Another Black Eye For Chasers?

[Amos Magliocco]

A reliable source with contacts among Oklahoma emergency managers said last week that those folks, too, are discussing ways to regulate or curtail stormchasing. I have no idea how serious they are or if they'll still be worked up about it in a few weeks.

I don't know what the definition of enforceability is, but I think it's the wrong way to imagine the relationship between laws and law enforcement. First, no bill ever failed to become law because it could not either completely eliminate an activity or behavior (marijuana, seat belts, ambulance chasing) or because it could not be universally enforced everywhere all the time. The way to think about a law like this would be as a "tool" for LE to use during days of what they might consider "dangerous" chaser convergences, meaning that, like seat belts, it would be selectively enforced or perhaps not enforced at all on other days. No law includes a provision to hold LE in contempt of court if they don't vigorously enforce every law every minute.

As far as proving that an individual was chasing or not, that seems like a no-brainer. How hard would it be to prove to a jury of 12 men and women that someone was chasing storms after their vehicle was stopped, their equipment photographed (could you close all those apps in time? would it matter if they were still on your hard drive? lol), their location (versus their residence) noted, their website and blog records entered into evidence, their chasing history revealed, their friends and family called to testify under oath? Of course that's an extreme and absurd example, but my point is that, in a court of law, it would be easy to convince 12 men and women that someone was engaged in storm chasing. There's far more physical and circumstantial evidence available for such a case than in many criminal trials. There is no requirement to prove intentionality!

Many chasers have decals on their vehicle that read: "STORM CHASER!" LOL. That might be pretty compelling in a court room.

The arguments I read against this is that you could just tell the cop you weren't chasing. That never seems to work on COPS: "I swear, o-c-iffer, that's not my weed. It's my mom's!"

No DA in a rural county wants to spend all that money bringing chasers to trial. But if they had to run a "test case" or two, it would be no challenge. What chasers on this site would spend the money to run the case up the ladder to a state supreme court? Wouldn't it be easier to pay the ticket from your computer at home than spend months in Lincoln or wherever while paying thousands to an attorney?

Finally, state legislators could care less about all this. Enforceability doesn't matter to them; they're giving LE a tool. And since most of them are lawyers, they'd know that proving someone is chasing would take less than a day. What a legislator wants is something for his or her next campaign flyer, like: "SPONSORED LEGISLATION TO CURB DANGEROUS STORM CHASING IN KANSAS." Nobody except chasers cares about the definition of "dangerous" or all the good and positive things we do. And like David mentioned, we have zero political clout since there's less than 1000 of us scatted all around the country and the world. We present no danger to any single lawmaker in any single state. We're the easiest targets in the world.

I'm not writing this because I'm in favor of such a law. If I were a betting man, I'd say it won't happen. My guess would be the story will die down until next May. I doubt there's much juice behind the anti-chaser sentiment. But I could be wrong.

All I'm arguing here is that an anti-chasing law is possible.

 

[fplowman]

Im wondering why it is that they really care? I mean really? Why do they care?

"someone was in a car driving slow on the gravel while we were trying to get through".

Crazy, crazy world. Being 39 yrs old something going on in my life is always being legislated or outlawed it seems.

 

[Mikey Gribble]

There is no way for them to make "storm chasing" illegal. That is absurd. All they can do is apply existing traffic laws to crack down on chasers.
All these sheriffs and small town cops that are rallying these sort of ridiculous movements can bite me. Who do they think is relaying accurate weather reports to the media and NWS? It ain't them. In large part chasers perform a public service when they are on a dangerous storms. These people should be saying thankyou instead of trying to punish us all because of a few inconveniences. I fail to understand what they were prevented from doing because of storm chasers blocking the roads. Was there a structure hit in Hill City? Nope. So what, was he slowed down a little when he was trying to chase the storm. Big deal. We probably did the NWS a favor by slowing down the cop because it just minimizes the number of false reports he can make. I'm just kidding BTW.
Seriously though, this whole stop storm chasers garbage will go nowhere. You can't make it illegal. No way, no how. All they can do is apply existing laws. Even if there ever was some sort of law passed I guarantee you there would be some public outcry. The media has chasers and the media would carry that story for sure since it contradicts there interests.
I honestly believe that anyone who thinks chasers do more harm than good for the public is a$$ backwards wrong.

