Hey, there! Log in / Register

Police came for the gun and ammo, stayed for the dirt bikes

Seized bikes

Seized bikes.

Boston Police report drug-unit officers with a search warrant raided 7 Speedwell St. in Dorchester and seized a gun and 400 rounds of ammunition. Also:

Prior to entering the location, officers conducted a protective sweep of the property. During the sweep, officers observed several dirt bikes and off-road vehicles in the rear of the location, as well as, in the basement of the property. All told, officers counted 22 dirt bikes/off-road vehicles on the property. In light of the unsafe, hazardous storage of the gas-powered vehicles, members of the Boston Fire Department responded to the scene and ordered the immediate removal of all the dirt bikes.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 
Free tagging: 

Ad:

Comments

Unlawful seizure of property. The Fire Dept would have said anything to allow the police to confiscate the bikes. last time i checked we live in America

up
Voting closed 0

You are assuming those were not stolen. Which in light of the warrant for other bad stuff likely they were.

up
Voting closed 0

Well it is un-American to assume that they are stolen. Speedwell is a tough street but they're good people living there

up
Voting closed 0

Well, if they aren't stolen, then the owners can show up with the title and registration (if applicable) and get the vehicle back. These aren't actual seizures, they are more impounds, just like when your car gets towed it's not a seizure.

The only reason most of these guys don't get their bikes back is because they ARE stolen and/or unregistered, and there is nothing unamerican about that.

up
Voting closed 0

Yes. An America where you don't hoard large collections of gas-powered vehicles in small enclosed spaces in residential areas due to the hazards they create.

Bear in mind that the fire department can come grab your grill off of a porch, too, because it endangers all.

An America where you do not operate unlicensed motor vehicles in areas where they are forbidden.

Let's see how many actual titles there are for these vehicles and I'm sure the owners will get them back.

up
Voting closed 0

"Bear in mind that the fire department can come grab your grill off of a porch, too, because it endangers all."

Yes, but for some reason they dont. Walk through the alleys of the South End and look at the number of grills (both gas and charcoal) that are on balconies and decks throughout the neighborhood. Probably more than the number of motorbikes in the picture above. I'm not saying that the owners of the bikes should get a pass.

up
Voting closed 0

And enough citizen complaints, and the BFD will be out there trolling the alleyways.

No, I cannot cite a case, but I am willing to believe that the fire department has seized a grill or 2 over the years, though most likely on Mission Hill.

up
Voting closed 0

Charcoal grills are illegal on any wood porch. Propane grills are illegal on porches but can be used on the ground. Wood fires in those cute little fire pits from Lowes are illegal anywhere. All outside burning requires a permit from the BFD.
The BFD does not issue outside fire permits except in very unique situations. Good luck with that. Section 15 covers open burning.

The Fire Department has the right to enter without being charged with trespass. Boston Fire Prevention Code Section 1.21, 1.22 also includes the right to abate any hazard. If the occupant does not do so in a timely manner, the BFD can order a fire detail until the hazard is properly abated. If it's serious, or if the occupant refuses to do so, BFD can hire a contractor to do it.
All costs incurred constitute a lien on the property.

Generally, if someone complains about a grill, the BFD shows up, assesses the legality of it, then either leaves or orders it extinguished. Please note the the BFD can, and will, put the fire out promptly if the occupant refuses. Brian J can tell you what that looks like...

As far as gasoline storage, no gas in an occupied building. You can store up to five gallons in a garage in an approved container separately without a permit. A fuel tank on a motorcycle, car, lawn mower, pressure washer, snow blower is all OK.

up
Voting closed 0

You could just go down to the police station and ask for it back. Simple, right?

up
Voting closed 0

"Unlawful seizure of property. The Fire Dept would have said anything to allow the police to confiscate the bikes. last time i checked we live in America"

Wrong. Storage of gasoline in any type of container, including (especially) motorcycles in an occupied building is illegal. Leaky carb, the fuel vapors hit the water heater pilot light and goodbye house.

