Isn't this the same piece of shit that shoved his service weapon down someone's throat during sex, used Flock to stalk his ex, casually used racial slurs in texts, and threw the Nazi salute in photos? Don't worry, I already know it is, but it's probably just your average Tuesday for most county deputies in Florida.
post
Besides speeding, records indicate Fultz did not have an endorsement on his driver license that is required to operate a motorcycle.
What's the phrase? "Never commit two crimes at the same time". I guess we need to add "...unless you're a cop, and then its all cool, bro".
It's not a crime if you're above the law /s
I got a motorcycle permit 18 years ago, but never did the (1) driving test where you have a friend bring a car and a trooper rides with them and follows you around or (2) a motorcycle safety course. At some point they removed option 1.
It showed as an AM license (CDL also) with a restriction of licensed MC operator over 21 in sight. For the one year I actually rode a motorcycle, I hoped I could talk my way out of it. "Ah shoot where did Uncle Joe go? He didn't see you stop me?"
My last license renewal, the worker and I were friendly, and she was impressed how fast I did the hazmat test without missing any. She asked about the permit and I told her I've just never gotten around to it, but for some reason have paid $6 extra per renewal to keep it on there.
Without saying anything, she must have removed the restriction. So I now have a motorcycle license.
I basically did the same and rode on a permit the entire time I owner a motorcycle. The difference was in my state the only difference between the permit and license (other than the permit times out sooner) is that you can't drive after sundown. Worked fine for me, got a little sketchy in the fall, but I basically had the same plan as you "shucks officer, I lost track of time and am right on my way home to Papa"
Damn it sounds like it's easy over there. I get AM category (scooters up to 50cc) free on the account of having B category, but I have to go through a course costing over 600 euros and then do the full theoretical + riding exams like I did for B cat (those cost a bit of money too, not too much). This is also cheaper than getting it from scratch which would be 900 euros for the course (more theory lessons) and be limited to 250cc at first.
I've been contemplating it for a few years now, but something important is that if I want to get an exam time the same year, I'd have to do the course in March or April (when it might still be snowy lol) because exam times are always booked up... And particularly last few years since I'm not working full-time or even half-time due to burnout, I'm broke as hell after winter because of the heating costs and dropping nearly a grand on getting a license and then another grand or 2 on a fixer-upper first bike doesn't seem like a great idea anymore :/ Will have to wait until mid-life crisis.
There's a reason USians are known to buy 1000ccs as starter bikes and yeehaw into a coffin. They generally only need either a 15 hour class or 6 month permit on a 125-250cc to be qualified for any motorcycle at all.
I will support "beginner" bikes forever. 90% of the "little bike" woes of my 250 ended up being skill issues. You know what 250s won't do on whiskey throttles when poor grip on the throttle and poor core body reaction tilts your torso back and pulls a little throttle jolt into a full throttle expedition? They won't power wheelie. I always see them say just use self control, but that's hard to do when your body is physically not experienced for a 3 second 0-100kmh rocket that only contacts your fingers and taint.
MotoGP's Moto3 class is 250 cc currently, and was 125 cc in the past. That should tell people all they need to know.
(Apparently the classes are made much closer in displacement and power gradually from 2019 to 2028. And the top class will actually lower the displacement from 1L to 850 cc next year.)
The "beginner" bike I want is actually nowhere close to 125cc, but it's not a deadly liter bike either. I'm looking at a 620cc Ducati Monster. Why? Because it looks nice, sounds nice and despite the Monster name, it doesn't seem to be the "one mistake and you're dead" kind of bike, has a more forgiving throttle response from what I've heard. And I already buy ridiculously depreciated German luxury cars for funsies and fix them when shit breaks, I think I could handle anything an Italian bike throws at me too, especially since it wouldn't even be my primary vehicle.
But then when I start thinking about the finances, it no longer makes sense. Besides the license and the bike itself, I'd also obviously need gear (ATGATT after all) and I'm hoping to lose some 50 kilos in the next few years so that also means buying expensive pants and a jacket again. Might put it off for another year or 2 at this rate so things align better.
