« Review: Brokeback Mountain midnight show | Main | Retardcapades, or, meddling with technology »
January 11, 2006
Retardcapades, or, the DMV tries to interpret its own law
I’m bemused and grateful to Schwarzenegger for exposing an interesting loophole in California licensing laws, after his recent “Getting In An Accident While Driving A Motorcycle He Was Not In Fact Licensed To Operate And Which Was Transporting His 12 Year Old Son And Then Not Getting Cited For It At All” adventure.
I’m sure that late-night television has probably taken care of saying pretty much everything that needs to be said about this. However, since I do not have television, I feel the need to point out that a particular element of this sets a precedent for unlicensed vehicle operation which spells fun, fun FUN!
From The Chronicle’s article today explaining why Schwarzenegger wasn’t cited, when he had a standard car license but no motorcycle license:
A standard license for driving a car cannot be used to operate a motorcycle, but according to DMV spokesman Mike Miller the relevant sections of state law makes no mention of a motorcycle with a sidecar. Miller said that means Schwarzenegger was operating within the law when he crashed.
You see what’s great about this? Schwarzenegger had no motorcycle license. He was riding a motorcycle. Ah, but he was riding a motorcycle plus a sidecar, which is evidently not still fundamentally a motorcycle. No violation.
The Thing You Are Prohibited From Operating
+ Some Other Element
No Problem.
I’ve been just giddy trying to think of combinations of things this might work with.
I do have a driver’s license, but let’s say I didn’t. If I were driving a car which was pulling a boxcar carring a dirigible, would that be okay?
For that matter, I’ve been assuming that the Mitigating Element (ME) would need to be another vehicular component, or at least something related by type to the original unlicensed object. But what if I, who do not have a pilot’s license, flew a plane whose ME was not, for example, a helicopter towed at the end of a rope, but a pyramid of circus elephants glued to the wing? I highly doubt that there is a statute on the books that expressly prohibits unlicensed persons from flying commercial airliners carrying circus elephants in formation.
Or, or, I don’t have a license to own, carry, or use a gun, nor do I want one. But what if I get a gun and affix a bicycle horn to the trigger? This is fun.
Posted by katie at January 11, 2006 09:46 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://mt.cementhorizon.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/177
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Retardcapades, or, the DMV tries to interpret its own law:
» Case Tractor from Case Tractor
Please direct Comments or used for identification purposes only. Pictures from TTS may not be copied or que... [Read More]
Tracked on February 21, 2006 09:01 PM
» Tractor Seat from Tractor Seat
. seat. tractor. Tractor Seats and abrasion resistant Designed to 21" Part. 420131. Our Price. $69.55 Our Price. $69.55 Our Price. $33.64 Qty. High Ba... [Read More]
Tracked on February 26, 2006 10:59 PM
» Dmv from Dmv
Driver Education, Renew & Obtain Drivers License, and other DMV information.The Department of Motor Vehicles titles motor vehicles, includ... [Read More]
Tracked on May 17, 2006 06:40 PM
» accessory bathroom pittsburgh steelers from accessory bathroom pittsburgh steelers
[Read More]
Tracked on December 4, 2006 09:03 PM
» spokesman review classified ads from spokesman review classified ads
[Read More]
Tracked on December 5, 2006 03:36 PM
» c car gas powered r truck from c car gas powered r truck
[Read More]
Tracked on December 5, 2006 08:02 PM
» free cell card game download from free cell card game download
[Read More]
Tracked on December 5, 2006 09:41 PM
» cingular itunes motorola slvr wireless from cingular itunes motorola slvr wireless
[Read More]
Tracked on December 5, 2006 10:30 PM
» tmobile from tmobile
[Read More]
Tracked on December 6, 2006 01:07 AM
» pharmacy schools from pharmacy schools
[Read More]
Tracked on December 17, 2006 06:03 PM
» ultracet weight from ultracet weight
[Read More]
Tracked on December 17, 2006 06:47 PM
» ambien online pharmacy from ambien online pharmacy
