AMA doesn’t cover towing if you lowside?

[Surj]

Who said it is only about towing? What's sad is them advertising a "roadside assistance" towing benefit and then doing everything they can to avoid providing it. All it specifically excludes is winching, and parts/wheel/battery delivery. What's funny/sad is someone thinking others don't have the right to complain about paying for and having an implied service being denied.

Unbunch your drawers, sport. My comment wasn't directed at you. But if you're gonna get all "who said..." then you better be smarter about accusations like "...someone thinking others don't have the right to complain..." I didn't say that, did I?

There are a bunch of posts in this thread about looking for alternate services if AMA doesn't cover crashes, it being good for nothing other than a pin, etc. The attitude in these posts represents a common, short-sighted one here on BARF and among motorcyclists in general. Yes, the AMA isn't perfect, but it's the only national organization looking out for our interests as riders. We weaken it, and our ability to advocate for our interests, by disengaging because AAA premium has better roadside assistance or whatever.

It's simple: AMA is about motorcyclist rights / privileges / etc. Roadside assistance, discounts, etc, are additional benefits to try to get more riders to sign up, because motorcyclists as a group are tragically, self-destructively uninterested in preserving what we have. You should join the AMA for the former, and if you need the latter, specifically comprehensive roadside assistance, get AAA Premium.

 

[rats]

"Unbunch your drawers, sport"?

 

[splat]

It's funny how so many of you think AMA membership is only about towing.

Sorry, not funny. I meant sad.

No one here ever said it was.

However, it's their hook and reel. It's the very first item listed on their membership webpage, so it's actually expected that they might follow through with it. I'm a member of many different national associations. From nursing to shooting, from Marines to motorcycles. If a fringe benefit is something you tout, it better be something you stand behind.

 

[tzrider]

Unbunch your drawers, sport. My comment wasn't directed at you. But if you're gonna get all "who said..." then you better be smarter about accusations like "...someone thinking others don't have the right to complain..." I didn't say that, did I?

There are a bunch of posts in this thread about looking for alternate services if AMA doesn't cover crashes, it being good for nothing other than a pin, etc. The attitude in these posts represents a common, short-sighted one here on BARF and among motorcyclists in general. Yes, the AMA isn't perfect, but it's the only national organization looking out for our interests as riders. We weaken it, and our ability to advocate for our interests, by disengaging because AAA premium has better roadside assistance or whatever.

It's simple: AMA is about motorcyclist rights / privileges / etc. Roadside assistance, discounts, etc, are additional benefits to try to get more riders to sign up, because motorcyclists as a group are tragically, self-destructively uninterested in preserving what we have. You should join the AMA for the former, and if you need the latter, specifically comprehensive roadside assistance, get AAA Premium.

If legions of riders don’t understand the value of the organization, whose fault is that?

 

[bpw]

It's funny how so many of you think AMA membership is only about towing.

Sorry, not funny. I meant sad.

I have little interest in either the AMA or AAA as political organizations, but I am a AAA member since there roadside service is so damn good that I give them money even though I disagree with much of what they do politically.

Despite AMA being a “motorcyclist organization” I don’t have much interest in supporting them, just don’t seem to do much that I feel strongly about supporting. Maybe I’m just not aware, but I am on the mailing list so they have plenty of opportunity to change my mind and have yet to do so.

 

[Maddevill]

Whoever you talked to was a moron. I have had 3 bikes towed by AMA after crashes with absolutely no issues at all. That's the purpose of towing coverage.

Mad

 

[NCGiant]

Whoever you talked to was a moron. I have had 3 bikes towed by AMA after crashes with absolutely no issues at all. That's the purpose of towing coverage.

Mad

I argued a ton, even spoke to a supervisor. They wouldn't have any of it.

 

[Krooklyn]

If legions of riders don’t understand the value of the organization, whose fault is that?

Touche.

 

[Surj]

If legions of riders don’t understand the value of the organization, whose fault is that?

Sure, the AMA takes a lot of blame for that. But as I already stated, "motorcyclists as a group are tragically, self-destructively uninterested in preserving what we have." That disinterest is on display in this very thread.

 

[NCGiant]

The fact that anyone is even on this board having the discussions disproves your claim of some overarching disinterest. Your advocacy rhetoric seems pretty tone deaf to the whole point of this specific thread and might be better framed being in the "Riders' Rights" sub-forums. Just because people are unhappy with one aspect of the overall service offering does not mean some don't value the rest. I don't believe lobbying should even be legal because it unfairly benefits the wealthy minority most of the time. But if the AMA wants to advocate for enthusiasts' rights then go ahead, but that isn't why I joined.

 

[tzrider]

Sure, the AMA takes a lot of blame for that. But as I already stated, "motorcyclists as a group are tragically, self-destructively uninterested in preserving what we have." That disinterest is on display in this very thread.

Where do you suppose that "disinterest" comes from? Is it really disinterest or is it a lack of awareness that anything is at risk? There is basically no mention of this on the AMA website home page. They emphasize the material benefits, such as the one we're discussing here. Protecting riders' rights is an afterthought on the top level page. You need to find your way to the "Action Center" before you find much of substance about threats to riders' rights.