I do love the Monster on paper (and by ear, and by eye) but I've generally signed off on Ducati for now and the foreseeable future. I could see it being my 3rd or 4th concurrent bike. Even my Honda needs maintenance that I seem to defer a little too much. While I have experience with depreciated Jaguars, I don't have the time to do that luxury maintenance on them all. In good weather, I just want to ride, in bad weather, I handle more pressing chores. But I did chase the sound with a VFR (V4) sport tourer. While Honda has two V2s, they're both sport/race oriented (VTR1000, RVT1000). And yet, I beleive I already have a street bike, so my dream is a 1098 sport, not a monster. Of course, you could always just get a 300 or smaller Japanese bike and have two bikes!
Anyway, since I haven't followed the Monster with any serious thought, I'd recommend just seeing if it's a wheelie machine. The Suzuki Sv650 (definitelynotaMonster) is twitchy in that regard. The SV won't loop in 3rd gear, probably not even 2nd without a clutch-up, but it's known to lift the wheel in spirited cross-traffic turns. Not so deadly, but can still ruin your day.
The weight fluctuation with atgatt struggle is real. The timing worked out well for me where I was down a fair amount after a rough couple years when I picked up riding. Only 10 kilos down though and could stand to lose another 10. While I wouldn't want to wait 2 years, I do acknowledge 50 kilos is a bigger swing. Sometimes the gear is tight in early spring, sometimes it's baggy by fall. Surely I think I'll make it down a full size for next season, but winter takes a toll. With regret at the time, I've already re-bought all my gear at about the same sizes because the first set wore out (all textiles, regular wear and tear, couple mild slides).
I was an adult when I started. I wish I started as a good, but I've accepted starting as a teen would have come with consequences. I've been active on bicycles all my life and credit that for good understanding of bi-cycle physics. Antics on a pedal bike cost less. Learning countersteering on pedals to command lean is invaluable to me. Everybody countersteers to lean, but most people think they're just leaning their torso. They're inducing a countersteer every time without realizing it because bi-cycle geometry is already worked out for the.
Stay shiny side up, wherever the road takes you.
Somehow read this that he avoided arrest because of the “Super Speeder” law. Like if you speed fast enough, it’s so impressive, they let you out of the ticket. Didn’t realize this was NOTtheonion. Made for an interesting interpretation on my first read.
Is that really why they ask where you’re going? Like coincidentally they think they are also going to solve some massive crime? Like “I’m in a rush to get to my drug deal! Oops.”
I've had luck with "I really really need to go to the bathroom!"
Before I was old enough to drive, I once was riding with a friend who'd recently gotten food poisoning and who really needed a restroom. He was speeding to get there and, when he got pulled over, told the officer so.
I don't remember the exact words, but after issuing the ticket, the policeman basically said "just pull over and shit on the side of the road if you need to."
Hey it was worth a shot. I'd ignore that advice because the next cop will brand you a sex offender for it.
As far as I'm aware that depends on the state; few states have the "peeing in public = sex offender" laws. Mine certainly doesn't.
Not aware of a "pooping in public = sex offender" law, but they might be covered under the same statute in the states that take issue with it.
If it were me, I'd respond: "Okay, I'll follow you to the nearest public bathroom, but you're still getting the citation."
Someone pulled that on me once, but I saw them pass a few public bathrooms as they cut around a line of cars in traffic to get to the turn lane a bit faster by going down the wrong way of the roadway, so they were obviously lying.
You might have more luck with your lie among lazier/less discerning/dumber cops, it's true.
- Ex-cop
Oh, I wasn't lying.
Fair enough, it looked like you were implying it was a trick you're passing on to others.
Obviously it doesn't matter either way and I can't prove or disprove what you're claiming now.
Yeah I'm suggesting they say that if needed, but lie convincingly.
Right, and I'm suggesting it's one of the older tricks in the book that only dumb/lazy cops would fall for.
The thing is, smarter people think better than to speed while carrying a body or a kilo of cocaine in the trunk, but smarter people tend not to commit crime as often, on average.
So as much as it makes no sense to you, it does when you factor in common criminals. Supervisors monitoring your KPIs don't care if the arrest was made on a dumb person or a smart person.
- Ex-cop
You're basically talking about the difference between traffic cops and regular patrol.
