Announcement / 2020 AMA Sanctioning & Membership Requirement

Ahh the good Doctor beat me to it! Brandie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danny Dominguez

Do you feel better? Maybe a nap? hahahahahahahaha

---

I need one of those conflict resolution courses you coppers sleep through.

And they let me play with knives....[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Branyon

Very much appreciated Harry, and not taken as sarcasm at all. And the same in this response.

IMHO, there is a communication gap here in addition to differences of opinion. I'd like to at least just get it down to the actual differences in opinion. Let me see if I can put this in terms of the discussion between the PROS (those in favor of the new policy) and the CONS (those opposed). I put it this way ONLY for clarity, not to poke fun at either side.

CONS: What does this do for THE CLUB (as opposed to for individuals)?"

PROS: [List of benefits, for example post #1]

CONS: I was free to join the AMA and get (nearly) all of those benefits before. What justifies me being *required* to be an AMA member to race in the CMRA? There should be benefits that are specific to the club, or that are not obtainable by individuals merely joining on their own to justify the club making this a requirement.

PROS: Joseph Caruso's (well-intentioned) post #84? that lists all the benefits, which are mostly *not* club-specific.

I'm afraid we're just talking past each other. Therefore, I tried to honestly list the club-specific benefits, and asked for additions if I had missed any. I believe that there is honest disagreement on the value of those benefits and whether they justify the club requirement to join the AMA. But those are just differences of opinion, however strong. Let's at least try to understand each other's position.

I can't speak for all the CONS (and yes I am one), but no matter how excellent those individual benefits are, they in no way justify the club requirement to join. That is a decision I can make for myself. I would think we would all agree on that point, but if not, please let me know because that helps me understand where you're coming from. I understand that the individual benefits may help justify the cost, but they do not help justify the requirement.

I have already stated that I personally don't think those club benefits are worth the club requirement to join, but I can understand others feeling differently. I understand that even though in my 19 years in the club, I think I have only personally known one person to race in a single AMA/MA race, there are a significant minority of the club that do pursue that path each year. And there are marketing advantages to the CMRA being a direct pathway to MA racing.

Respectfully,

---

You haven't seen answers on how it directly benefits the club because they don't exist. I appreciate the level-headness of this post.

One thing I will say is that the AMA, through its lobbying, does help the CMRA, albeit indirectly. By lobbying for the RPM act, the AMA helps ensure that road racing is exempt from the most basic of motorcycle upgrades - replacing the exhaust. This protects the members of the CMRA because what are racers going to do anyway? Replace the exhaust. What could the EPA do if it continued to happen? Go to events and fine everyone and possibly(?) shut down the event entirely for allowing it to happen.

By lobbying for the continuation of allowing motorcycles and ATVs on public lands, the AMA also helps get more people interested in motorcycling. I did not, but I would think that a solid percentage of the CMRA members grew up riding on public lands. If they had no where to ride, they might not have ever started motorcycling at all. Then they might not ever end up in the club. Seems plausible.

So while there may not be an immediate, direct benefit for the club, I can see that the AMA does protect the longevity of the club by the continuation of their lobbying efforts on a couple different fronts.
-Cody

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brandie Cox

Hi Rodrigo!

Yes, the AMA is fighting this. See my post #45 if you have time. I have a few interesting links there.

Sincerely,

Brandie Cox

---

Thanks Brandie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rodrigo DaCunha

Thanks Brandie.

---

You are very welcome.

I paid my $49 and am now an AMA member. Will be submitting license renewal tonight.

Heck, I just had to pay another $44 to join a different AMA plus $5 to the FCC to fly a toy drone (sorry er uh quadcopter) in a public park whether I raced or not LOL :D I might lose control and the park needs me to have $500k of liabilty insurance hahahaha #truestory but somehow it's always $49??? Strange huh?! Carry on

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox Schaffer

Heck, I just had to pay another $44 to join a different AMA plus $5 to the FCC to fly a toy drone (sorry er uh quadcopter) in a public park whether I raced or not LOL :D I might lose control and the park needs me to have $500k of liabilty insurance hahahaha #truestory but somehow it's always $49??? Strange huh?! Carry on

---

I believe the Academy of Model Aeronautics can provide you with that liability protection as part of their membership. Yes, its another, yet different, AMA. :rofl:

I was just upset AMA made me a first year member after being a member for 11 straight years when I was younger......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Christopher Corder

I believe the Academy of Model Aeronautics can provide you with that liability protection as part of their membership. Yes, its another, yet different, AMA. :rofl:

---

LOL :D yes, but if I WANT to race, I need the FAA (I misspoke saying FCC, was thinking RC = Communication LOL, my bad) endorsement as well, which I most assuredly do! (And Carrolton Parks requires both even if I didn't wanna race, for some strange reason?!)