nyc.general

On Sep 8, 11:53 pm, General Kireiko wrote:
> In Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> : What in the Constitution suggests that bicycle and automobile
> : operation are qualitatively different? Why shouldn't bike riders be
> : tested for competence and licensed?
>
> There is no money to be made in it (lisencing cyclists). Motor vehicle
> operators outweigh cyclists by orders of magnitude.
>
> You can be ticketed for operating a bicycle unsafely or breaking any traffic
> law. You have to share the road (outside of limited access highways, etc.)
> I know of no cop who will write one, though.

Have you ever been in New York?

One day I watched one stopping cyclist after cyclist, I think on
Seventh at 23rd.

> Since bicycles, horses, motor cars, etc., are not explicity mentioned in
> the Constitution, by virture of the reserve clause, the right to regulate
> such things fall on the states. The Feds get their way (forcing states
> to pass regs) by threatening to withhold highway monies. The 55 mph
> speed limit and the 21 yo drinking age, and the BAC for DUI all stem
> from this threat.

And the distinction between cars and bikes?