According to this Dakota County Criminal Complaint, a man found riding a motorcycle with two young children without helmets was stopped and charged with gross misdemeanor child endangerment. While people should be permitted to make their own poor choices regarding helmets, riding with two unprotected children is absolutely insane.
On August 3, 2012 at approximately 8:22 p.m., a Mendota Heights officer was on routine patrol on Highway 13, Mendota Heights, Dakota County, Minnesota, when he observed a motorcycle occupied by an adult male and two very small children traveling northbound on Highway 13 South. He noticed a female child was seated in front of the driver and a male child was seated behind the driver. The female child was discovered to be 3 years old. The male child was age 5. The driver was identified as Michael Bruce Johnson.
The officer noticed that none of the occupants were wearing head gear and only the driver was wearing eye protection. After making these observations, the officer turned his vehicle around to catch up with the motorcycle. He indicated he had to travel at a high rate of speed to catch up with the motorcycle. The officer initiated a traffic stop on the motorcycle. He noticed the child on the rear of the motorcycle was unable to reach his feet to the foot rests, and there was not a footrest for the female child.
What would possibly posses a 44 year old man to load a three and five year old on his motorcycle and take a ride? And seriously? Only a gross misdemeanor?! Isn’t there anything Backstrom could come up with which would put this guy away for more than a year? What do you think?
Dakota Complaints Map
Dakota Inmate Dashboard
Loading ...
September 19th, 2012 at 8:57 am
Was he breaking the law by riding like that? Helmets aren’t required, but having more people on a bike than its designed for is an infraction.
Was it stupid? yes. Was it lawbreaking? I’m not sure. Do you want the police deciding on a whim what is and what isn’t safe, and issuing citations based on that rather than law?
September 19th, 2012 at 9:12 am
Fuck you Mark. Putting two little kids on a bike with no helmet is criminal no matter how much the law defines it.
I’d like to see your opinion if that guy had spilled the brains of those 3 and 5 year old children while he walked away because his reaction time was better.
September 19th, 2012 at 9:13 am
Yes, several. To begin with the obvious, Bill linked to the criminal complaint which says right at the top which law was being broken. “COUNT 1: ENDANGERMENT OF A CHILD Minnesota Statutes §609.378, Subd. 1(b)(1); 609.101. On or about August 3, 2012, in the County of Dakota, Minnesota, MICHAEL BRUCE JOHNSON, did being the child’s parent, legal guardian, or caretaker, endanger the child’s person or health by intentionally or recklessly causing or permitting a child to be placed in a situation likely to substantially harm the child’s physical, mental, or emotional health or cause the child’s death.”
Besides that:
If the bike has a passenger seat, it must also have passenger footrests.
169.974 subd. 3 (a)
Passengers under the age of 18 must wear a DOT-approved helmet.
169.974 subd. 4 (a)
Passengers must be able to reach both footrests while seated on the
passenger seat. 169.974 subd. 5 (b)
September 19th, 2012 at 9:27 am
My gut tells me that there is something else going on with this parent than just simple poor decision making, and thus I am less outraged and more concerns for the well being of these children.
Did this guy break the law? Certainly and I don’t have any issue with child endangerment charge, as this behavior could be a definition of it. I don’t know that I feel like the parent needs more time in jail. I think he needs some help.
I can recall riding on the back of my dad’s motorcycle before I was large enough for the helmet to fit. But we were going maybe 10 mph and only in front of our house. The only instruction given, hold on tight. And I loved it. This guy driving down Hwy 13 is what has got me wondering about him.
The other day my Nephew-in-law was helping me pickup a trailer as he picked up his kids from my brother-in-laws. The kids and their stuff went into the bed of the pick-up truck and I followed them to their house, about 8 blocks north. On this drive I was just waiting for some Farmington cop to pull him over. I can’t imagine that such behavior is allowed. (It is illegal for an adult to ride in the back let alone a kid). I can recall riding in the back of my dad’s pickup on Hwy 10 up north on the way to the hardware store back in the late 70′s.
Also the other day I looked out my window and noticed my neighbor had their 9 year old girl out there pushing the mower. She was mowing the grass with a gas powered walk behind mower.
Last Wednesday I was the pallbearer at my Grandfathers funeral. He was working the farm as soon as he could walk. He ran horses and a plow when 10. My dad ran a tractor when he 10, and drove the farm pickup all over the place, had his drivers license at 12.
I mention the last because our view of what is o.k. for kids to do has certainly changed over time. And even knowing that, I think what this guy did in the story was way wrong, and to me indicates a larger mental issue, especially considering the children’s ages.
September 19th, 2012 at 9:32 am
There is a big difference between 3/5 and 10/12 IMO.
September 19th, 2012 at 9:34 am
Also the kids were required to have eye protection under MN law, in addition to the violations MSPD mentioned.
This is normal practice throughout much of the world. Except there would probably be a wife and infant on the motorcycle too. Dangerous as hell, but a necessity for many in third world countries.
September 19th, 2012 at 9:42 am
Its good to know I get such aggressive reactions from some commenters, and good to know about the motorcycle laws that were violated. I figured not having a seat for the one was the only one, but looks like helmet and not being able to reach the footrests is another.
Having said that, should a father be issued a ticket if taking a young son/daughter out with a helmet, but not able to reach the footrests? Its a good way to introduce them, but technically ticketable..
September 19th, 2012 at 10:00 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
September 19th, 2012 at 10:17 am
It was stupid, he should be ticketed, end of story.
