankster. His '08 ZX-6R is clean and fresh-looking, its red fairings emblazoned with Monster Energy logos, the mark of big time sponsorship. Levesque has traveled the world to show off his riding skills, this summer alone working events from the Ferrari World owners show in China to the Indy MotoGP round. He is a member of a handful of professional, strictly off-the-street stunt riders.

"Most people's image of a stunter is the guy who rips by them on the highway doing a wheelie at 100 miles per hour," he said. "But things are changing. Stunting is developing a good name. The professionals are breaking away from the amateurs."

Like most stunt riders, Levesque admits that the competitive side of street bike freestyle is not catching on. Even with a national series like the XDL Sportbike Freestyle Championship, competitions are still too few and far between and purses too small for riders to make a living off of them. It's public performances, like the daily swap meet show, and not prize money, that pay the bills for professional stunters.

But none of the other riders at Friday's exhibition have shared in Tony L's success. Although they match the pros trick for trick, the stunting world they live in is a much different one. They talk about police harassment, being unable to find a place to practice and getting their legitimate off-the-street shows shut down by the authorities. Publicity, it seems, is creating a back lash. Just prior to Biketoberfest, House Bill 137 went into effect. The new Florida statute makes lofting the wheel of a motorcycle while on the street punishable with a $1,000 fine, arrest and confiscation of your bike. This means that amateur freestyle street bikers have more to lose than just the skin off their elbows if they practice their skills in public.

Frank Geremia understands both sides of the equation. He's both a stunt rider and a Daytona Beach police officer.

"I tell my friends, if you get in trouble I can't help you," he said of the dichotomy of his career paths. "I tell them don't run. Be a man and take the ticket. Mentioning my name won't get you anywhere."

But Geremia has figured out a unique way to reconcile the lawless reputation of street bike freestyle with the goals of law enforcement. He developed a program that uses stunt riders to give grade school children an anti-drug and anti-violence message. Dubbed "The Xtreme Show," the program has been accepted by the national Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.) organization.

"The hardest hurdle that we've had to overcome [in having the show officially sanctioned by D.A.R.E.] is the stigma attached to stunters," Geremia said. "Stunting is like any profession. There are always a few bad apples. It's the same in law enforcement."

Geremia, along with Levesque, recently performed at the National D.A.R.E. Conference in San Antonio, Texas and is booking shows throughout Florida and around the country.

"Our program shows the kids that they can have fun and accomplish things without drugs or alcohol," he said. "My guys are professionals with too much to lose to stunt on the street. Whether they're on or off their bike they're good role models to put in front of children."

But not everyone sees the future of stunting as kid-friendly, mainstream entertainment. On the edge of Friday's performance, away from the motorcycles and the spectators, Kenny Kelley was leaned up against a black Chevy Avalanche with huge chrome rims. Kelley's Adrenaline Crew outfit had organized the show. A stunt riding entrepreneur, Kelley knows the places that sick tricks on a street bikes can take you. He's worked in Hollywood movies, performed on the Vans Warped concert tour and produced and starred in stunt movies that have shown up everywhere from pay-per-view channels to the DVD aisles at Best Buy. A self-described "black sheep" in the professional stunting world, Kelley believes that street bike freestyle was born on the streets and the streets will always be its most profitable venue.

"No one wants to see this stuff in a parking lot," he said of off-the-street performances and competitions.

The controversial Adrenaline Crew DVDs combine public road motorcycle antics with general lawlessness and a Jackass-style maelstrom of adolescent hi-jinks, pranks and destruction of property. Some claim they bring a bad image to stunt riding and motorcycling in general. But no one can argue with their success.

Kelley seemed far removed from the crazy, spike-haired character familiar to his fans. His close-cropped head and lack of visible piercings or tattoos along with his measured and insightful view of his business could convince you that you're talking to a young executive and not the king of motorcycle mayhem. Kelley knows what it takes to make money in the stunting world and he knows how much he stands to lose if he places all his eggs in a basket that goes broke. The word he uses to describe the street bike freestyle scene over the past two years is "frustrating." After early successes, the hopes of plentiful corporate sponsors and a freestyle motocross-like ascent into the X-Games and onto ESPN seem to be fading.

