Chasing license?

[Sarah Berling]

So this is an idea that is running through my head. I realize that I don't have everything figured out, but here's the basic idea:

The number of chasers has been increasing (sort of like bacteria increases in a petrie dish ), with some of the, er, irresponsible ones making the responsible ones look bad. What if there were a chasing license that one had to obtain in order to chase? Like, if someone had said license, they could get through roadblocks (or had some other privileges that are a little more reasonable). But with the privileges came responsibilities (I haven't thought this part through yet...maybe mandatory spotting for whatever area you're in?) I realize that the whole idea is not entirely feasible. For instance: if licensing becomes a governmental thing, then it will either a) be issued only to NWS members and spotters or B) become a power play.

And I'm not talking about needing a meteorology degree to become licensed. It would be sort of like the driver's exam: basic common sense and courtesy.

On the plus side: it would (probably) cut down on idiot chasers.

What do you guys think?

Sarah

 

[Chris Sokol]

Simple answer: NO

 

[Dennis Gulley]

Enforcing a law like that would be almost impossible. Everyone would just stick to the back roads to avoid law enforcement. The only vehicles that they would know were chasing would be the ones with all the weather equipment mounted on them. It would be like the law against drugs. If you are that type of person then you are going to use drugs or chase regardless of any laws. I know that I will still chase if they ever come up with such a thing.

Dennis

 

[bvassmer]

Yeah, I dont think something like this would work - mainly because of the enforcement issues. We dont want one more thing for local law enforcement to worry about when there is damage they have to protect.

Maybe some more training would be nice, and there are already spotting classes held every year throughout the US. Maybe something a little more advanced (past most adv spotting classes) that teaches people more first aid and other ways to help in an emergency situation.

Come to think of it, isnt that what EM have to do?

 

[Patrick Ware]

Will someone please explain peoples need and desire to always REGULATE activities in this country?
Sorry, but bad idea. Every time the government gets involved in something it gets incredibly screwed up.
Besides, they already regulate chasing through state, county, and local traffic laws and city ordinances. What are you wanting, to only let a select few get into their cars and have the freedom to move about the country and watch, photograph, study severe weather.
Your papers.....give me your papers....you are not authorized to view this storm.....Klink.

 

[Craig Maire II]

Wow

A license still would not stop locals from going out to view storms and they (locals) are the ones that many times get confused with REAL chasers and cause trouble for law enforcement, emergency management etc. There are already WAY to many laws on the books and I definitely think trying to regulate storm chasing would be a BIG MISTAKE. In short, BAD IDEA.......

 

[Steve Miller TX]

While I understand wanting to cut down on irresponsible chaser behavior, trying to do so by regulation is a terrible idea for many reasons both on constitutional as well as practical/logical grounds and leads down a very dangerous path.

Just the thought of trying to "classify" citizens and then assign appropriate freedoms smacks entirely of a strict communist society or even a page out of a George Orwell novel.

Let's pretend for a moment that storm chase licenses are issued. Can you imagine the the amount of effort needed to track those licenses as well as review all cases of reported violation to consider revoking licenses? Who administers the testing? I could go on but you get the idea.

Instead, one of the best ways to cut down on bad chasers is to police ourselves. The way to do that is to stop turing a blind eye to those that are truly wreckless on a continual basis or pulling a stunt that is clearly dangerous or very stupid. I won't try and speak for all chasers, but all of theones I know have done some a couple of isolated things that would fall into gray areas like speeding a little above the speed limit (dangerous/wreckless speeding would be like 90mph in a 60mph zone in my opinion....not 70 in a 65).

I'm talking about the very blatent and intentional crap like blocking the middle of the road, passing when it clearly wasn't safe, pulling out onto the road without looking (this is utter stupidity in my opinion), etc. If somebody is continually acting this way, we MUST make it an issue and even publicly identify and condemn that person or persons and clearly separate ourselves. You can also catch their actions on video.