 

[Earl Faubion]

In my opinion this is much ado about nothing. Our right to travel for any reason we choose is well-established and it’s highly unlikely any attempt to thwart that would pass a constitutionality test. We can be governed on how we drive and what we drive but (short of a declaration of martial law), not on why we drive. There are already adequate laws on the books that can be used to deal with the described problems.

 

[Dan Robinson]

Stepping back from this issue for a while makes me realize that nobody really cares. Even if a big tragedy happens - like a tour group getting mowed down by a speeding car - it will be on the news for a week maybe, then everyone will forget about it just like everything else that happens in the world.

Nobody outside the chaser community cares about this issue. My bet is that the LE in the affected counties see the heavy traffic and few rougue maniacs, and get perturbed for a couple of days. Enough time to get a few quotes into the local paper. Then, they go on with their jobs and their lives and don't think about chasers until the next spring. I just can't see them seething about this for months, plotting to get laws enacted. Maybe I'm wrong though.

 

[Doug Lee]

If some legislator where to introduce a bill outlawing chasing in his or her state, it could easily get shot down by several arguments.

First, is this law necessary? Do chasers pose that big a threat to the general public? How much real harm have chasers done? Why criminalize a group of mostly hobbyists, who sometimes do perform a valuable public service?

Second, what about constitutional issues? The First Amendment guarantees the right to assemble peacefully, and that implies freedom of movement. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments say that the government cannot deprive people of their liberties without due process of law.

Third, what about jurisdictional issues? What about the researchers? Their job is to gather data about real-time weather events for later analysis, and some work for government agencies. What about the chasers that are spotters for their home jurisdictions? What about someone who is only a spotter, but their EOC sends them to watch a storm in the next county? What about the NWS mets that chase? What about the chasers that are LE and FF personnel?

Fourth, what about the law of unintended consequences? An antichasing law could cost tourism dollars, not just from the chasers staying away, but from the bad reputation the state could get if a regular tourist was mistakenly arrested under the antichasing law. Then there's the cost of lawsuits. I know that many chasers couldn't afford to fight the charges. I'm not a big fan of the ACLU, but they live to challenge laws like this.

Actually, I think the bad chaser / chaser convergence thing is an annoyance that we'll have to live with. Many of the those who engage in unsafe behavior are not really storm lovers, they are thrill seekers. When storm chasing is no longer a thrill, they'll move on to other things. The bad thing is that new thrill seekers are likely to replace them as long as the media glamorize their bad behavior. The other chasers that engage in unsafe behavior will probably mellow with age, especially if they have a close call or two. I'm not wishing bad things to happen to people, I'm just saying that if you make a habit of standing too close to the stove, you'll learn when you get burned a couple of times.

 

[David Wolfson]

Haukay, here's the thing as I see it. The laws, if they're made, won't be about stormchasing. They'll be about non-emergency stopping a vehicle on the road shoulder or "obstructing" private property. That would be quite broad and hassle all sorts of people, but it's already the case on interstates and near the Bush ranch, for example.

Put in language that limits the effect to "counties under a NWS tornado or severe thunderstorm watch or warning" and exempt registered local storm spotters, government employees, and first responders. Yeah, it can be done....

 

[Jesse Risley]

I don't think they really need to pass any new laws. Existing laws similar to what Dave posted could be enforced in full vigor. They call this practice "Zero Tolerance" enforcement in this neck of the woods and it's very effective in changing the driving behavior of the general public within a given area in a very short period of time.

