nOOBie crash

Message

#51 Post by **yoda731** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 2:38 pm

dieziege wrote:So my wife can't buy and register a bike to give me for my birthday? "fudge" that!

Wouldn't you want it registered/plated in your name, which I think would mean you had to go to DMV anyways?

dieziege · #52 Post by **dieziege** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 2:59 pm

I don't care who the state thinks owns it as long as I get to ride it.

It wouldn't do any good anyway. A new motorcycle doesn't have a license plate, it has a scrap of cardboard with the dealership's name. It can have the same scrap of cardboard whether or not it is registered. How would a cop know that the bike wasn't legal except by stopping the rider? If the rider looks competent they won't get stopped. This girl you want to protect didn't look competent or legal and would have been stopped had any cop seen her, even with the existing laws...but none did.

You've just messed with me and created a law for no good reason. I call that knee-jerk.

If she got a loan to buy the bike she had insurance. If she didn't buy the bike then none of this matters. If she paid cash, well, then she was aparently a responsible young woman to have that much cash on hand and what right have we to micromanage her life?

#53 Post by **yoda731** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 3:16 pm

I understand it sounding knee-jerk and seeming like just another useless law, and I respect what you are saying.

But, I'll stand by the idea of requiring an MC endorsement to get plates. From the dealer, you're right, the bike would have a temp tag with a big 30 day expiration date in big letters that would still prompt the new owner to bump up to a real plate within 30 days, or again be ripe for being pulled over. If it was bought privately, there wouldn't even be the temp tag "loophole."

As for insurance, Florida (where the gal crashed) does not require any insurance for a motorcycle, period. And creditors these days I am sure can find a way to guarantee they get their money even if some jackarse totals the bike. I would bet most people could get motorcycle financing without any insurance.

If you don't need plates, then you're probably not planning on riding on the road, in which case you don't need an MC endorsement either, and its again a moot point.

Go Steelers.

JC Viper · #54 Post by **JC Viper** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:57 am

Well I can thank her for putting more people under the impression that all motorcyclists race and put everyone else in danger. Then the politicians will think about having speed limiters place on bikes or just ban them outright for being so dangerous.

I remember a time when someone ran a stop sign and clipped the back of my bike. Even though I was doin 25 in a 30 both the driver and cops said that they know "you people are always speeding" despite the fact that I pointed out it was drizzling and my bike was still upright after being hit instead of in peices should it be that I was going faster. Me 75 at fault, punk 25.

DivideOverflow · #55 Post by **DivideOverflow** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 1:55 am

There is no knee-jerk reaction about my opinion. I have felt this way for a long time.

You have to be licensed to buy a car. You should have to be licensed to buy a road bike. You have to be insured to buy a car, you should have to be insured for a road bike. If the bike is not going to be used on public roads, that is fine, but don't give them a license plate.

Even when bikes are bought used, they have to be titled and registered at the DMV or tax office. If they are riding around illegally on an unregistered bike, fine, those people will always exist, and that does suck. But when we can keep unlicensed riders from registering bikes, we are cutting out that many more people that are a hazard to themselves and everyone around them.

CNF2002 · #56 Post by **CNF2002** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 2:28 am

That'll help for bikes bought at dealerships new or used...what about private sale bikes? How can you regulate that?

DivideOverflow · #57 Post by **DivideOverflow** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 2:43 am

DivideOverflow wrote: Even when bikes are bought used, they have to be titled and registered at the DMV or tax office. If they are riding around illegally on an unregistered bike, fine, those people will always exist, and that does suck. But when we can keep unlicensed riders from registering bikes, we are cutting out that many more people that are a hazard to themselves and everyone around them.

Still have to be titled, even from a private party. If they don't title the bike, then there isnt anything you can do but wait for them to crash or get their bike impounded. Like I said, this isn't a cure all.. but all of the kids that I know around school that ride without a license or insurance, bought their bikes from a dealer!

grymlocke · #58 Post by **grymlocke** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 5:22 am

does this mean those 5-7 yo kids on the minidirtbikes that race in those leagues need a license too? an endorsement? or would you just kill off that sport because they're underage?...

