Slashdot Mirror

In most places you can put up a bond and insurance is not required. See: https://www.dmv.org/insurance/...

It is perfectly reasonable to consider Tesla itself to be the one and only dealer.

In my state they do fit the legal definition of a dealership.

(GG) "Operating as a new motor vehicle dealership" means engaging in activities such as displaying, offering for sale, and selling new motor vehicles at retail, operating a service facility to perform repairs and maintenance on motor vehicles, offering for sale and selling motor vehicle parts at retail, and conducting all other acts that are usual and customary to the operation of a new motor vehicle dealership. For the purposes of this chapter only, possession of either a valid new motor vehicle dealer franchise agreement or a new motor vehicle dealers license, or both of these items, is not evidence that a person is operating as a new motor vehicle dealership.

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4517

But that last sentence threw me off a bit. So I looked it up at the federal level and am now even more confused.

https://www.dmv.org/buy-sell/car-dealers/

It still seems state specific on the exact rules, but seems to imply a company only becomes a legal car dealership once they obtain a dealership license, and only then does any of the dealership regulations apply.

Tesla seems to not have a dealership license in quite a few states, and that seems the entire reason they are banned from selling their cars there.
Since right to repair laws are also per state, it would seem these two would go hand in hand.

For states tesla has a dealership license in, and where the state also has right to repair laws, I'd think those laws should cover the one and only tesla dealership.

For states tesla has no dealership license in, I'd think any right to repair laws would actually not apply to them at all.

In my state we do have right to repair laws, but tesla does not have a dealership license.
So I don't think those laws would cover them here.

In kansas a motorized scooter is less 130cc or 3.5 brake horsepower...

It sounds like you're talking about the Kansas definition for a moped or motorized bicycle. A motorized scooter has the additional requirement of being under 5 horsepower, but the laws don't change so the point is moot.

These vehicles are already regulated.

...it was Nevada that first adopted autonomous legislation back in 2011. Since then, a total of 30 states, plus the District of Colombia, have put some sort of self-driving regulation on the books. Of that group, 25 states—Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Vermont—and Washington, D.C. have adopted official legislation regarding the vehicles. The remaining 6 states—Arizona, Delaware, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Washington State, and Wisconsin—have dictated autonomous car guidelines through executive orders.

The State of State-by-State Autonomous Car Regulation

It's what any good driving school would teach. Let me google that for you...

Mentioned toward the end of the video...
https://www.geico.com/more/dri...

https://www.dmv.org/how-to-gui...

#6...
https://www.usatoday.com/story...

Damned right. That's also the advice of the DMV. https://www.dmv.org/how-to-gui...

A lot of people posting here need to look up Subrogation and learn something about what State Farm is doing.

They paid out and are now looking to recover their payment, this is something they are allowed to do and is normal under the law.

http://www.dmv.org/insurance/s...

The policy holder is part of the suit because your insurance company requires it. If you have insurance and it pays you on a claim, you are agreeing to help sue anyone they want to go after to recover the money.

Okay, so among other reasons why you are retarded, states are consitutionally prohibited from diving themselves up into smaller states. There is also no provision for secession as you say, so no leaving and coming back as two states, as some other AC suggested.

Now, it's very clearly stated on the list of requirements for a California drivers license that you present proof of citizenship as well as name as well as address. What exactly do you think is not being done here?

You are a denier of facts, floating in a cesspool of Fake News and an echo chamber full of confirmation bias.

The classic Trump argument tactic. Seeing what people are saying about you, and calling them the same things. I call you out on fact-challenged fake news full of confirmation bias, so of course your immediate knee-jerk response is to just call me the same thing. "I know you are, but what am I?"

As mentioned, the DMV records intentionally do not specify whether a license holder is a citizen or not, so it would be difficult number to determine, wouldn't it?

So, then how are they able to issue those people licenses which specifically say they are not valid for official federal purposes? How does the government know to issue an AB-60 license instead of a different kind of license? You're suggesting that they left that field out of their database?

Also, "as mentioned"? As mentioned where, in The Washington Times?

so it would be difficult number to determine, wouldn't it?

Well, if what you claim is true (and that's a big "if"), then yeah I guess it would be sort of hard to determine. But, you said this:

it's how the CA system works now. That doesn't mean they are legally allowed to vote, but they are registered

So, if we can't determine the number, then why are you claiming that this is how the system works and that "they" are registered? You're saying yourself that "they" are registered to vote in California, so I guess I'm just not seeing where you're getting that information from. Could you shine a light for those of us in the dark? You seem to have a lot of information on this issue, don't hold it all to yourself! Also, is there a single record of an illegal immigrant actually casting a vote in California? It just seems a little weird that you're simultaneously claiming that people are doing a certain thing, and also claiming that it's "difficult" to determine. I'm sure it's just my stupid brain not able to make an obvious connection though!