 

[Surj]

The fact that anyone is even on this board having the discussions disproves your claim of some overarching disinterest. Your advocacy rhetoric seems pretty tone deaf to the whole point of this specific thread and might be better framed being in the "Riders' Rights" sub-forums. Just because people are unhappy with one aspect of the overall service offering does not mean some don't value the rest. I don't believe lobbying should even be legal because it unfairly benefits the wealthy minority most of the time. But if the AMA wants to advocate for enthusiasts' rights then go ahead, but that isn't why I joined.

It doesn't disprove anything. In fact, there are people in this very thread saying they just don't care, or that they aren't aware of anything to be concerned about. Sorry if you don't think the discussion belongs here, but the reality is that it came up and it's contextually relevant. You're trying to line up reasoning that just doesn't work.

Where do you suppose that "disinterest" comes from? Is it really disinterest or is it a lack of awareness that anything is at risk? There is basically no mention of this on the AMA website home page. They emphasize the material benefits, such as the one we're discussing here. Protecting riders' rights is an afterthought on the top level page. You need to find your way to the "Action Center" before you find much of substance about threats to riders' rights.

It's both. Again, there's plenty to be critical of the AMA of, and I've gotten on their shit list for doing exactly that myself. But you keep commenting on motorcyclist disinterest with what the AMA is doing wrong. If you can leave the AMA part of it aside and focus on the other side of the equation for a moment, there's tons of evidence of it even here. I've had conversations with Budman and others about their frustration at the minimal traffic and attention the Riders Rights forum gets, and even threads in general about pressing issues with a deadline on them. Barfers run their virtual mouths ad nauseam on the most inane shit, but getting attention—never mind action—is damn near impossible. That's not the AMA's fault—that's motorcyclists.

 

[T100]

AMA ? Meh. Did nothing for me except send a pin and a patch after my check cashed.

And I can buy AMA pins in sequence at almost any M/C event I attend. Times have changed, I've moved on, tow services for bikes are available for subscription in my area.

But even better is that of my group of friends two have bike trailers and cell phones and often need an excuse to bail on the wife and church service come a Sunday morning.

My opinion too. A total waste of money, like joining the NRA. Get AAA Premier membership and forget about it.

 

[budman]

The fact that anyone is even on this board having the discussions disproves your claim of some overarching disinterest. Your advocacy rhetoric seems pretty tone deaf to the whole point of this specific thread and might be better framed being in the "Riders' Rights" sub-forums. Just because people are unhappy with one aspect of the overall service offering does not mean some don't value the rest. I don't believe lobbying should even be legal because it unfairly benefits the wealthy minority most of the time. But if the AMA wants to advocate for enthusiasts' rights then go ahead, but that isn't why I joined.

I get that, but I for one have seen the good that the AMA does.
I see a full time person in DC watching out for shit that would hurt riders across the country.

I see a Western States dude that attends Senate Committee meetings, write letters and walks the hall of Sac too to just name a couple things. EDIT... he sits on the CMSP Advisory and Motorcycle Safety Committee with me and was also a major player on the Lane Splitting Bill. He is a solid dude and I am thankful to have him and an ally.

and also they support our little grass roots efforts in a substantial way when necessary.

The old AMA said Rights, Riding, Racing ... that to me is what they are.
Why I joined? (racing)
Stayed for the rights and as a motorcyclist, who is a the lower level of the totem pole with the Political establishment I have learned to really appreciate them for what they do.

Then there is the History too, which I really dig. http://www.americanmotorcyclist.com/hof/

Sure it is not perfect, but as Surj pointed out we don't have many others that will fight for us.

 

[redtail]

My opinion too. A total waste of money, like joining the NRA. Get AAA Premier membership and forget about it.

Agreed, dropped my AMA 10 years ago and have had AAA premier ever since.

 

[budman]

I am onboard.

Screw our rights and other things. It is all about getting towed.

Got it.

 

[T100]

C'mon man...no, it's about really getting something for your money/membership, rather than the illusion of getting something for your money.

 

[budman]

Yeah. I get that.

Your paying AAA to oppose lane splitting.

Nice

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a7db7efe4b033149e401ce1

Bill.

I have seen the AMA makes a difference. If you doubt that call me a liar and I will prove you wrong.

 

[budman]

Don’t get me wrong. I have AAA.

I use them for what they are. A good service for a price. They don’t stand up for our rights. In fact they oppose them to make their pocket books fatter. But they sell a good story.



I was in a senators office with the AMA pushing to make AB 51 a solid reality.
I was in the CMSP committee meeting in solidarity with the AMA to make the CHP tip favorable (still not released )

I worked with them to make the OHV bill favorable. I ...... triple AAA was no where.
I am sure your AMA experience is similar huh?

 

[budman]

Sorry for the abrasive rant. I am passionate about riders rights and racing. My respect for the AMA is obvious. .
I still have to check in on my towing deal although I have AAA too.