...did anyone stop to think that THAT girl was breaking the law anyway by not having a helmet if her state requires it?..more laws heaped on would not of made a difference...imo

...if a law like that does pass, would you make a private seller into code enforcement agent? make joe-average-private-bike-seller the one responsible to make sure bubba-plaidshirt-buyer of that old enduro in the garage is endorsed, insured and legal?....

DMV (dept. of motorvehicles for those outside CA) requires alot of that stuff to register it as operational, non-op though is a different creature altogether...

**'you' is used in a broad 'the man' sense...your state

#59 Post by **yoda731** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 5:45 am

grymlocke wrote:does this mean those 5-7 yo kids on the minidirtbikes that race in those leagues need a license too? an endorsement? or would you just kill off that sport because they're underage?...

...did anyone stop to think that THAT girl was breaking the law anyway by not having a helmet if her state requires it?..more laws heaped on would not of made a difference...imo

...if a law like that does pass, would you make a private seller into code enforcement agent? make joe-average-private-bike-seller the one responsible to make sure bubba-plaidshirt-buyer of that old enduro in the garage is endorsed, insured and legal?....

DMV (dept. of motorvehicles for those outside CA) requires alot of that stuff to register it as operational, non-op though is a different creature altogether...

**'you' is used in a broad 'the man' sense...your state

Kids on dirt bikes would be fine, per the notes above, since they wouldn't (or at least SHOULDN'T) be riding on public streets. No street usage, no need for a plate, no new for an endorsement.

A private seller would not have any responsibility or concern. The action of consequence is not buying or owning or riding the bike in parking lots, countryside, or backroads. The action of consequence is taking the bike on the public streets, at which moment they are legally required to have a plate for the bike, and at which moment it makes sense for them to need to have demonstrated some degree of knowledge/control of a motorcycle by having obtained the MC endorsement on their license. (Yes, I agree that having the endorsement can't override stupidity, but it demonstrates that the holder was at least exposed to the info, even if it doesn't stick...)

Technically, I know that you are required to have a plate on backroads and other areas as well, but in my experience, as long as you are not endangering lives and property other than your own, most cops/troopers aren't going to give you grief out in the countryside for not having the plate (unless they have to hit their quotas...

)

dieziege · #60 Post by **dieziege** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 6:01 am

DivideOverflow wrote:There is no knee-jerk reaction about my opinion. I have felt this way for a long time.

You have to be licensed to buy a car.....

Umm... it would help your "no knee-jerk" case if you were even close to correct about other things you say. I'll say it again... YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE LICENSED TO BUY A CAR. Not in Florida, not in California, not in any state I have researched.

Florida has a stipulation that you cannot renew the registration if one of the owners has a Suspended license... that is intended to force them to pay unpaid parking tickets and the like. If that person didn't have a license at all, no problem. They don't require that the owner be licensed. They don't even require that the owner be the one who registers the car... a 99 year old grandma with no license can buy a car for your daughter, register it in her name, and give it to her when she is 6 years old. Of course, the insurance companies will exclude her from driving the car until she has a learner's permit, but it will be hers legally, registered an insured in her name. Grandma (and your daughter) just needs to have someone else drive it if it goes on public roads.

Think about it, how else would Joe Rockstar who lost his license doing 185 own a car for someone else to drive?

liability insurance is required in most states to register a motor vehicle. Florida apparently exempts motorcycles, which is reasonable since motorcycles usually don't do too much harm. No state requires comprehensive, medical for the rider/driver, or any of the other types. It wasn't a problem in this case; the young woman didn't hurt anybody or cause any property damage.

Your solutions won't help. Your information is incorrect. Your ideas are flawed. ... all of that would be forgivable...but you also don't research your "facts". Google it.