"For something to break big, someone has got to take a risk," he noted of the lack of corporations willing to bet their cash on stunt riding becoming a two-wheeled NASCAR. "You can't blame everything on the economy, but that's certainly part of it."

Kelley estimates there are only 20 riders in the U.S. who are making a decent, full-time living exclusively from their stunt riding.

"My father always said, 'People who are pioneers end up with arrows in their backs,'" he added.

"Some day they'll make a documentary about all this and it will be about guys that spent thousands, but never made a dollar, just so that they could be the pioneers in this scene."

Kelley is one of the few stunters who has broken ground and made money at the same time. But for the majority of street bike freestylers, their lives are an endless cycle of injury, run-ins with the law and unpaid bills.

The swap meet crowd was slim and spectators for the stunt show even sparser. The sight of smoking tires and sound of four-cylinder motorcycles hitting their rev limiters drew a few away from the boxes of used seats and racks of five for $20 t-shirts with "Biketoberfest 2008" printed on them. They try to relate to what they're seeing, but the gulf between them and the stunt riders is wider than the orange mesh construction fence that separates them from the action.

"One time I accidentally did a wheelie on my bike," I overheard a middle-aged Harley-type tell his friends.

"It was crazy," he added, shaking his head as he walked away from something that he couldn't quite understand or appreciate.

The anonymous rider speaks for the majority of mainstream motorcyclists. Crazy tricks on sport bikes can catch their eye, but once they're watching they don't quite know what to make of the spectacle. Legitimate sport, valued entertainment or outlaw activity, the last chapter has yet to be written on the street bike stunt scene. In the meantime there are tricks to be learned, bikes to be crashed and bones to be broken. Achieving mainstream success, the most exclusive stunt of them all, isn't coming easy.

Motorcycling has always been about freedom, taking risks and pushing limits. Which is why back in the day they had things like hill climbs, one wheel motorcycle races, Custom bikes that pushed the limits of ride-ability and the government trying to ban them.  It was about seeing if you could get down roads not made for bikes (pre dirt bike days), sleeping in tents and trying not get hit when caught in a rain storm so blinding you can't see where to pull over.  It was riding in freezing cold without heated hand grips and vests because the bike was your only transportation.

You knew sooner or later you would go down and probably rode in such a manner as to insure it.  The sun, rain, cold and wind etched the miles in your face and you never gave it a moments thought or consideration. Because it always has been and always will be, for the true "biker" about the ride.

When self professed Bikers such as the President of ABATE of Florida stand in front of the Florida legislature and proclaim that sportbikers are not bikers they betray their lack of understanding of what "riding" is all about and abdicate any credibility they may have thought they had as a "biker". Amen?Add to Technorati Favorites
rc

Florida takes the title from California as the land of WACKO

We knew we could do it. Hell we didn't even have to work at it. It came natural. I'm not sure if it has to do with the constant heat, transients, old folk, runaways or swamp gas, But ol Walt Disney knew that if he wanted to build the ultimate fantasy land what better place to put it but in a land where reality is often blurred.

Thank you Girl Geek for validating my own insanity as no matter how many times I have left this state I keep coming back.

Excerpts from:
 From the Bizarre to the Tragic, Florida May Be Weird News Central
 
For Florida, odd and sometimes grievous news just seems to be part of daily life.
Just last week there was a story about peacocks going on "the pill," one about police unsuccessfully attempting to tase a 450-pound boar into submission and another about a mother and son who allegedly tried to put a "hit" on two men and offered to pay the would-be killer in anti-anxiety pills.

"Florida is messed up," Drew Curtis wrote in his 2007 book "It's Not News, It's Fark." "Whatever the reason, Florida is without a doubt the No. 1 state for weird news."


Though there is hardly a way to quantify the "weirdness" of a state, the fact that the oddities of the Florida news have inspired multiple books, at least one daily blog and the only state-related tag on Fark -- a site dedicated to absurd news -- seems to support Curtis' claim.

When Tom Scherburger, Metro editor and 16-year employee of the St. Petersburg Times, decided to take all the weird news he had seen over the years and begin a blog called "Bizarre Florida," he knew it would be quite an undertaking. 