[Read More]
Tracked on December 26, 2006 02:04 PM
» pharmacy phoenix from pharmacy phoenix
[Read More]
Tracked on December 26, 2006 05:03 PM
» ambien 10mg from ambien 10mg
[Read More]
Tracked on January 17, 2007 09:00 PM
» fun machine slot from fun machine slot
[Read More]
Tracked on January 20, 2007 03:12 PM
» miami tax attorney from miami tax attorney
[Read More]
Tracked on January 21, 2007 09:59 PM
» dallas insurance quote from dallas insurance quote
[Read More]
Tracked on January 21, 2007 10:01 PM
» estate florida lutz real from estate florida lutz real
[Read More]
Tracked on January 22, 2007 01:21 PM
» 1 32 car slot track from 1 32 car slot track
[Read More]
Tracked on January 27, 2007 01:20 PM
» free poker clay chips from free poker clay chips
[Read More]
Tracked on January 27, 2007 04:10 PM
» machine sale slot from machine sale slot
[Read More]
Tracked on January 27, 2007 06:22 PM
» fitness from fitness
fitness [Read More]
Tracked on January 29, 2007 10:23 PM
» fitness from fitness
fitness [Read More]
Tracked on January 29, 2007 11:00 PM
» elettrostimolatori from elettrostimolatori
elettrostimolatori [Read More]
Tracked on January 31, 2007 03:54 AM
» effexor used for from effexor used for
[Read More]
Tracked on January 31, 2007 04:27 PM
» lil oxycontin wyte from lil oxycontin wyte
[Read More]
Tracked on January 31, 2007 09:30 PM
» abbigliamento auto from abbigliamento auto
abbigliamento auto [Read More]
Tracked on February 1, 2007 11:37 PM
» abbigliamento auto from abbigliamento auto
abbigliamento auto [Read More]
Tracked on February 2, 2007 12:45 AM
» montagna from montagna
montagna [Read More]
Tracked on February 2, 2007 02:12 AM
» montagna from montagna
montagna [Read More]
Tracked on February 2, 2007 03:04 AM
» nautica from nautica
nautica [Read More]
Tracked on February 2, 2007 04:35 AM
» altri sport from altri sport
altri sport [Read More]
Tracked on February 2, 2007 06:44 AM
» altri sport from altri sport
altri sport [Read More]
Tracked on February 2, 2007 07:31 AM
» volley from volley
volley [Read More]
Tracked on February 2, 2007 08:45 AM
» volley from volley
volley [Read More]
Tracked on February 2, 2007 09:34 AM
» bridal links wear from bridal links wear
[Read More]
Tracked on February 13, 2007 11:37 AM
» billabong tote bag from billabong tote bag
[Read More]
Tracked on February 13, 2007 12:20 PM
» kid shoes with wheels from kid shoes with wheels
[Read More]
Tracked on February 15, 2007 04:37 PM
» jacket knit maroon nike from jacket knit maroon nike
[Read More]
Tracked on February 16, 2007 06:19 AM
» paul frank umbrella from paul frank umbrella
[Read More]
Tracked on February 16, 2007 07:30 AM
» wholesale merchandise from wholesale merchandise
[Read More]
Tracked on February 16, 2007 08:42 AM
» farmhouse sale spain from farmhouse sale spain
[Read More]
Tracked on February 17, 2007 06:02 PM
» marble and granite from marble and granite
[Read More]
Tracked on February 17, 2007 06:17 PM
» glass drawer pull from glass drawer pull
[Read More]
Tracked on February 18, 2007 12:13 AM
» live deal from live deal
[Read More]
Tracked on February 25, 2007 07:23 PM
» deal spain travel from deal spain travel
[Read More]
Tracked on February 25, 2007 11:03 PM
» daily lottery ny state from daily lottery ny state
[Read More]
Tracked on February 26, 2007 01:24 PM
» hair loss tablet zocor from hair loss tablet zocor
[Read More]
Tracked on February 26, 2007 03:00 PM
» poker online bet best from poker online bet best
[Read More]
Tracked on February 26, 2007 06:20 PM
» machine shop new york from machine shop new york
[Read More]
Tracked on March 1, 2007 07:33 PM
» seven jeans size 29 from seven jeans size 29
[Read More]
Tracked on March 2, 2007 12:09 AM
» bad credit cash loan from bad credit cash loan
[Read More]
Tracked on March 2, 2007 12:27 PM
» agency collection debt from agency collection debt
[Read More]
Tracked on March 2, 2007 01:50 PM
» New York Bike Accident Lawyer from New York Bike Accident Lawyer
[Read More]
Tracked on April 4, 2007 11:24 AM
» Strapon Man from Strapon Man
See these mean Dominant sluts make a man their BITCH!www. 2007 01, fisting bizarre lady fisting [Read More]
Tracked on November 8, 2007 11:32 AM
» zobokocicecn from zobokocicecn
nice post [Read More]
Tracked on November 14, 2007 12:03 AM