After saying all of that, I personally havn't seen this really being an issue outside of the Rooks County, KS fiasco and that appears to be an isolated incident and I suspect those that were involved have caught wind of how everybody feels about it or maybe caught some heat. I've seen a few massive chaser convergence events, two this past year, and about 99% of the time see everybody acting responsibly and being considerate. Yeah, it can get a little crowded, but if everybody is cautious in these situations, we'll be fine.

However, talk to me again in 10 years when 5000 vehicles show up around an isolated supercell.

 

[John Diel]

Not even! NO. In fact, not just no, but NO!!

Law Enforcement has planty enough on their hands without having to check on every chaser that blows by. How would you enforce such a law? Basically a License requirement would give LE yet another excuse to pull over someone with an extra antenna, don't even mention the obvious folks with instrumentation. Anyone with a HAM Radio or CB, would now be suspect in the vicinity of a storm.

Self policing of the Chaser Community is a better answer. Storm Track only shows a very small part of the total Chaser Community. What about us Media Spotter/Chaser folks? Those of us that chase for local media would now be required to spend both time and money to get a "license" just to go out and view Nature and report back what we see? Who's going to pay for all this? OK, let's add a tax on the books to pay for all the volunteer spotters out there who will also be required to have this "license" or risk getting a citation for doing what the public asks of them.

Nope, this would be a very bad idea.

 

[Earl Faubion]

From a law enforcement perspective it's silly and unenforceable, not to mention probably unconstitutional as well.

 

[Aric Cylkowski]

I just can't see anyway that storm chasing will ever be regulated unless something absolutely catastrophic happened. Then again, how could you prove that someone was storm chasing if the camera was in the backseat and your car had a lack of external instruments/magnetic stickers advertising that you were a chaser?

Honestly, I would like to see the other local yokels and yahoos shape up a tad, maybe read up on ettiquette and courtesy. A few spotter courses wouldn't hurt either, IMHO.

EDIT: I forgot to add that all the really dangerous stuff (speeding, erratic driving, etc.) is already illegal, so chasers already have to check that stuff while intercepting.

 

[Mike Johnson]

I agree with most of the discussions that licensing would not be a good idea or it simply would not work. This would be like trying to license mountain climbers.

My gut feeling is when the first chasers are killed, it will be big news and chasing will be regulated on some level, either through local, county, state or Federal governments. It would not be that difficult to make such
a law and there are many ways to write it. Small counties could enforce
such laws if they wanted to.

LETS HOPE NOT!!!

Mike

 

[Steve Miller TX]

I think instead of regulation, you'd see "selective enforcement" by various agencies. In otherwords, a zero tolerence attitude and lots of harassment. I'm sure now that if you are a chaser just casually driving through Rooks County, KS and that sheriff pulls you over, he could be pretty motivated to write you up for every little thing he can find...even take you to jail. LOL!!

I think they could also invoke and legally put you in jail if you are doing anything wrong around an ongoing tornadic event citing anything from interferring with a public peace officer to interferring with aid/assistance.

You can argue the rights and wrongs about this on here until you are blue in the face about whether or not they could legally get away with it, but you know what? You'll still go to jail...right or wrong. That's something to argue about AFTER you get out of jail and pay lots of money to get your vehicle out of impoundment. Then you can have your day in court. But if that judge is also biased against chasers for some reason, good luck there too.

Anybody that wants to argue that something like that couldn't or wouldn't ever happen ain't living in or paying much attention to the real world out there.

 

[Rob_Davis]

From a law enforcement perspective it's silly and unenforceable, not to mention probably unconstitutional as well.

Yes, but doesn't that description apply to a large percentage of the laws on the books today? :lol:

 

[Sarah Berling]

Lol, I'm beginning to see a pattern here. Just remember, it was only an idea and a half-baked one at that.

 

[Andrew Khan]

I do not want something like that, to ever happen. I think it would be near impossible to even, do..