"We knew when we started Bizarre Florida near the end of November [in 2007] that the challenge wouldn't be finding strange stories," the blog states. "Rather, it simply would be keeping up with all the bizarre events -- large and small -- that occur daily in the Sunshine State."


"We're a content provider for the rest of the country, if not the world," the 28-year Florida resident told ABC News. "The material's there.
"
That material is sometimes a sort of oddball humor -- like when a Tampa man was arrested for riding his bike in a batman costume -- and other times intensely grotesque -- like when a man from Winter Haven allegedly beat his baby daughter to death for not being a boy. 
 
For Scherberger, knowing the difference between the comic and tragic can be difficult.
"There's a fine line there," he said. "Some tragedies are funny, to anyone it's not happening to. It's on a case-by-case basis. It's a gut feeling."By walking that fine line, a gaggle of comedy writers who make their home in Florida have become successful by looking to the day's headlines for inspiration.

"The heat leading to sunstroke and leading to dementia among so many people creates a weirder, wacky environment," Levine theorized.

Drew Curtis wrote in "It's Not News, It's FARK," that the Florida "weirdness" was "diverse, and seems to be endemic of the population.""Part of the reason Florida is such a magnet for bizarre stories is that so many people are rootless," Sherburger agreed. "It's a land of refugees. People will literally get on a bus with no job, no money and land in Florida looking for something to do. This is a good place to start over."

In the "land of refugees," nearly half of Florida's residents were born out of state, according to the 2000 Census. "Sometimes I think that Florida, being sort of the end of the road, is where all these cracked marbles kind of roll and now they come to a stop in the sand," Levine said. "When you're there, there's no place left to go.

"There's a lot of aggressive newspapers and we have access to virtually every arrest record," he said. "They say that in New York they'll tell you anything, but they won't give you records. In Florida, they won't tell you anything, but we have all the records."
Thus stories like the one about a woman stealing guitars from a dead man and then going on a "sex rampage" are reported more regularly than they might be elsewhere.

"We are a blessed people, but nevertheless, ours is a complex society," Bryant said.
Or, maybe, it is not so complex after all.  "These are all theories though," Scherberger said. "I don't know why Florida is weird. It must have something to do with the heat."

Ed. Note: Now my ol lady thinks she has it figured out. She looked at a map and without a moments hesitation said, "well no wonder, it's the penis of the country!" 

And she may be on to something there.  Because if your riding west on Appalachee Parkway, when the capital comes into view, more than one person has been heard to say, "That looks like a giant pair of balls with an erection!"Add to Technorati Favorites

Motorcycle Deaths Up In U.S., And Florida Leads Pack

Motorcycle Deaths Up In U.S., And Florida Leads Pack
Florida had 530 motorcycle fatalities in 2007, compared to California with 495.
TBO.com
Published: October 17, 2008

Research Motorcycle Accidents ST. PETERSBURG - Highway fatalities nationwide decreased in 2007 compared with 2006, but motorcycle fatalities increased, and in no state were there more than in Florida, according to federal figures released Thursday.

Florida had 530 motorcycle fatalities in 2007, according to data compiled by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The state with the next highest number is California with 495 deaths. Texas placed third with 375 deaths, and Pennsylvania was fourth with 210, according to the NHTSA.

The figures were used by the National Transportation Safety Board for a study on all types of transportation fatalities.

In most categories there were decreases – in aviation and in marine deaths, for instance. Though fewer people died during recreational boating, there was a slight increase in the number of people who died while passengers on commercial vessels, the NTSB said.

Aside from the increase in motorcycle fatalities, there was an increase in the number of people killed in rail fatalities – from 774 to 808. The vast majority of these fatalities were people struck by rail vehicles.

Highway fatalities, which account for nearly 95 percent of all transportation deaths, decreased from 42,708 in 2006 to 41,059 in 2007. That represents a 4 percent decrease.

However, the number of motorcycle deaths increased from 4,837 to 5,154, a 7 percent jump. And the 317 additional deaths in 2007 was the largest spike in any category.

In Florida, of the 530 killed, 52 percent were wearing helmets and 48 percent were not, according to NHTSA data. The state does not require all motorcycle riders to wear helmets.

