Originally Posted by
Digital_Cowboy
Okay, how was that "unfair?" And I would think that the auto lobby/industry would want the people using their products to be properly trained and licensed. I like the suggestion that would impound a person's car if they're caught driving without a license or insurance as well as the steep fine. And how if they can't pay their debt that their car(s) is/are sold to cover those costs.
To be honest, the bill had other increased fines as well, including some steep ones for speeding. The auto lobby liked none of them, and the 900$ fine for no license got called out for some complaint, as it would be an "economic hardship."
Part of the problem was the increased fines were seen as a money grab by the commonwealth; unbelievably
Virginia's gas tax does not come close to paying for the roads, not even the interstate highways. Another part of the problem was that the fines only applied to in state drivers. The complaints were overwhelming. The fines were an attempt to secure some transpo funding. Now, of course, our governor has just borrowed a lot of $$$.
Originally Posted by
Digital_Cowboy
Did he by any chance happen to admit that he brought it on himself?
Yes he did and does. It's a major PITA, and he knows full well he blew it.
Originally Posted by
Digital_Cowboy
True, up to a point. If one runs a red light or stop sign then they're a danger to others. But yes, I agree that by and large that a drunk on a bike is mainly a danger to themselves.
In a far more minor way than they would be in a car. I know when I'm drunk I ride a lot slower, possibly because if I ride fast, I'll throw up from the exertion. I was hoping for a vomit smiley here, but no such luck. This sort of basic problem is not replicated in a car. And there's the simple physics of the 2000 pound car and the 20 pound bike.