Also, when you're citing your sources, try to stay away from things like InfoWars, Milo, The New American, Freedom Daily, or any other organization who uses a tweet as a basis for their claims and fear-mongering.

And somehow you acknowledge the issue

No, you're misreading me. I'm not acknowledging that million of illegal immigrants are registered voters in California, I am making fun of the fact that people genuinely think that somehow the combination of automatically enrolling eligible voters and also giving illegal immigrants driver licenses magically equates to millions of illegal immigrants being registered to vote. And nothing is stopping them! Ooooh, scary.

It doesn't really matter

Yeah, pshh, illegally registering non-citizens to vote wouldn't matter anyway. That's why there's no investigation, right? Fuck it man, Clinton Foundation.

hint: the number is greater than 1

Prove it. Seriously, prove it. You can't though, can you? But you're still going to state that like it's a fact, aren't you? See man, you're a perfect symptom of the problem of fake news. You believe it because it sounds like something that could be true, and because it agrees with your bias.

and the vitriolic hatred for "others" of some stripe indicates an unwillingness to engage in critical thinking or rational discussion on your part.

Yeah, OK Trump University graduate. "I know you are, but what am I?"

90's Hondas weren't the most popular car to steal in the 90's.

Earlier Hondas have always been popular targets for theft, and yes, they are easy to steal. They don't have immobilizers or really any other anti-theft equipment and they're very easy to get into physically.

Under CA law, a state ID card cost $29. If you're on public assistance, it costs $8. Seniors can get a state ID card for free.

Under CA law, you need ID to actually register to vote. Kind of hard to argue against presenting ID at the voting center if you're legally registered, eh?

Using your example of NH an ID card is $10 and lasts for 5 years. That's $2 per year for voting. That's really cheap.

And yet, if it were a poll tax, it would be outright illegal.

And to go further, how does one live in a modern society WITHOUT a Government issued ID? I guess you never travel on an airplane. You do not set up utiltities. You never rent a car or tool. You don't have a bank account. You have no cell phone nor mailbox.

Hmm, I have to ask, why does one need a government issued ID to use a mailbox? A P.O. box, maybe (though I'm not sure, I've never secured one), but a mailbox? My mailman delivers mail, I open the box, nobody asks for ID. Not even for my absentee ballot. And for that matter, I can easily get a cellphone without ID. Tools I can also buy without ID, I suspect a rental company would let me post cash for many of them, though I suppose some exceptions might apply. And airline security is already severely questioned as to its merits.

But all of those things, none of them are directly constitutional rights, though I am leery about bank accounts and utilities not available without ID. That seems a severe potential for trouble. Not that my bank asks for my ID when I go in, mind you.

Still, let's stick to voting. If you're going to require ID to vote, it should be simple to require the state to provide the ID, and to bear as its own burden the effort to seek out any documentation or verification the state claims it needs. This would satisfactorily address the concerns, so why don't you just agree to do it? Is that so hard for you to accept?

Basically - you live in the woods as a hermit - probably not too interested in politics to start with.

Doesn't matter, it's not for us to judge, it's for government to meet its obligations. When it comes to voting, the mandate is properly on the state.

Using your example of NH an ID card is $10 and lasts for 5 years. That's $2 per year for voting. That's really cheap. And to go further, how does one live in a modern society WITHOUT a Government issued ID? I guess you never travel on an airplane. You do not set up utiltities. You never rent a car or tool. You don't have a bank account. You have no cell phone nor mailbox. Basically - you live in the woods as a hermit - probably not too interested in politics to start with.

eventually get to the point where you end up with a 5mph limit and a man walking in front of the vehicle with a red flag and a whistle to warn people ahead

There are motorized vehicle laws on some US states that originally mandated this very thing. These laws were written back when cars were new. Even then when 5mph was a top speed motor vehicles were quite dangerous to the driver, riders and surrounding traffic. Some residential streets near where I live are only 15mph. They still have the occasional multi-fatality crash from people not paying attention and driving at access-road or highway speeds when inappropriate.

These people refuse to countenance the fact that there must be a trade off between road safety and society - which like it or not depends on motor vehicles - being able to function

What we have today is a culture that is used to treating cars and trucks as harmless or at least "safe" things. The reality is that the single most dangerous thing a person will do every day isn't eating out at Joe's Lardshack or hanging out with the smokers at lunch but is to get in a car and drive. The car is something to improve your utility over what it was before. There should not be any trade off for that with society in a rational world but humanity is far from rational about such things.