» Mobility pokes holes in application from diagram network wireless
Mobility pokes holes in application securityZDNet Asia, Asia -Mar 29, 2007"How many people have Starbucks and home users on their network diagram?" [Read More]
Tracked on November 29, 2007 09:44 AM
» Seventh heaven for Sheets? (Milwaukee from Terrific cover letter that knock em dead
It has been, what, going on seven years now since Ben Sheets was flown in from the Sydney Olympics and [Read More]
Tracked on December 1, 2007 06:29 AM
» Man recovering from crash (Lancaster from dallas escort texas
LANCASTER - Jeremiah I. Walker, 22, of Lancaster, was driving a 2002 Ford Escort east on U.S. 33 when he [Read More]
Tracked on December 2, 2007 02:35 PM
Comments
What if I want to operate a business, but don't have a business license? If I operate the business out of my house, can I argue that the house is attached to the business and therefore makes it a different entity entirely? Or do I need to also tie some streamers to the top of the house just to cover my (or its) ass?
Posted by: Dianna at January 12, 2006 01:32 PM
My reading of the loophole is that the ME has to be physically stuck to the primary unlicensed object. So if your house is the location which is serving as your business, I think you're screwed, but if you've got streamers covering your ass, then I think you're OK.
Also: what if your house/business has a lean-to built on the side? Then I think you might be OK, too.
Posted by: katie at January 12, 2006 02:54 PM
would jack in the box antenna balls count? or a rearview mirror air freshener?
Posted by: michele at January 12, 2006 02:58 PM
Or a bumper sticker reading I'm Not Licensed To Operate This?
Posted by: Dianna at January 12, 2006 05:18 PM
The Black Eyed Peas would have changed the title of this post to "It startcapades".
Posted by: sean at January 12, 2006 06:56 PM
I can't help but wonder if the affixed ME in question here made the Governator's illegal operation of a motorcyle legal because the sidecar made it a 3-wheeled vehicle as opposed to the less-stable and more-dangerous-to-drive 2-wheeled motorcycle. If the reason behind the separate licensing requirement for motorcycles is that they're fundamentally different and more difficult to drive than vehicles with more wheels, then perhaps having more wheels negates the need for a separate license. However, I'd contend that even if the above were the case, if the sidecar can be easily removed (which I assume it can be), the sidecar shouldn't be an ME and the governor should still be considered to have been driving a motorcycle without the appropriate license... and riding a minor around at the same time. I wonder if California cops know that he doesn't really have any privileges and he's not really an indestructible cyborg.
Posted by: Kristina at January 12, 2006 08:10 PM
From the California DMV Motorcycle handbook:
"A motorcycle: Has a seat or saddle for the rider; is designed to travel on not more than three wheels; and weighs less than 1,500 pounds. A farm tractor is not a motorcycle. Exception : A motorcycle with a two-wheeled sidecar weighing less than 1,500 pounds is also considered a motorcycle." (Emphasis in original)
Considering that the DMV explictly states that a motorcycle with a sidecar is a motorcycle, it seems like it would take a lot of work to read that as saying "A motorcycle with a sidecar is not a motorcycle."
Schwarzenneger would have been fine, though, if he had been riding in a tractor. I like the emphasis they put on that part; it has an air of frustration. "A tractor is not a motorcycle, damnit! Stop asking!"
Posted by: Zach S. at January 12, 2006 08:26 PM
I tried to do some research on sidecars, but it seems that most true sidecars only have one wheel, while "sidecars" towed behind motorcycles have two wheels? Are these the two-wheel sidecars mentioned by the CA DMV? I think so because the DMV also says of license requirements: "Class C — You may operate a motorcycle with a sidecar attached, a three-wheel motor-cycle, or a motorized scooter." Class C is the standard license that everyone has, so I guess he really was legal after all. Unlike California, Washington now requires special licensing for motorcycles with one-wheeled sidecars.