Welcome to America, where rules promulgated eighty years ago are needed to prevent the stupid from frying their homes.

up
Voting closed 0

Whatever gets them off the streets. Those things are a menace. Glad to see the guns and ammo go, too, of course.

up
Voting closed 0

round two usually goes to the ACLU, who are going to accuse the police of profiling inner city bike riders!

up
Voting closed 0

The ACLU is not likely to invest any of their resources in the cause of returning these motorcycles to the people who had possession of them. It's not the kind of thing they do.

up
Voting closed 0

Would be thrown out for lack of standing.

up
Voting closed 0

They don't have to be profiled by police. Just sit back and watch how these idiots take over streets and weave in and out of traffic and pedestrians. They're profiling themselves!! LOL

up
Voting closed 0

Not only are they menace on the street but those small engines pollute more and the noise is ridiculous.

Why does a law-abiding perfectly nice motorcycle enthusiast think it is OK to use an aftermarket muffler and urban environment? Am l really un-American for thinking that I don't have to put up with that crap?

up
Voting closed 0

I'm a perfectly nice law abiding motorcyclist with after market pipes. I think it's OK because the new ones are carbon fiber and a lot cooler than the stock metal ones, making my riding more pleasant and safe for myself and my passenger. If you don't like the noise, you could move out of the city, close your windows, etc. I think it's selfish, not un-American, to infringe upon others because of a personal opinion.

Plus, have you ever even heard a Ducati? It sounds amazing

up
Voting closed 0

You are the one infringing on others with your ridiculous noise. There is a reason we have laws against such things and it's because everyone hates loud assholes like you who are overcompensating for your low intellect. We aren't impressed with your silly toy and the vroom vroom noises, little boy.

up
Voting closed 0

How do you know this author is a little boy?

Motorcycles and low intellect do not go hand in hand. Some of my favorite people are bike riding scum who happen to also be some of the computer programmer, green energy making (solar, wind, etc), music playing, robot designing human beings that make your life easier and better. And more interesting.

Signed,
A different Ducati riding motorcyclist.
ATGATT, my friend

up
Voting closed 0

I don't think so, if you have installed aftermarket equipment for the purpose of increasing noise.

up
Voting closed 0

So what I meant by nice law abiding is that they seem like very nice people otherwise. I have two neighbors one with a dirt bike and one with an adorbs antique with sidecar that are stupid loud. My next door neighbor actually used to run his bike parked between ours buildings for about 10-20 minutes every evening.

Except for this my neighbors are pretty great. It's a stuff like this that will cause the city to "overreach" and outlaw all of them.

up
Voting closed 0

city ordinances that specify nothing about 50 decibels between 11 pm and 7 am, and nothing above 70 decibels at other hours. Have a look. Sure hope your aftermarket pipes don't go over this amount or you are violating the law. http://library.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Massachusetts/boston/chapterx...$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:boston_ma$anc=JD_16-26

up
Voting closed 0

Plus this part of the law should make it easier to enforce against offensively loud motorcycles:

16-47 a. 1.
No person shall park, use or operate a motorcycle, within the City of Boston, manufactured subsequent to December 31, 1982 that does not bear the required applicable Federal EPA exhaust system label

up
Voting closed 0

Stickers are easy to buy and install.

So have officers use sound level meters, you say? Easy to fight in court. The law spells out how the pipes are to be measured and it's pretty specific.

Plus, simply asking for when the meters were last calibrated and tested can get things thrown out of court.

eta: specific and not easy to gain an accurate measurement. Taking the measurement cannot be done while the biker is riding by. I don't think they are allowed to stop someone for suspiciously loud pipes, but I could be wrong.

up
Voting closed 0

Definitely they should take them for lab tests.

That take like three months.

Problem solved.

up
Voting closed 0

Lots of vehicle regulation is done by stickers: registration, inspection, parking permits...

Are motorcyclists better at sticker fraud than the general driving population?

up
Voting closed 0

If you were a perfectly nice law abiding motorcyclist, you wouldn't have illegally amplified your motorcycle.

It's like saying "I'm a perfectly nice law abiding patriot who likes to set off fireworks in my backyard" or "I'm a perfectly nice law abiding wine enthusiast who likes to smash bottles in the street."

Sorry bub, you're neither perfectly nice nor law abiding.

up
Voting closed 0

You probably shouldn't have waded into this one.

Your aftermarket pipes are 90% likely not street legal and there will be a sticker indicating this - or there was on the packaging. Unless it was removed of course.