California does. In that state, 86 percent of those killed were wearing a helmet and 14 percent were not.

In Florida, 25 percent had a blood-alcohol level greater than 0.08. A driver in the state is presumed intoxicated if his or her percentage is 0.08 or greater. Thirty-two percent of the people killed had a blood-alcohol level greater than 0.01, the NHTSA data show.

Our note: more people are killed wearing helmets than are killed not wearing helmets.

O.K. that note was sarcasm but it was also a play on how NHTSA uses statistics. We are not surprised that Florida leads the nation in MC fatalities and have debunked this statistical chicanery on more than one occasion, for example here:

The Governors Highway Safety Association Fuels Panic with myths regarding motorcycle fatalities

Of course we are concerned with motorcycle fatalities. We are also concerned that NHTSA and D.O.T. continue to advocate for failed policies focusing on injury prevention when crash prevention is key.

However to taking that change in tactics would necessitate the cessation of discrimination against motorcyclists and require "other vehicle Drivers" be held responsible for their part in the rising fatality rate.

We can not however and will not argue the "alcohol issue", other than superfluous mention of numbers of accidents with a B.A.C. greater than .01. Thats meaningless and can only fuel the fires for more legislation that forget history and the fact that prohibition did not work.

Though there can be no doubt that alcohol and motorcycles do not mix. Niether do cell phones and "other vehicle drivers". We do not excuse the alcohol use. Therefor we also can not excuse cell phone use.  It's called  looking at the science objectively as opposed to emotionally.

Related posts:

Traffic fatalities down, but alcohol-related traffic deaths up in Florida, WHY?

Alcohol-Addressing the Elephant in Our living room

If NHTSA focused all their energies on solving this problem they would save more lives than and helmet could.Add to Technorati Favorites

Hey find an illegally parked motorcycle, well hell just mace everybody

Thanks to Gixxer for this one:

Pro Cyclist Files Complaint Against Dallas Police
DALLAS (CBS 11 News) ―

Leslie Porterfield has set three land speed records reaching speeds of 230 miles per hour on her motorcycle. Now she's looking for some fast action of another kind after filing a complaint against the Dallas Police Department.

Porterfield owns High Fiver Motorcycles in North Dallas. On Thursday nights she's open late to welcome customers with hot dogs and energy drinks.

More than a hundred customers gathered for the event last night. This time, however, they were greeted by several Dallas Police officers responding to a complaint.

According to Porterfield, a police officer shoved a customer. When she tried to resolve the issue, she says the officer "looked at me straight in the face and sprayed the mace right in my direction. He continued to fan the spray across the crowd of my customers. I collapsed to the ground. My eyes were on fire and my face was burning."

Dallas Police have a different story. Officers say several motorcycles were illegally parked on the service road along LBJ, while other bikes were blocking a fire lane.

Officers say they tried to disperse the crowd after a customer became aggressive. That's when Officer James Stambaugh placed his hand against the customer's chest. Police say he refused to back down.

"According to the report, it appears a crowd was gathering and they did not have an opportunity to spray one person so they shot a one second burst into the air in order to disperse everyone at one time" says Dallas Police Lt. Vernon Hale.

But at least a dozen witnesses, including Leslie's employees, strongly disagree with that account.

"He just pointed it right at her (Porterfield's) face, sprayed her and then sprayed everybody who was on the front porch of the business" says one of Leslie's employees, Quincy Tidwell.

There were no arrests or citations handed out. Porterfield's complaint alleges that Dallas Police used excessive force. Police say that Porterfield had no signs of being sprayed in the face with pepper spray.

Officers say she did not show the signs of red or watery eyes or skin discoloration. The Dallas Police Department Internal Affairs office is investigating the complaint.

A side note of disclosure to the story, Leslie Porterfield was featured last month on a segment for TXA 21 news. She also worked on a promotion for the station.Add to Technorati Favorites

WHAT MAKES YOU THINK YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY?

You do have that right, but why? After all it is not mentioned in the Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments of the U.S. Constitution/”Law of the land”) so how in the hell did we get it and other rights that may or may not be spelled out in the constitution. And if we do have the right to privacy, how come we don't have the right to do dope in private?  Now there's a convoluted jump in logic for you.

