Pepper and the gang from the Vancouver Island AIM Chapter have managed to salvage all of the chapters show 'n' shines - the PIG 'n' Fin is still a no go but if this extremely determined lady and her group have anything to say about it, their chapter and the cause of helping injured riders will be looked after for a long time to come. Please visit their web site by using the link above - the full story is available for you there!

F.I.R.R.E. is also about the cause of Injured Riders, it was formed in the wake of troubling times between AIM Can and AIM. It also however has the rights of riders and the education of riders, drivers and the general public as part of it's mandate. F.I.R.R.E.

Volunteers are needed in almost every organization - please people consider getting involved - we need you  - every volunteer based group needs you!

Dave Munro, President of the Vancouver Chapter of AIM and the man who headed up the lawsuit between the Vancouver Chapter and the National Governing body had this to say about the lawsuit, the information that I had been given on the suit from various sources and formation of F.I.R.R.E.:

Since you have put a lot of information of the lawsuit between AIM & Aimcan on the Internet and some of it borders on slander, perhaps as a journalist you would like to print the truth of what really happened, instead of a one-sided misinformation.

AIM Vancouver has no intentions of taking over other chapters, finances, fund raisers or anything else they do. As for your accusations that we do not want to the organization to grow, that is a flat out lie, as we would love to see it grow.

You accuse Vancouver chapter of not caring about injured riders, is especially insulting,  with the number of riders we have helped in Alberta and you know yourself that we have forwarded emails to you,  people requesting help and one of our director was kind enough to put together an informational package for you during this lawsuit.

If you care to find out, look at our website and see how many visitations our chapter alone has done this year. And through this whole court proceedings, we have not asked any chapter for funds nor have we taken funds  that were to help injured riders and put it towards the lawsuit.

There are people that believe in AIM strong enough that they are funding the lawsuit.

You say that you do not understand the reason this came about, yet on your blog, your question is your answer dated April 29th.

To make the accusations of the prez of any chapter, shows you do not understand how a chapter should work. All chapter members vote and whether the prez agrees or not, he has to follow what the membership voted on.

Distancing yourselves from Vancouver chapter is a perfect example of null and voiding the networking of helping injured riders.

We do not allow personal attitudes, nor agendas to interfere with helping injured motorcyclist and their families. We hope you can do the same to the benefit of those in need.

If you or anyone else that has questions and would like to know the truth, and not be biased by one person’s opinion, you can call me and I will answer your questions.

Dave Munro
AIM Vancouver

P.S. In my “humble” opinion, what I see of this organization F.I.R.R.E. is someone or people are acting like a flock of vultures’, trying to swoop in on the kill. AIM is doing fine, we are not dying and any rider who wishes to help injured riders can be part of AIM.
If the reason for F.I.R.R.E.,  is AIM or AIMcan will not help injured riders, then F.I.R.R.E.  is basing itself on bullshit.
(Sounds pretty personal to me Dave and not accurate in any way shape or form IMHO)

Mr Munro obviously only read some or parts of the various articles that have been printed on the subject - No one said anything about AIM being closed- AIM Can however is shutdown as a result of the fact that it could not afford to hire a lawyer to defend itself - because no of the Chapters would help to fund the defence of this law suit. I resigned when a board member took it upon himself to file an appeal after we had agreed to wind down as AIM Can and re brand ourselves - my personal feeling on the subject was - its just a name - the cause is what is important...

As far as AIM taking over other chapters etc - there is a document that was reportedly signed by the VIAIM Chapter - I was told by a VIAIM member that it literally signed over the autonomy of the Vancouver Island chapter to Vancouver - I guess I was told wrong??? - and that information by the way was not put out on the INTERNET until now, but rather, was expressed in a private conversation between myself and an Okanagan Chapter member.

No one said Vancouver didn't care about injured riders, but rather, that no one here in Alberta wanted to spend money we raised for injured riders on a lawsuit and in my humble opinion - the whole lawsuit did nothing but harm to the reputation of the organization here as volunteers did not want to be a part of something that was involved in a lawsuit. We here in Grande Prairie had Grande Prairie Regional Tourism and Grande Prairie Regional College members on the board for AIM Can Peace Country Chapter and they backed out because of the lawsuit - IMHO, the harm that was caused was far greater reaching that many might have thought.

Nothing in my blog post of April 29th answers that question at all - all it does is ask - WHY.

I myself am distancing myself from the Vancouver Chapter and its president as I have no love for what went on and feel the whole lawsuit thing was wrong - I as an individual do not speak for F.I.R.R.E. or any other organization - only for myself and I am entitled to my opinions.