More pedantically, it's "Traffic enforcement unit cops" or "Cops who went out of their way to take a speed measurement certification course and get issued the equipment and thus are expected to use them or lose them" vs. "Cops who didn't."
As you can imagine, the latter doesn't care nearly as much about traffic enforcement.
- Ex-cop
In my area (HCSO, PCPD) you could tell by their boots: jackboots = traffic enforcement.
Of course there's also FHP, who are basically an entire agency of only traffic enforcement.
I'd recommend getting a dash cam and your speedometer calibrated, just in case you got a wheel resize or gear configuration change that made your speedometer inaccurate. We were required to calibrate our patrol cars every year if we used it to measure speed, but there is zero such requirement for random motorists. I think the LIDAR and RADAR guns were yearly too, but I never applied for the class required to use one so I'm not sure.
There are tons of nightmare scenarios you can avoid by having a dashcam including the police lying about something you did while driving, which could lead to all sorts of awful things for you.
For $50, it's a no-brainer to me.
A radar detector is very different from a dash cam, including in law depending on your area.
I think you're just doing mental gymnastics to make a reason for not getting one. Just be honest with yourself and say "I don't feel like it."
It reminds me of the people who point out that seat-belts trap people in cars so they won't wear a seat-belt. They don't think rationally about the very remote odds of that, they just latch on to it as an excuse to do what they were already going to do.
I'm not saying I like going to court. I'm saying losing in court is worse than winning in court.
You seem to think that's more likely without a dash cam. I don't.
Sounds like you've had unusual experiences with the courts. I can't force you to base your opinion off of more typical experiences, in large part because you haven't lived other people's lives (or looked into their court cases).
Back to my metaphor, if a seat-belt trapped me in my car, I wouldn't decide that must be normal and I should never wear a seat-belt again.
I'm not saying you don't have cause to be a bit silly about this, I'm just trying to get you to realize you're being a bit silly about this.
I don't know what to tell you other than that we live in a brutal, unfair universe and are forced to do our best.
The only thing worse than having courts (which by nature of being comprised of human beings, often get things wrong) is not having courts.
I guess you may not know that court can still levy judgements against you ex-parte (generally, civil), or just put a warrant out for you to force you to come (generally, criminal).
"I don't want to go to court" is like saying "I don't want to pay taxes." The government doesn't really care if you want to do it or not.
Yes, not putting your matches next to your lighter fluid is a great idea (we should focus on "making a real difference" to prevent needing court), but you still need fire hoses for when you get unlucky and you have to fix a problem outside of your control (court).
But that's all just fluff if you think that cops seeing a dash cam will make them want to take you to court. I really think that's an incredibly rare cop that feels that way, and you seem to really think that's very common; I suspect if I polled a hundred cops I'd get roughly 0 that feel that way, but you'd probably insist those were an unusual 100 cops, or the ones in your area are different. I can't reason you out of a position you didn't reason yourself into.
However - should you ever consider dragging anyone else into court and getting a civil monetary judgement against them, you may also want to consider that an awful lot of the type of people who go around doing things that would make such a judgement relatively easy to obtain, also live their lives in such a way that collecting any actual money from such judgements is exceptionally difficult. Again, making court a waste of time and energy.
"Only poor people commit crime or injure others."
Nope.
You’re missing a subtlety here… cops don’t take you to court, they send you (or your lawyer) to court. Rub a cop wrong and they give you a bogus citation which all they have to do is get a tsk tsk about not showing up to court for, but you either A) pay the citation, or B) pay a lawyer to show up to court to fight the citation for you, or C) spend your time and effort going to court yourself to fight it. Option B being more expensive than option A and option C being most expensive of all if you value your time in the least.
You start off by puffing out your chest in an attempt at pedantry and then just use synonyms in this context. Besides, literally none of that contradicts anything I've said and just largely ignores it.
Well, I’ve been around since the 60s, and interacted with a few cops over the years, and most of them have been pretty great people on the whole, the vast majority I’d say, on duty and off. Still, I have interacted with several who did get petty and vindictive and have been tweaked by signs of “anti-cop-paraphernalia” in one’s possession, and I suppose when you offset those against all the “good cops” I have interacted with, I get that feeling that “anti-cop-paraphernalia” really does piss them off. All the online videos of cops in the 2000-2020 era trying to beat up people filming them with cell phones doesn’t help either.