Not that this post is about dope. It's more about how in some respects we have freedom and how, by holding our legislators to a low standard of performance we are losing them.  Now I understand that
not holding lawmakers to a “LOW” standard is difficult when you consider how “Low” most of them are.  But considering their deficiencies and in-competencies it would seem that “touchy -feely” socially correct thing to do would be to slap em upside the face and educate them a little.

AND BELIEVE ME WHEN I SAY THIS HAS TO DO WITH MOTORCYCLE RIGHTS.  IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH LIBERTY.

Now I ain't no attorney or Constitutional scholar and sometimes I have to get my own face slapped to force me to look at something a little more in depth.  Now recently Mike of GoldIron has been repeating 9th amendment, 9th amendment so often I  was beginning to think he had like maybe some Parrot DNA in him.  Then I started to question my own understanding about a thing or two and started doing a little looking up and reading.  This is something we encourage others to do.  Even though we know most “others” ain't gonna do it, we still encourage it. 

Now just as an aside, we gonna elaborate just a little on why folk should google and read a lot.  Because sometimes when I'm listening to people talk about important issues, you know like “Freedom”, I'm thinking to myself, “Your a freaking idiot!”

Now I generally, out of  some weird desire not to hurt somebody's feelings, don't say your a freaking idiot out loud.  Well let me be a bit more honest, there are times when it would seem that exercising my “freedom of Speech” might be physically hazardous to my health.   But then I think to myself, o.k. now if I'm sitting here thinking, Dudes an idiot. How many others are thinking the same and like myself are just keeping their mouths shut? But one of these days I just know it is going to come out.

O.K. as usual I digress and shall get on with it.  So I got to looking at the 9th amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America (ever hear of it), which is like really short and vague and is as follows:

Amendment IX:  The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Why is it that the  short, simple stuff is so hard to understand?  Like just what are these other rights?
Well if you really want to look up and read try this on for size but make sure you got a heap of time on your hands.  “The Rights of Man” by Thomas Paine who said “These are the times that try mens souls”  Hell he got that one right didn't he

Apparently Privacy is one of them and doing dope isn't. O.k. so who made that determination and how?

Well the courts are the last word. But they shouldn't have to be a backlogged as they are trying to figure out what's legal and what ain't.  Hell you could be in the right about something but dead before the courts have time or you got the money to be proven right.

It's those folks that pass those God knows how many laws that your probably breaking one you don't even know about right now.  Yepper, your friends and mine, legislators who legislate.

 Legislate: intransitive verb: to perform the function of legislation  ; specifically : to make or enact laws transitive verb: to mandate, establish, or regulate by or as if by legislation

Note how it does not say, to “go to your office and not make laws”.  So most of these “Legislators”
think that they are supposed to go to work and make laws.  Now we think that they think they are doing this for our own good.  When the truth of the matter is we really don't need all them damn laws and they are doing a heap of it to MAINTAIN POWER (not yours) and TAKE MONEY (yours).

So, o.k. so how do these folk determine what you are or are not free to do (besides being bought by corporate lobbyists)?  Well there is this other gig called “DUE PROCESS” and then another one called “SUBSTANTIVE DUE  PROCESS” (keep this one in mind. This is YOUR weapon). Thanks Mike for leading me down this freaking path.

Now most of us think about due process as what is supposed to happen when you get arrested. And that is true. Due Process is “supposed” (and of course we all know that things ain't always as they are supposed to be, don't we?) insure you are treated fairly:


Fairness is the idea of doing what's best. It may not be perfect, but it's the good and decent thing to do. It requires being level-headed, uniform and regular, when all around you is prejudice, corruption, or the desire of an angry mob to see justice done. Fairness requires breadth and depth. Not only does the outcome have to be fair, but so does everything along the line such as evidence gathering and presentation. Fairness is difficult to put in the form of strict legal rules and principles that cover every situation. Which is fairer?

