Oregon law requiring bikes to be licensed
03-09-09, 08:11 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Spokane/Tri-Cities WA
Posts: 1,385
Bikes: mountain bike, road bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Oregon law requiring bikes to be licensed
Here is a link to thread about a proposed new law that would require bikes to be licensed and registered in Oregon. https://www.bikeforums.net/clydesdales-athenas-200-lb-91-kg/518620-new-law-proposed-oregon-ride-free-while-you-can.html
The thread was in the Clyde section, but not sure if some of you Oregonites would find it posted there
The thread was in the Clyde section, but not sure if some of you Oregonites would find it posted there
03-09-09, 08:20 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beaufort, South Carolina, USA and surrounding islands.
Posts: 8,521
Bikes: Cannondale R500, Motobecane Messenger
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Tried here, and the race card was used.
03-09-09, 08:36 PM
#3
El Hammermeister
By the way, it's Oregonians, not Oregonites. Where you from?
03-10-09, 03:35 PM
#4
Center of the Universe
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 4,374
Bikes: Bianchi San Remo, Norvara Intrepid MTB , Softride Solo 700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
This kind of stuff pops up from time to time. But someone always does the math and finds that it really is not economically feasible to do it.
__________________
Matthew 6
Matthew 6
03-10-09, 06:26 PM
#5
Sore saddle cyclist
The guy proposing this is a far right Republican, it's not likely to go very far in the legislature or past the Governor. The State is in the process of making a major push for bike tourism, this will only hinder such programs. It's all talk and posturing at this stage.
03-11-09, 10:06 AM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Port Townsend, WA
Posts: 982
Bikes: xtracycle, electric recumbent, downtube folder and more
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
It is amazing how many people on the forum that is linked to above want to reduce the number of bicycles by taxing them. It is no wonder why the average car driver doesn't want bikes on roads.
Last edited by crackerdog; 03-12-09 at 08:27 PM.
03-11-09, 10:19 AM
#7
Racing iS my Training
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,263
Bikes: 07 Bianchi San Jose, 08 Tarmac SL2, 05 Cervelo P3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
03-12-09, 01:12 PM
#8
I make stuff up
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oregon, the damp side
Posts: 187
Bikes: '85 Ritchey Commando, '96 Specialized Sirrus, '06 Surly Cross Check
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
03-12-09, 02:06 PM
#9
Center of the Universe
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 4,374
Bikes: Bianchi San Remo, Norvara Intrepid MTB , Softride Solo 700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
03-12-09, 08:32 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Port Townsend, WA
Posts: 982
Bikes: xtracycle, electric recumbent, downtube folder and more
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
There, I think I cleared up what I was trying to say. I will rephrase here, if you go read the forum that is linked in the OP, I am surprised by how many want to tax bicycles. It would reduce the number of bicycles a lot. Bicycles save us taxpayers money since we are already paying for most of the roads through other taxes (gas tax is a small portion of the cost of roads) and take up less space, beat up the road less and if you figure in other costs such as health care, water cleanup, air pollution costs, etc., then bicyclists should get paid to ride compared to cars.
03-13-09, 11:01 AM
#11
Center of the Universe
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 4,374
Bikes: Bianchi San Remo, Norvara Intrepid MTB , Softride Solo 700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
There, I think I cleared up what I was trying to say. I will rephrase here, if you go read the forum that is linked in the OP, I am surprised by how many want to tax bicycles. It would reduce the number of bicycles a lot. Bicycles save us taxpayers money since we are already paying for most of the roads through other taxes (gas tax is a small portion of the cost of roads) and take up less space, beat up the road less and if you figure in other costs such as health care, water cleanup, air pollution costs, etc., then bicyclists should get paid to ride compared to cars.
The other factor is all those parent out there that will scream bloody hell when they find out they have to register all the childrens bikes.
__________________
Matthew 6
Matthew 6
03-13-09, 12:13 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Beaverton, OR
Posts: 14,744
Bikes: Yes
Mentioned: 525 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3230 Post(s)
Liked 3,868 Times
in
1,439 Posts
This is the problem with democracy. Get enough people together and you can do any stupid thing you want without really thinking it through (or perhaps I should say without admitting the results you got when you thought it through). Of course the strength of democracy is that if you get enough people paying attention, things like this never happen.
My reaction to this was that it was intended as a way of eliminating public spending on bike infrastructure. The stated premise is that the money raised by the licensing fees would be used to pay for bike infrastructure. The unstated corollary is that no other money would be used for such a purpose. And since this won't actually raise any money, the anti-bike grouches would get what they wanted.
There's an article on bikeportland.org today about a state rep defending this bill with the slogan, "Share the road, share the load."
My reaction to this was that it was intended as a way of eliminating public spending on bike infrastructure. The stated premise is that the money raised by the licensing fees would be used to pay for bike infrastructure. The unstated corollary is that no other money would be used for such a purpose. And since this won't actually raise any money, the anti-bike grouches would get what they wanted.
There's an article on bikeportland.org today about a state rep defending this bill with the slogan, "Share the road, share the load."
