🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <dodd-1511940707090001@reliant.arlut.utexas.edu>,
dodd@cayman.asg.arlut.utexas.edu (Stirling S Dodd) wrote:

>The responsibilities I believe you are refering to (based on old
articles)  include vehicle registration,  licensing,  and operator
licensing?

Close, they are vehicle registration (license plates), vehicle safety
inspection, and operator licensing.

>A few simple questions then:  Do you think that if bikes were to adhere to
>these standards they would then truly be equals?  

I believe that if bikers were held to these same responsibilites then they
would be paying the same price as drivers for the same privileges.  As it
is, they get the same privileges at a lower cost.

>Do you believe that those fees alone are what finance our roads,  

No, but they do pay a share.

>and if so, the fact that is upsetting is that bikes get a free ride?  

Not a free ride, since bikers pay the other taxes that go into road
construction, but a less expensive ride.  Yes, this bothers me.

>Finally and most importantly,  do you think that if we made bikes pay like
>cars, that enough revenue could be brought in to cover the cost of
>COLLECTING it, and would you really like to increase the lines at the DPS 
>offices ;-) ?

It should only be a small incremental cost to collect the registration
fees, since everything is already in place to do this with the current
registration facilities that handle cars, trucks, and motorcycles.  For
operator licensing, I don't see the need to conduct on-the-road operator
testing because riding a bike is just too easy.  Only the written part of
the test, which judges knowledge of traffic laws, would be necessary.  And
since drivers must also pass this same written test, a operator's permit
for a car would also allow the holder to operate a bike.  Since almost all
bikers are also drivers, the net increase in the load at DPS would be
negligible.  As for vehicle safety inspections, well, that doesn't seem
necessary because there isn't nearly as much to go wrong with a bike as
there is with a car (I am willing to be proved wrong here), unless someone
else (not me), wants to propose that bikes be required to have running
lights and other things that would need inspecting.  I mentioned
inspections only for completeness, not because I think something should
actually be done about it.

>I don't think so.
>Even if bikes paid the same fees as cars,  it would not alleviate the 
>problem of bikes vs cars on the road.  

I didn't say it would.  I said it would hold bikers to the same
responsibilities as drivers.  Getting drivers to recognize the rights of
bikers is a separate problem, but the knowledge that bikers are held to
the same standards as drivers would go some way in helping.

>Car drivers would still be obnoxious!  

*Some* car drivers would still be obnoxious.  Please don't make
stereotypes.  Keep in mind that *some* drivers are polite, just as *some*
bikers are obnoxious.

                                ++Don Nash

Internet: D.Nash@utexas.edu     The University of Texas System
THEnet:   THENIC::DON           Office of Telcommunication Services