    *

       A system of rules so strict that even a few innocent people get unfairly punished
    *

       A system not so strict that even a few guilty people go unfairly unpunished

Due process of law holds that the second answer is more correct, for many reasons. On a practical level, there's less of a danger to the whole legal system. If your system is convicting a few innocent, chances are it's railroading many of the guilty, so you've got two problems on your hands -- those who are falsely imprisoned and those who have a stronger habeas corpus claim. If your system is letting a few guilty slip through, chances are that those lucky evil-doers might change their ways, or in any case, law enforcement or informal methods of social control can pick up the slack. However, on the more important theoretical level, it depends on what kind of system you want to have -- one that just rolls over people indiscriminately -- or one that is individualized and takes into account the need for your society to expand freedom. The U.S. Constitution guarantees due process because it's designed to be a "living document" that expands freedom.


Note those two words “Expand Freedom.”  O.K., all those whose legislators are currently involved in expanding the freedom of anyone other than those who work with “credit swaps” and “derivatives" raise your hand. IF you raised you hand you are probably on the wrong site and need to exit forthwith.

Now unlike “Privacy” due process is is expressly mentioned in the Constitution:

   *  Fifth Amendment -- No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

Fourteenth Amendment -- All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

Our friend is the 5th amendment if you want to use the 9th amendment to prove your state wrong.

Now the 9th amendment was thrown in their for a reason.

The Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is somewhat of an enigma. It provides that the naming of certain rights in the Constitution does not take away from the people rights that are not named. Yet neither the language nor the history of the Ninth Amendment offers any hints as to the nature of the rights it was designed to protect.

Every year federal courts are asked to recognize new Un-enumerated Rights "retained by the people," and typically they turn to the Ninth Amendment. However, the federal judiciary does not base rulings exclusively on the Ninth Amendment; the courts usually cite the amendment as a secondary source of fundamental liberties. In particular, the Ninth Amendment has played a significant role in establishing a constitutional right to privacy.

Ratified in 1791, the Ninth Amendment is an outgrowth of a disagreement between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists over the importance of attaching a Bill of Rights to the Constitution. When the Constitution was initially drafted by the Framers in 1787, it contained no Bill of Rights. The Anti-Federalists, who generally opposed ratification because they believed that the Constitution conferred too much power on the federal government, supported a Bill of Rights to serve as an additional constraint against despotism. The Federalists, on the other hand, supported ratification of the Constitution without a Bill of Rights because they believed that any enumeration of fundamental liberties was unnecessary and dangerous.

The Federalists contended that a Bill of Rights was unnecessary because in their view the federal government possessed only limited powers that were expressly delegated to it by the Constitution. They believed that all powers not constitutionally delegated to the federal government were inherently reserved to the people and the states. Nowhere in the Constitution, the Federalists pointed out, is the federal government given the power to trample on individual liberties. The Federalists feared that if the Constitution were to include a Bill of Rights that protected certain liberties from government encroachment, an inference would be drawn that the federal government could exercise an implied power to regulate such liberties.


On several occasions in the past, (Supreme Court Justice) Douglas wrote, the Court has recognized rights that cannot not be found in the written language of the Constitution.

Now I found this definition of  SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS: -
why the law is just; related to concept of legality; source of fairness beyond the Constitution; decided mostly through Fundamental Rights/Compelling Need Tests; interpretation is the phrase "due process of law" as a continuation from  life, liberty, and property.

Which led  “ulTRAX” to post in 05 the following:

For instance, are scorched-earth laws written by Neanderthal or lazy politicians that unjustly restrict the rights of responsible citizens unconstitutional? Can a case be made that the 9th REQUIRES laws to be written in ways that CLEARLY STATE LEGITIMATE INTENT, target ONLY a well-defined problem, and in ways that maximize the freedoms of responsible people? Should citizens have the right to sue politicians for "political malpractice" if they willfully push for laws that violate this standard?

Which brings me to my question: does the 9th protect responsible drug use?

Now I don't know ulTRAX but but I do like his thinking and he does raise an interesting concept should lawmakers/legislators be required to engage in due diligence and/or due process to determine the constitutionality of a law before enacting it? It would appear that the constitution and the courts insist on it as a way of limiting the states preponderance to want to control everything.

Excerpts below are from find law discussion of the 9th and 14th amendments  with substantive due process. Unfortunately things have slowed on the net and seem to be unable to access the sites at this time. Your welcome to google them.