Posted by: Kristina at January 12, 2006 09:27 PM
I think you're right. Looking at the Vehicle Code, it appears that the legislature said pretty specifically "Here are the requirements for a car drivers license, and 2-wheeled motorcycles need a special license." Subsequently, they define a motorcycle to include three-wheel motorcycles and two-wheel motorcycles with sidecars.
So this leaves a gap in the legislation: A two-wheeled motorcycle needs a special license, a two-wheeled motorcylce with a sidecar is considered a motorcycles, but the law doesn't say explicitly that a two-wheeled motorcycle with a sidecar needs a special license. The DMV apparently decided that the failure to mention sidecars in the legislation implies that the legislature did not intend to require a special license for two-wheeled cycles with sidecars.
In the DMVs defense, it IS their job to interpret authorizing laws like these, particularly when the law leaves gaps. Further, it seems as though this was a pre-existing policy, not some ad hoc explanation thrown together to justify not citing Schwarzenegger.
Posted by: Zach S. at January 12, 2006 09:49 PM
Wow, I actually hadn't gotten nearly as far as looking up the real DMV rules. OK, maybe the more wheels = more stability thing makes sense.
I think the definitions of what is and is not a motorcycle (thanks to Zach) are really interesting. So if a motorcycle is something designed not to be driven on more than 3 wheels, then a 2-wheeled motorcycle + a 2-wheeled sidecar = 4 wheels = essentially, a car. I kind of get that, logically, although I still think in common sense terms it's silly to pretend it's not a motorcycle which might need its own training/licensing, especially since this is the vehicle we're talking about him running into a car with.
I'm momentarily distracted by the DMV's impulse to let us know in italics that a farm tractor is not a motorcycle. I never would have thought such a clarification was necessary, but imagine the legions of 16-year-old farm boys all excited that Dad said they could get a motorcycle, only to run outside on Xmas morning to find... a tractor, and a lot of corn to be planted.
Posted by: katie at January 12, 2006 11:51 PM
What if I surgically attach my BF* to my person, like with glue or stitches. With the ME thus attached, could we then get legally married?
*Yeah, I know. I'm just preparing for all possible events (who thought A.S. would end up governor anyway?).
Posted by: Delightful House at January 14, 2006 12:01 AM
Ah, I see what you're going for here, Delightful House. But I think if we follow the complex legalese through, we see that you have to attach your theoretical BF not to you, but to something else that will make him fair game for you to, er, operate with your license. In other words: the problem with the motorcycle was that the governor was licensed not to drive a motorcycle but a car, and only "got away with it" due to the presence of an ME that made the motorcycle (a) not a motorcycle, and (b) therefore, apparently, a car.
Analogously, the problem with the theoretical BF (TBF) is that you can't/won't/don't have a license to marry a man, so we have to find an ME that will make him (a) not a man, and (b) therefore, apparently, a woman. I'm sure I wouldn't like to weigh in on whether having you stitched to him would make your TBF more or less of a man, especially in the interest of household tranquility, so I suggest a more neutral ME, like weaving a hornet's nest into his hair, or, more provocatively, gluing a football to his hand. Because I think according to the Motorcycle Logic, we could argue that a man + a football = not a man, which, remember = therefore a woman.
Posted by: katie at January 15, 2006 09:33 PM
Unlike the rationale for requiring a separate motorcycle license (e.g., it's inherently more difficult and dangerous to operate than a 3 or 4-wheeled vehicle) there's no good reason that people shouldn't be able to marry whomever they wish... other than the fact that the concept is foreign to a lot of people and thus scares the crap out of them. I'm of the opinion that such grafting shouldn't be necessary for one to exercise such a fundamental human right.
Posted by: Kristina at January 16, 2006 09:59 AM
Absolutely, Kristina. And oh, trust me, I concur. But since that's not happening in California any time too soon, it's nice to find a loophole that might allow me to marry a woman with a strap-on.
Posted by: katie at January 17, 2006 02:00 PM
Hmmm. It kinda is a loophole that allows the strap-on at all, eh?
Posted by: Delightful HouseMATE at January 19, 2006 10:26 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)