It is interesting to observe Dan's behavior on several websites where he abuses anyone with an opposing opinion. There seems to be an obvious pattern of obsessive anger that rages within him like a dustdevil on a summer day.
I welcome a civil discussion to the points presented to counter his claims above however, "Big Ed" or "Dan" must explain why he has been an active participant in overturning the aggreement reached by the stakeholder's group in ORD 3973. This ordinance was agreed to by the major OHV advocacy groups in Southern California including CORVA and the AMA.
Why does he support eliminating a requirement that OHV riders on private property must have written permission from the landowner if that owner is not present? Doesn't elimination of this provision allow trespassing OHV riders a loophole when no trespassing signs are stolen from remote properties?