Forbidden from Riding Motorcycle

[drdank]

Can a commander prohibit his troop(s) from riding a motorcycle off-base provided they have fulfilled all required safety items?

[jk]

a commander, as in military like in the US armed forces?

Ya, I think they pretty much own you and if you do ride it and get injured, you get that old, damaging US government property charge. Heck, a private employer can prohibit such activities.

[drdank]

a commander, as in military like in the US armed forces?

Ya, I think they pretty much own you and if you do ride it and get injured, you get that old, damaging US government property charge. Heck, a private employer can prohibit such activities.

Yes, military. I have heard all sides (yes he can, no he cannot, it depends, etc...) of this issue. I do not want to contact the base legal because I'm not trying to bust balls, just want some information. Looking for an answer with references and cases to prove it if possible. In my limited research, I have only found the 'United States v. McDaniels' case. I have already read the governing Air Force regulations for off-base motorcycle riding requirements, but it makes no mention of command authority to implement a policy such as the one mentioned above.

The entire scenario is as follows:
Commander will approve motorcycle riders with 5yrs experience to continue riding (read: have their motorcycle endorsement for years, not demonstration of miles accumulated, high performance riding schools, etc...) and those under that amount of time will not be permitted to operate a motorcycle.

[antrc170]

Without a valid military reason the commander cannot limit your free rights while not under military control (on base, during duty hours, etc). If you've read the US v McDaniels case you'll note that the court upheld that the service member could not drive because of a very specific condition which put the threat of harm to others at an elevated risk. Simply operating a motorcycle after completing the proper certifications does not put the public at an increased risk. As far back as 1958, the Judge Advocate General has ruled that the Commander cannot enforce private vehicle ownership and operation without a direct military cause. Basically, the order is an improper order that is not enforceable.

However, don't just go riding a bike without first bringing the problem to the attention of the command. Use your chain of command to petition to speak to the commanding officer who issued the order. Present to him/her the facts of your case that show the order is over reaching of the authority. Hopefully, it will be enough to change the order. If not, you can contact your post JAG. I have included a link to a discussion article that you may find useful. You'll want to pay attention to pg 118 and the references.
http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_L...s/276077~1.pdf

[jk]

. As far back as 1958, the Judge Advocate General has ruled that the Commander cannot enforce private vehicle ownership and operation without a direct military cause. Basically, the order is an improper order that is not enforceable.
]

Ok, simple enough; by regulation he cannot prevent it.

by regulation, a soldier is entitled to only 30 days leave off base. By regulation, a soldier is not allowed to become drunk. by regulation, a soldier can be ordered to do a lot of crap.

While you might win the battle, I suggest you will lose the war.

and unless things have changed a lot from when I was young and after seeing a friend face charges for getting a tattoo, I would be very careful about showing up with any injury from riding the motorcycle. Commanders didn't like it when you did something to damage his property.