Carbon fiber *is* cooler than stock.

Loud pipes *do not* save lives.

It's a BS argument to tell someone to move out of the city because they don't appreciate the sound of aftermarket pipes on a Duc.

Signed, fellow Duc owning rider.

up
Voting closed 0

Loud pipes DO save lives. I've blipped on the throttle of my Harley at intersections before only to see surprised people in driver seat look up from their cell phones.. They did not turn into my lane and cut me off that time. Drivers simply do not look for motorcyclists (or regular cyclists for that matter).

That said, i dont agree that constantly revving around like some sport bike guys do is necessary. I ride as quietly as I can in residential areas.

up
Voting closed 0

A demonstration that you can startle drivers by revving your illegal bike does not indicate it has saved your life.

Drivers look for motorcyclists the same way they do for other cars - in the middle of the lane.

up
Voting closed 0

Motorcyclists are taught to divvy up a lane into thirds. And often, to be seen and depending upon the situation we are in either one of the outer thirds.

Some like to ride in the right side of the lane if they're in the right lane of a multi lane road - allows for an easy out if someone in front of us does something stupid and we need to get out of the way onto the shoulder. Similarly some like to ride in the left side of the lane.

And people get into different parts of the lane based upon what they're going to be doing once the light turns green. For example, I might be in the left part of the lane to oncoming left turners see me sooner rather than later. The argument may be there for staying in the right side of the lane to give the motorcyclist some running room / time for the chance to swerve out of the way if the left turner doesn't see them and continues to turn.

I recommend car drivers put their heads on a swivel, as motorcyclists are taught to do. Pay attention to the world around you.

up
Voting closed 0

That's just fine.

Right third of the middle. Middle third of the middle. Left third of the middle. Fine.

But when "dividing up the lane into thirds" starts to mean "let a car take the left two thirds, and I'll squeeze by on the right third," or "I'll kinda be in this lane, but then kinda not be in this lane," or even "you guys get the lanes, and I'll barrel through on this nice white stripe," then you get into problems. Which are your fault. So don't.

up
Voting closed 0

That's lane sharing and illegal in MA. Motorcycles can share a lane, motorcycles and cars cannot.

Further, it also means cars don't get to creep over into the lane I am in if I happen to be over in the right third of the lane. Like some bimbo did to me on Melnea Cass one early evening (dusk). She "didn't see me" until my handle bar scraped along the side of her car. It was a quick maneuver on her part and I was so shocked I didn't hit the throttle to get to safety.

up
Voting closed 0

Unless you took it off, the button on your bars sounds the horn. You know, that thing the law requires you to have, so you can signal other drivers that they should not run into you?

Your loud pipes do not make you safer. They do make your neighbors and all the people you ride by hate you.

up
Voting closed 0

I've blipped on the throttle of my Harley at intersections before only to see surprised people in driver seat look up from their cell phones.. They did not turn into my lane and cut me off that time.

You mean you woke them up from their celly screen stupor. Your horn would have done the same. Changing out one's horn on their motorcycle is one of the first things my friends and I do on our bikes. Stock is rather anemic and solves many conspicuity issues. As does added lights to help with depth perception by those in cars. Plus reflective gear for night visibility.

That said, i dont agree that constantly revving around like some sport bike guys do is necessary. I ride as quietly as I can in residential areas.
up

On this I agree with you. I contest they're actually doing more harm to their motor than anything.

A friend on his Harley stopped by last weekend. No one would have known since his pipes are so polite. ;-)

up
Voting closed 0

If you don't like the noise, you could move out of the city, close your windows, etc.

I won't get into the stupid "loud pipes save lives" arguments; it's like talking to anti-vaxxers. If we assume that your belief is true, is it not also true that I would be safer in my small gray car if I blew my horn constantly? How about an aftermarket extra-decibel horn? You'd hear me coming then! You'd really be aware of me, and I'd be much safer!