And just to be clear: F.I.R.R.E. started because as the soon to be confirmed AIM Can chapters that had no governing body decided to strike out on their own - a fresh start, a new name and organization with none of the political baggage that had hamstrung AIM Can National. F.I.R.R.E. started because there is a core group of riders in Alberta dedicated to helping injured riders and wanting to work for riders rights and education of riders and the general population (we have no BCCOM here)  So I humbly submit that if you read everything that has been put out there on the topic you will see that the only thing I care about is seeing injured riders get support.

Even though I as a person have no intention of ever speaking to the parties involved in the lawsuit again on a personal level - it has not prevented the Busted Knuckle from carrying stories about AIM Vancouver's fund raising show 'n' shines or the web site Belt Drive Betty dot Com from putting news feed articles on Dave Munro's comments in the news - Mr Munro does not seem to understand me or my mind but that's OK - let me explain it for you all - I have no desire on a personal level to ever speak to these men again - that does not negate the work that AIM does - the value to the riding community is apparent and therefore the Busted Knuckle - which is a community paper will carry articles as they are sent in because the paper is not about me or what I feel. Belt Drive Betty dot Com will carry the news feeds regardless of my personal feeling - I provide a service to the community - oh and Dave - I am NOT a journalist - you imply by using that term that I went to school and have formal training - I do not, I am a community reporter not a journalist. Self taught and learning daily and I sir am entitled to my opinion just like you are entitled to yours - they are like "A holes" - opinions are - everyone has one.

Now on to the other important stuff of the day....

I heard this past weekend from some BCCOM members that Jim McNenney is getting ready for a fight to prevent the province of BC from altering the helmet law in that province.
I have a call  in to his office and hope to hear that directly from him.

I have a question for all of you and I WANT you wading in this...

Rights or protection and who should get to decide.
Is it up to our government to legislate the degree of risk you should be allowed to take?

Helmet or no helmet or beanie - where do you fit in this equation and why?

Please remember that everyone is ENTITLED to their opinion - I promise to be as respectful as possible on this ever so tender topic, if you will...but I do want debate, I want to really understand every side of this situation  - inside and out.

In the news today:
A family in Kitwanga BC is suffering a double tragedy as the step grandfather of a dead motorcyclists disappears the day of the funeral.

In Ontario a Quebec motorcyclist died in an accident on Satruday.

In Ottawa an accident between a bicycle rider and a motorcyclist saw the bicyclist die.

And in Ontario the Lansdowne Children’s Centre Foundation fundraiser saw 600 riders turn out.

There's a ton of American Sports News from the AMA circuit in the latest sports news section on the home page at - scroll to the centre of the page...
If you are fortunate enough to be riding today, please - ride like everyone around you is blind and out to get you and please remember to ride Proud not Loud - save them pipes for when it counts!

Belt Drive Betty
A MAX Award winning web site!
National VP of Marketing
Foundation for Injured Riders, Rights & Education
Contact Me LinkedinFacebookBloggerTwitter

Post a Comment

  1. in my eyes the real question is the lack of definition of the "industry standard" that the new law states

    does that mean DOT? - logic suggests that it does
    however...does it not seem possible that enforcers may use the ambiguity of "industry standard" to run roughshod over any and all riders dependent solely upon the discretion of the enforcer?

    one would like to think that the people that are enforcing this law would be above bending the law to suit their needs or wants...but we've seen examples time and again of this not being the norm

    so who enforces the enforcer?

    something to think about

  2. If I buy a helmet, (I don't currently own a motorcycle) I want it built to protect my head. If it isn't built to some kind of standard, it might not do that. So I think the government should pick the standard that best protects motorcycle riders - whether it be DOT, CSA or Snell - and require that manufacturers place the appropriate sticker on helmets that meet the standard. If the law requires that riders wear helmets that meet a standard, then the law should state which standard clearly and unambiguously. Leave it to riders to obey the law or pay the fines as they see fit.

  3. Thanks for your opinion Chris. There are some riders out there who want the right to have a choice - how do you feel about an adult having a choice as to what works for them?
    Just a question....

  4. I agree with both of problem is with the ambiguity of the "industry standard" statement.

    Say for instance that the government decides that in order to ride a motorcycle you must wear a full face helmet...and that will be the industry standard. If that became the case I'd have to stop riding after 42 years because I'm claustrophobic and can't wear a full face.

    I'm not saying it will - I'm being hypothetical..

    I think I should have the right to choose what I wear on my punkin (for the record I wear a DOT half helmet) but if I wanted to wear a beanie...I should have that choice...also for the record - I wear a helmet in no helmet states cos I believe in wearing protection of some sort, but at the end of the day it should be my choice.

  5. Keep up the good work! I invite you to see my post, I hope you will find interesting too.

  6. Hi Radu - thanks for the feed back - considering you are in marketing I am flattered