Let's be honest - it's very, very hard to chase without breaking some "minor" traffic laws. Almost anyone who drives is going to violate at least a minor traffic law at some point in time (i.e. speeding less than 5 over, stopping over a stop line, CA stops, improper stopping or standing in the roadway, improper signaling by putting hands out the window, etc. etc.).

Why would new laws need to be passed when LEOs can simply crack down on chasers in the troubled areas and start writing citations for minor offenses. I doubt this would ever be publicly mentioned as an enforcement mechanism, but it's far more likely to happen than anti-storm chasing legislation. Chasers could start getting treated like some truckers, folks who own radar detectors, and the "fast and the furious crowd" are treated in certain areas - more likely to walk away with a hard ticket as opposed to a warning. This will suck, but it will get the point across and start hitting people in the wallets and likely steer some chasers away from said counties or jurisdictions once the word gets out.

Before this starts another anti-cop rant, consider the facts. LEOs would be operating within the confines of their authority and sworn duty to uphold the law, and chasers would have little recourse since they would be in violation of the law. We're just talking about laws that are rarely enforced nationwide (probably less than 0.01% of tickets written annually in the U.S. for these minor infractions) and generally result in a verbal warning, IF LEOs even bother to stop people for these violations on a normal basis.

 

[John Olexa]

I'll just stick with lightning. 2 am in the morning, I'm all alone

 

[David Mikulec]

Like Jesse says, all that the counties and or states need to do is enforce existing laws - and I have to agree. With many localities already short of staff, the last thing law enforcement probably needs are even more laws to enforce. Heck, a zero tolerance policy on speed limits would make many think twice before venturing out and would 'bankrupt" many more after just one or two chase excursions. And it would put some much needed funds into local treasuries.

 

[Dick McGowan]

I can't imagine anything this sheriff does would pass. Perhaps he didn't know that MANY storm chasers were in contact with the NWS in Dodge City the night of Greensburg? (Mike U is a storm chaser too!).

If it did pass...the first deadly tornado that hit a Kansas town, I would personally hold this sheriff responsible for their deaths, as well as KS legislators.

The media would eat up a story like this, and hang whoever is responsible, out to dry.

 

[Zack Borst]

A lot of people seem to want to blame everyone but the storm chasing community. I would say that if they are even considering passing a law to prevent storm chasing that means there is probably a significant problem. There should be some way of self regulating, I am not sure how but something needs to be done. The other option is to simply point out the obvious situations where storm chasers made a huge difference and had the chasers not reported the storm perhaps there would have been a loss of life or something along those lines. I think you probably could compare bad chasers to the the idiots who impersonate all the other emergency services. I would bet money the people who are causing the problems are part of those whacker groups that have lightbars, a million antennas, and no real reason for existence other than to get in the way and be a danger to themselves and those around them. I am sure most of you can picture the types I am referring to.

 

[Jason Boggs]

SIMPLY PUT: It would be absolutely impossible to make storm chasing illegal, so why is everybody so worried about it?

 

[Doug Lee]

Jesse and Zack both have valid points. As far as self-regualtion goes, that will be hard to do without legal authority. If you see any unsafe, illegal activtiy, report it and be willing to testify, sign afffadavits, etc. Best of all would be to watch your own behavior, and encourage others to do the same.
As some have said, try to work with local authorities instead of against them. Let them see your radar and tell them about weather they should be concerned about. If you're a ham, emergency management volunteer, Red Cross volunteer, etc., tell them how you can help deal with the aftermath of storm, if needed. Assure them that you will not interefere with their operations. A little PR goes a long way.

As I said earlier, this is a problem that won't go away completely. The best we can do is to keep it from growing and affecting everyone. Not being part of the problem is a start.

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

From the ST Archive......1987:

The Texas Department of Public Safety has issued a stern warning to storm chasers in Texas: "You better follow the rules of the road". In a recent meeting, storm chasers were mentioned as a problem and a "crackdown" will be in order. Some of the state troopers have Mustangs which are faster than the older cars.