On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:05:11 -0500, John Forrest Tomlinson
<
[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 15:36:06 -0800, "GaryG"
><garyg@shasta_SPAMBEGONE_software.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>1) Bicycles are used on public streets, just like cars.
>>
>>2) I have to register my car each year, and make sure I have proof of
>>registration when I drive.
>>
>>Is the registration requirement for motorized vehicles "anti-car"?
>>
>>Given the similar requirements for motorized vehicles, how is a bicycle
>>registration requirement "anti-bicycling"?
>
>What is the purpose of the registration for cars?
1. Revenue collection, to fund street construction and repair.
2. To identify the owner of a vehicle for a variety of reasons.
3. To provide a quick method of differentiating between similar
vehicles through the presence of a unique identifier on the exterior.
>Does that purpose
>exist for bikes?
Purpose #1 is hard to address; certainly, the state has an interest in
collecting revenue wherever it can, but as bikes presently use
facilities that were built for cars in most cases, and do so in a
mnner that has only a small impact on the cost of construction and
maintenance of those facilities, it is debatable whether the useage
fee component can be reasonably applied.
Purposes #2 and #3 are not readily applicable to bicycles because
there is no requirement for bicycles to have a unique serial
number...and many do not. As such, a registration tag or decal's
presence is not a verifiable means of determining that the bicycle on
which it is present is also the bicycle for which it was purchased.
>What would be the impact of not having registration
>for cars?
Oy. First, gasoline taxes would have to go up to cover the lost
revenue. Okay, so that's not a bad thing. Second, every time the
cops had a situation in which a fugitive was being sought, they would
end up stopping *lots* of people unecessarily just because they were
driving the same kind of vehicle. Third, it would become next to
impossible to enforce parking laws without the use of the boot.
Fourth, it would become much more difficult to find and apprehend
hit-and-run drivers, since there would probably be no description
available for the driver at all. I could go on at considerable
length.
>Would the streets be safer or less safe?
Much less safe.
> What about
>requiring registration for bikes? Would the streets be less safe?
In view of a number of things, including the fact that the number of
bike-caused safety infractions is so low that no tracking is even
attempted in most jurisdictions, there is no basis for holding that
registering bikes would contribute to increased safety.
>Don't be simplistic in looking at public policy.
Always suspect that there is a monetarily-related interest driving
public policy.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