Jail time would be ridiculous.
Yeah, this happens all the time in third world countries, and their rate of traffic deaths is much higher. The fact that it happens elsewhere doesn’t make it right.
That said, I don’t think treating him like a child abuser makes sense either. He made a stupid decision, it was just more publicly obvious than a lot of other stupid decisions we all make with our kids.
My dad let me ride in the back of his pickup at 70 MPH in when I was a kid (in the ’90s, well after it was widely accepted that this was ridiculous and illegal). It was wrong and I won’t do it with my kid, but I don’t think it was cause for him to be shipped off to jail.
September 19th, 2012 at 10:36 am
Its good to see ya keeping it classy, lefty ;)
I just don’t like a cop deciding something isn’t safe/dangerous/etc based on a personal opinion. They were breaking afew cycle laws, so yes.. ticket him. I don’t like leaving alot of discrection up to the police officer in most situations.
We see differently on that.
September 19th, 2012 at 10:39 am
I think this was clearly a stupid idea. That said, I dont think it qualifies as gross child endangerment. The cop should have written him tickets for both helmets, eye protection, foot rests, speeding if applicable, and anything else he could think up, but I dont think there is any way the child endangerment will stick.
Stealing from above, but I assume it is accurate: “recklessly causing or permitting a child to be placed in a situation likely to substantially harm the child’s physical, mental, or emotional health or cause the child’s death.”
I dont think you could prove that this was LIKELY to harm the child. Statistically the chance they would get in an accident is still very low.
Again, not agreeing with the behavior at all, but I dont think this should be treated like child abuse.
September 19th, 2012 at 10:43 am
Some of my fondest childhood memories involved my grandfather loading my uncles and siblings into the back of his pickup (we sat in lawn chairs) and driving the back roads outside San Diego jumping over the tops of the hills. We called ‘em Wheee Hills. It’s a wonder any of us lived through the ’60s.
September 19th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
People often think that just because they are fully in control of the vehicle they are driving that they somehow will be safe from injury and or death. The key problem is that you cannot not be fully in control of your passengers, nor other drivers on the road. A 5 year old on the back of a motorcycle in general is dangerous. A motor cycle rider having to keep hold of a 2 year old in front of him is dangerous.
Looking at the statute, I can see an officer feeling that allowing young children without helmets on a motorcycle on a state hwy to be reckless. But since the helmet debate goes on, and if the kids had a helmet, it wouldn’t be reckless, my guess is a good lawyer will get him off. The key to the child endangerment is the reckless clause.
Note that at this time the guy was not asked to be jailed. The dad is out and simply is charged with this thing. He’ll have to go to court, and if he’s lucky he’ll get out with a gross misdemeanor.
September 19th, 2012 at 12:51 pm
Like smokers, I think people who ride motorcycles should be on separate and significantly more expensive insurance policies than the rest of us who choose to live our lives in a much less reckless manner.
September 19th, 2012 at 1:41 pm
I think Lefty must speak of the dangers of riding without a helmet from personal experience. A severe head injury is the only thing that can adequately explain him.
September 19th, 2012 at 1:52 pm
sui generis,
How is my thought that off base? It is proven that smokers and motorcycle drivers incur higher medical bills than normal people do.
lefty
September 19th, 2012 at 2:10 pm
I was referring more to the fact that you seem to be entering this whole discussion in full out asshole mode…
September 19th, 2012 at 2:14 pm
I dont currently have a motorcycle, although I do have a license for one and have owned more than one in the past. I do feel that they are dangerous, and obviously any accident will likely be more physically damaging than a similar accident in a car.
That said, I dont see how anyone could say that driving a motorcycle with two kids on it is “likely to substantially harm the child’s physical, mental, or emotional health or cause the child’s death.” Again, I think it was dangerous, and not a wise move on the parents part, but I cant make the jump that they were “likely” to be hurt or killed as a result.
It was a dumb move, and he should get every traffic ticket the cop can think up, but dont charge him with something that could be viewed as child abuse, unless there is more to the story we are not aware of.
September 19th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
I’m guessing this had more to do w/the officer having to travel at a high rate of speed to catch the motorcycle suggesting he may have been speeding which would add credibility to the charge.
Was that part added in after the fact for exactly this purpose, probably.
September 19th, 2012 at 2:21 pm
lefty, do you understand what the the word “civility” means? OR do just like to hear your echo while conversing in the toilet.
September 19th, 2012 at 2:41 pm
Will,
Not sure what you mean there. I am simply saying that I am tired of paying for other people who do stupid things and this guy who puts his kids on his bike is one of them.
I was offended by mark saying that somehow an officer protecting these children from the potential of danger now and in the future is somehow akin to a “police state”. It’s too bad you have a problem with that, but I think dead kids are a bad thing. Apparently you don’t.
lefty
September 19th, 2012 at 6:54 pm
Let’s face it, whether or not these kids had helmets or could reach the foot pegs, if they were involved in an accident it wouldn’t be pretty.
September 20th, 2012 at 10:46 pm
From what the StarTrib says, he was going north on 13 near Annapolis. That stretch of 13 was just redone this summer and has turned into a real racetrack. Speed limit is 40mph and now rarely obeyed.
If you keep going straight, you go into Cherokee Park; veer off to the right and follow 13, which becomes Annapolis and drops to 30mph. Hitting that intersection at high speed, regardless of your vessel of choice, is not highly recommended…
Kiddos without helmets is just WRONG.