Neat anecdotes, but nobody should be convinced by anecdotes.
For the dozenth time, you are generalizing from a very small data set and acting like that makes you wiser; it doesn't.
See if this makes sense to you:
"I crossed the street and stubbed my toe, therefore crossing the street results in stubbed toes, so I don't leave my house any more."
The Florida Highway Patrol caught Brevard County Deputy of the Year Michael Fultz riding his motorcycle 111 mph while off duty in February but did not arrest him under Florida’s ‘Super Speeder’ law, News 6 has learned.
Instead, the FHP trooper issued Fultz a civil traffic citation for exceeding the posted speed limit by 9 mph, records show.
“I’m not going to take you to jail, Fultz,” Trooper Joshua Provencher told the deputy, according to a video recording of the traffic stop obtained by News 6. “Obviously you and I are buddies. I’m not trying to show favoritism, either.”
Well, to be fair, as long as he said he's not showing favoritism, that means he's not showing favoritism. I see nothing wrong here and I'm glad these stand up guys don't get in trouble.
Oh well if there's no favoritism. So you or I could do that and he obviously would do the same thing. Or someone who was a different color or religion. No favoritism.
FHP also did not address how it might respond to public concerns that the deputy may have received special treatment.
mhm
I really didn't think the Lemmy consensus would be "speeding is okay actually especially on a motorcycle"
Failing to move back right to stick to a number arbitrarily chosen for esoteric fuel economy regulations predictably incites speeders behind you to make the passing situation 5x worse. Check out India sometime if you want to see the absolute worst version of this. Lorries do 50kmh at best in the inside line. Scooters do 35kmh in the shoulder. The "outer" lane does anywhere from 50kmh to 120kmh between lorries and scooters.
Breaking law is kinda badass but also still fuck police and florida.
I just don't understand how people are conflating speed differentials at highway speed and speed differentials when driving past a parked car.
A faster vehicle takes longer to brake and imparts more energy in a collision. Even in scenarios where the relative speeds are always the same, an accident will be more deadly, and accidents will always happen because people make mistakes.
He looks like a husky version of Dangle from Reno 911.
“But there’s a fairly decent amount of traffic. He was not weaving. He wasn’t doing anything like that. He was in a straight line in the left lane.”
I don't care at all about a motorcycle riding at those speeds under those conditions.
ACAB because of cop favoritism, and fuck this scumbag in particular, though.
I'd even say motorcycle is optional. If you're going in a straight line, not changing lanes at all, in the left lane, on a highway or other controlled entry/exit road...you can be going mach fuck for all I care. You are not the problem.
Until he's moving too fast for normal reactions and some poor victim smears him because he wasn't in their mirror 1 sec prior. 111 mph is ~150fps. That's 10 car lengths. And the victim is only absolved if they can prove speeding - good luck if that's a smeared cop.
It is exactly the problem.
111 mph is ~150fps
It's a freeway. Everyone is going the same direction. Speed differential is what matters, and it was only around 45mph. You drive 45mph past parked cars all the time and don't blink an eye. All it takes is one parked driver to pull out and it's all over for you, apparently.
It is exactly the problem.
You people making shit up is the problem. You're literally sitting there imagining scenarios where you can feel threatened by a man sitting on a 400 - 500 pound machine, who is traveling at 45mph relative to you. You're ignoring the actual situation being discussed and inventing scenarios in your head so that you can feel threatened and express your righteous indignation while clutching your pearls. It's really weird.
Comparing parked cars and cars moving at ~65mph on the highway is pants-on-head stupid
Parked cars enter the travel lane faster than cars on the highway change lanes. Travel speed is irrelevant, rate of change is. Rotating a car 30deg off parallel to leave a space is a faster action. In both situations, I'd be riding the far side of the lane to give as much berth as I can.
