Rich said:Wayne Pein said:DMVs and the general public don't REALLY want bicycle drivers to be
licenced and registered. If they were, then they couldn't justify some
of the discriminatory laws they have against bicyclists.
I doubt the general public has given this idea any thought at all. The
general public views bikes as a toy for kids.
That is one view of the general public. The other is that bicyclists are
freeloaders since we don't have licence and registration requirements.
Quoted message said:
As for the DMV, maybe they view bike riders as such a small (and
non-hazardous) segment of the transportation system that they just don't
care.
Yes, of course they don't care at this point. Except for isolated
college towns and some other select high bicycling locales (where there
tend to be more bicycling regulations), there is little bicycling to
worry about. Bicyclists are largely below the radar.
Quoted message said:
Unless, of course, you have some memos or somehing from DMV officialy
backing your claim that the are against it becuase they then "couldn't
justify the discrimitory laws", I'll go with explanations I conjured up
out of the blue (just as your's probably are)
Rich
Your conjured explanations do not invalidate my claims.
No, I have no official memos. That isn't necessary. One need only
examine the state and local vehicle codes to see the plethora of
discriminatory laws levied against bicycle users that already exist.
This system "works" because bicyclists essentially have no lobbying
power to change it, and most bicyclists actually are glad to not have
licensing and registration requirements. They are glad to fly under the
radar as lepers of the road. However, if we DID, then state DOTs and
legislatures would have to rethink their whole paradigm of low speed
vehicles, and they don't want to have to deal with that. Why should
bicycles be allowed on roads when faster low power vehicles are not?
Wayne