As for the "move out of the city" and "close your windows", please. As someone who works in Boston and lives in a rural area, let me tell you, I've had enough of you "loud pipes" types recreating in my small quiet town, every single weekend that the weather's nice. You shake the windows and the walls when you're riding by. "close your windows"? Eff. You. You have no right to ride around destroying the quality of life of every single person you pass. If you truly are convinced that you just aren't safe enough riding without "loud pipes", then clearly it's just not safe for you to ride, period. Disagree with me? Post your address and I'll come by some night and give you a dose of what your "loud pipes" friends give me.

up
Voting closed 0

"I think it's selfish, not un-American, to infringe upon others because of a personal opinion."

Like your selfish, personal opinion that loud motorcycle noise is cool and totally OK at 1am?

up
Voting closed 0

Nothing makes car drivers, home owners and pedestrians more angry than loud motorcycles. Loud pipes risk government over regulation and have zero safety benefit. Even race tracks have sound limits so before you go coring out those Termis, do some research.

36 year rider and current track day enthusiast.

up
Voting closed 0

And only one gun recovered? Makes you wonder if there were more they missed, or if the person at the property had already sold or loaned them out.

up
Voting closed 0

Near any gasoline powered vehicles are illegal in any building of occupation in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and most states. Also, most states and I know the City of Boston is quite strict on gasoline powered appliances/equipment in any building of human occupancy and NEAR any such building. Regardless whether it's located on the hill(Beacon or any hill) in any neighborhood of Boston.

up
Voting closed 0

If they cant find the owners, does any of this stuff ever go to public auction? And do the boys in blue get first dibs?

Theres a retty slick Yamaha SRX in there.

up
Voting closed 0

up
Voting closed 0

A good start.

up
Voting closed 0

If this activity is as dangerous as police claim why is it the police are not stopping them with the mass of their vehicles? Aggressive enforcement would probably reduce the problem pretty dramatically.

up
Voting closed 0

As the headline says, they weren't there for the bikes.

up
Voting closed 0

Obvious that this was a stash house for bikes. Wonder if the proprietors knew the warrant was issued and got rid of what they could and just missed a gun/ammo

up
Voting closed 0

I understand that. I am however just referring to the bikes in a general sense. Why are the police unable to forcefully stop them?

Other police forces seem much more liberal with their use of patrol cars to stop bikers.

up
Voting closed 0

I mean, are you suggesting that BPD chase down and ram the bikers with their cruisers?

Of course, the bigger fear is one of these clowns causing an accident while the cops are chasing them. There has been plenty of discussion about this on this very website.

up
Voting closed 0

Yet these people act no less dangerously when the cops are NOT chasing them and they represent a lethal thread to pedestrians and others on the roads.

up
Voting closed 0

Deliberately hitting a person on a motorcycle with a motor vehicle is using lethal force. That is "likely to result in death or great bodily injury". Last time I checked, we don't do that for traffic violations regardless of how obnoxious they are.

up
Voting closed 0

Take a look at how the NYPD deal with these people. It is certainly more aggressive than how Boston deals with it. Using cruisers to block off roads etc. These people represent a lethal threat to other people on the road, force when lethal threats are present is not unwarranted.

up
Voting closed 0

Cruisers can't go on sidewalks. It makes much more sense to find out where those stolen bikes are kept and confiscate them, though I don't quite understand why the "owner" doesn't get locked up for receiving stolen properly.

up
Voting closed 0

Take a look at how much the NYPD pays out in a given year - out of tax money - for extreme use of force and outright murder of people that just don't look right to them.

No thanks.

up
Voting closed 0

And how much to those that are victims of these people? How much to those who get to suffer through a defacto state of lawlessness wherever these people travel. The resulting damage to private property and injury with zero accountability? Look at the videos of police interaction with these gangs, there is no high speed pursuit there is no increase in grossly negligent operation.

up
Voting closed 0

He will be the know to explain why they don't do things like the NYPD.

up
Voting closed 0

The police often have a no chase policy for these because when chased, dirtbikers will use sidewalks, public parks, and private yards, as a mean to escape and it's very dangerous.

up
Voting closed 0

The threats high-speed chases pose to law enforcement are staggering; since 2010, an officer is killed every six weeks in a pursuit-related accident.

Source: http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display...

up
Voting closed 0

Make it known the police will pit lawless mobs and suddenly the lawless mobs will disappear.

up
Voting closed 0

Much?

Funny how you are all about the constitution when it is amendment 2, but not when it is amendment 4.

up
Voting closed 0