I'm not your prior commenter. And no, I dont fly past traffic like that because there's always a high likelihood of someone jumping out into the faster lane. "Open lane pattern" is something to look for. But to not realize how often and how quickly parked cars leave parking spaces is pants-on-head blind
You’re literally sitting there imagining scenarios where you can feel threatened by a man sitting on a 400 - 500 pound machine, who is traveling at 45mph relative to you
no, they're imagining scenarios where some selfish prick who can't stand to wait in traffic like a normal human with the rest of the normal humans SPEEDS THROUGH A CLOT OF MULTI THOUSAND POUND VEHICLES like a dumbfuck. You're inventing reasons why people shouldn't care when you murder people with your 500lbs of crotch rocket, starting with yourself but often involving innocent people in your carnage.
grow the fuck up.
this is the fuckhead you're defending: https://nypost.com/2026/08/30/us-news/florida-deputy-of-the-year-resigns-after-claims-he-tracked-ex-with-flock-cameras-used-n-word-did-nazi-salute/
So the "victim" you describe, the guy blindly merging without adequately paying attention to their surroundings and causing a crash.
That guy is the problem.
I see this often. Going that much faster means an average car still in the other lane simply will not be in the motorcyclists lane at all before the bike passes. The bike will pass while the car just has its tires on the line. The motorcyclist is looking ahead for vehicles already in the same lane. Higher risk? Obviously. But I'm tired of people acting like they're a victim because a bike blasted by and they think "I could have killed that biker" (or "that biker could have killed themselves on my car") while barely on their second signal flash. They traveled 10 car lengths, you got your tires on the lane, they pass, you complete your lane change, they're now 30 car lengths ahead.
That situation does not crash the bike into the changing car. It either makes the bike swerve out into a median or the bike passes without incident. The actual cause of speeding bike crashes in traffic is weaving when dipshits riders switch lanes and inadvertently box themselves into a dead end.
Want to avoid lane-change crashes of any type? Change lanes smoothly and predictable. Use your signal, take 4 seconds to change on the highway, and do not swerve to grab the faster lane every 15 seconds. Be predictable, go home without a collision report. You don't have to give motorcycles special treatment but collision avoidance works the same.
or you could just obey the fucking laws like everyone else.
why you gotta go put your death on someone else's life because you're an impatient prick?
I obey the law. But somehow, this speed differential works just fine here in Germany where people share responsibility and cooperate. Your speed limits are arbitrarirly low for some esoteric fuel economy logic.
I obey the law.
doubt!
arbitrarily low for some esoteric fuel economy logic.
pfft sure bud.
it's not about reaction time, or the physics F=MA, nah you're above all those concerns.
what a fuckin toolbag
I get it, it's the only experience you've known, so it must be right.
[USA] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Maximum_Speed_Law
Meanwhile, your whole interstate system was inspired by the German autobahn. Look at an interstate circling a city. Most of them are 65mph, often with minimum 12ft lane width, awkward turns skirting district borders, interchanges every mile or more, and persistent dense traffic. Then look at your middle states with incredibly straight interstates, significantly wider 20ft lanes, miles between exits, no commuter traffic. It's still 65mph except for some brave areas that increased it a whopping 5-15mph in the early 2000s. Absolutely no one in that engineering company concluded 65 was the maximum safe number. It wasn't 80, either. The average car has become far, far more capable and stable than those present in 1974. Try one of those on a current 65mph highway some time.
it’s not about reaction time, or the physics F=MA,
oh so deutschland doesn't obey the laws of physics huh?
you get extra rhine-land reaction time?
dolt. stop acting like you're some kind of uber-menschen-driver - you aren't. you aren't special just because you ride a rice rocket.
get a fucking grip you silly little dumbkoff
But have you considered how much easier it would be to speed if 90% of the other drivers were in a train instead? There could be so many fewer potholes if oversized vehicles were restricted. The roads could be for local commercial vehicles and enthusiasts - all speed all the time.
After reading the whole article, IMO Fultz should be charged for what he actually did, and the sergeant who told the trooper, "It's up to you," should be disciplined for not doing his job. Making unpopular decisions is one of the reasons supervisory people get paid more. That guy dodged his responsibility, laying the risks he should have taken himself onto the trooper - risk of punishment for ignoring the infraction, risk of ostracism by other officers for making the arrest. When a subordinate specifically consults you for advice, it's your job to give it. This guy plain and simple let his trooper down. If he isn't stepping up right now to take 100% of the heat, his superiors should be penalizing him for still not doing his job.


top 95 comments