What induced the Court to dismiss its fears of upsetting the balance in the distribution of powers under the federal system and to enlarge its own supervisory powers over state legislation was the increasing number of cases seeking protection of property rights against the remedial social legislation States were enacting in the wake of industrial expansion.

This occurred in Mugler v. Kansas, 42  where the power was defined as embracing no more than the power to promote public health, morals, and safety. During the same interval, ideas embodying the social compact and natural rights, which had been espoused by Justice Bradley in his dissent in the Slaughter-House Cases, 43  had been transformed tentatively into constitutionally enforceable limitations upon government. 44  The consequence was that the States in exercising their police powers could foster only those purposes of health, morals, and safety which the Court had enumerated, and could employ only such means as would not unreasonably interfere with the fundamentally natural rights of liberty and property, which Justice Bradley had equated with freedom to pursue a lawful calling and to make contracts for that purpose. 45  

In contrast to the presumed validity rule, under which the Court ordinarily is not obliged to go beyond the record of evidence submitted by the litigants in determining the validity of a statute, the judicial notice principle, as developed in Mugler v. Kansas, carried the inference that unless the Court, independently of the record, is able to ascertain the existence of justifying facts accessible to it by the rules governing judicial notice, it will be obliged to invalidate a police power regulation as bearing no reasonable or adequate relation to the purposes to be subserved by the latter; namely, health, morals, or safety. For appraising state legislation affecting neither liberty nor property, the Court found the rule of presumed validity quite serviceable, but for invalidating legislation constituting governmental interference in the field of economic relations, and, more particularly, labor-management relations, the Court found the principle of judicial notice more advantageous. This advantage was enhanced by the disposition of the Court, in litigation embracing the latter type of legislation, to shift the burden of proof from the litigant charging unconstitutionality to the State seeking enforcement. To the State was transferred the task of demonstrating that a statute interfering with the natural right of liberty or property was in fact ''authorized'' by the Constitution, and not merely that the latter did not expressly prohibit enactment of the same.


Insofar as the police power is utilized by a State, the means employed to effect its exercise can be neither arbitrary nor oppressive but must bear a real and substantial relation to an end which is public, specifically, the public health, public safety, or public morals, or some other phase of the general welfare.

''Liberty'' .--The ''liberty'' guaranteed by the due process clause has been variously defined by the Court, as will be seen hereinafter. In general, in the early years, it meant almost exclusively ''liberty of contract,'' but with the demise of liberty of contract came a general broadening of ''liberty'' to include personal, political and social rights and privileges. 74  Nonetheless, the Court is generally chary of expanding the concept absent statutorily recognized rights.

To the extent that it acknowledged that liberty of the individual may be infringed by the coercive conduct of other individuals no less than by the arbitrary action of public officials, the Court in effect transformed the due process clause into a source of encouragement to state legislatures to intervene affirmatively to mitigate the effects of such coercion. By such modification of its views, liberty, in the constitutional sense of freedom resulting from restraint upon government, was replaced by the civil liberty which an individual enjoys by virtue of the restraints which government, in his behalf, imposes upon his neighbors.

Now this goes on and on and on................. as the courts pretty much change with the times and have overturned themselves on occasion.  See, the reaity is, NOT EVEN THE COURTS NO WHAT YOUR FREEDOMS ARE OR ARE NOT, THERE FOR THEY CAN NOT BE THE ARBITER OF YOUR RIGHTS, IF ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL AND ENDOWED WITH INALIENABLE GOD GIVEN RIGHTS THEN ALL MEN ARE THE ARBITER OF THEIR OWN RIGHTS!

Now my thinking is that you are probably not going to get  the courts or the legislatures to sanction the legitimacy of the Golden Rule as the highest law of all which is probably kinda like what they meant in the Declaration of Independence when they said:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

However as a tool to confront your legislators or a judge should you have the need, it would seem that knowledge of the ends and outs of  of the 9th amendment and substantive due process may surprise you with just how free you can really be. Unfortunately have I have done written beyond the point most people will read so I suspect they may never know.

It may also surprise a number of people hoping that the government will force banks to refinance loans with lower interest rates to avoid foreclosure is illegal. For the government to do so is unconstitutional. But then has that ever stopped the government.Add to Technorati Favorites