If the residential areas were designed truly with the residence in mind there would be no private driveways. Instead society would put cars in lots near residential areas, the roadways would be for foot, horse or animal traffic only. For deliveries and shopping people would have to walk and use trolleys or carts to take large, heavy or quantities of things between car and house. But today the notion of private personal vehicle ownership and typical neighboorhood layout means that poorly trained, unrecertifiablly incompetent operators mix with people, pets, and other vehicles and this is considered normal.

Until every incompetent driver is replaced with a self-driving car that will obey the posted limits this will continue to be a problem.

http://www.dmv.org/nj-new-jers... Some states, NJ and CA that I know of, do annual inspections. In others, the police can stop you and test your emissions under certain circumstances. In either of these cases, you would fail the inspection. These cars can't be repaired to pass the tests. Therefore, you will not be able to operate them. These were sold as cars legal to drive in the US but are not. Therefore, a full refund is the only appropriate course of action.

http://www.dmv.org/insurance/a...

This site says 'most.' Maine uses Surety Bonding and is a fairly simple process. I just insure my license to maximum comprehensive coverage (which is rather expensive) but I own about 20 working/restored vehicles as they are a passion for me. I have another half dozen but they are either being restored or will be restored in the future when I find someone who can be safely tasked with the job. I just bought a well-maintained old '78 Chevy cum Tow Truck that is my next project. I have never owned a tow truck before. I plan on lifting it, throwing some TrxUs under it, replacing the winches, and helping extract (getting towed is for wimps) my friends from giant bogs or mud holes.

I will likely buy an electric car, such is not feasible where I live currently -- the tech is not there, and I will certainly buy an automated vehicle when I can. I will likely be an early adopted just to hack at it and see what I can do with it. Retirement and selling your business make for fun times.

Maybe the DMV should streamline the process instead of lowering the requirements?

Part of the Commercial Drivers License Test includes questions like "The phrase gross combination weight is figured by adding together what?". Is it reasonable to require you know the answer when you are just driving a person around in a passenger car?

The reason why the commercial drivers license test is way too onerous is that it's really meant for people driving trucks or other specialized vehicles. What aspect of the existing drivers license test does not cover what a person just driving a few other people around in their own car would not cover? After all, that's exactly the same as if they were simply driving friends and family around... if the test can't help you be a decent driver doing that, then improve the basic test instead of requiring you to know a truck swinging wide is called Offtracking...

By the sounds of it, the US needs to do what other developed nations have done and have separate heavy vehicle and taxi licenses. In countries like Australia and the UK, a taxi license concentrates on things like navigation, traffic laws, stopping and picking up passengers, dealing with difficult passengers and knowledge of the local area. In London they take this to the extreme with "The Knowledge".

In Australia, we have five classes just for trucks (Light, Medium and Heavy Rigid as well as Medium and Heavy Combination) and this is for good reasons, you dont want someone who only has a medium rigid license driving an articulated lorry with three trailers (heavy combination) because they are very different vehicles.

Maybe the DMV should streamline the process instead of lowering the requirements?

Part of the Commercial Drivers License Test includes questions like "The phrase gross combination weight is figured by adding together what?". Is it reasonable to require you know the answer when you are just driving a person around in a passenger car?

The reason why the commercial drivers license test is way too onerous is that it's really meant for people driving trucks or other specialized vehicles. What aspect of the existing drivers license test does not cover what a person just driving a few other people around in their own car would not cover? After all, that's exactly the same as if they were simply driving friends and family around... if the test can't help you be a decent driver doing that, then improve the basic test instead of requiring you to know a truck swinging wide is called Offtracking...

You'd probably need to guarantee at least half a million dollars in your retirement account;

$55,000 in Texas
http://www.dmv.org/tx-texas/ca...

It doesn't say how you get it back - I assume you never do until you either start paying an insurance company or stop driving.

It would take me many decades to hit $55,000 in insurance fees so this really isn't a worthwhile option for me.

Salt. Do you live where they salt the roads or near an ocean?

California has a bi-annual smog inspection. Smog inspections have been shown to be very effective at reducing smog.

Hybrids and electric cars are exempt though, along with several other alternative fuels, really old cars (older than 1975 and still running), and new cars less than six years old. So CA only gets the data on older cars that are using the "usual" amount of gas.

If California were to implement the plan that Oregon is looking at, they wouldn't be able to use the smog inspections, because the segment they want to add is the same segment that's exempt from inspections.

I just re-read that post. I said "here" enough times to make it clear.

Laws vary by jurisdiction. That's why you won't get a New York attorney defending you in Florida. Or a US attorney defending you in China.

In my state, you *must* do it. I was wrong on the days. I thought it was 15. It's currently 10. That may have changed since last time I read the laws.

http://www.dmv.org/fl-florida/change-address.php

In Florida, by law you must notify the Driver License Division of a change of address within 10 days of moving.

If you have a driver license issued before July 1, 1997, you will receive a change of address sticker to place on the back of your license. If you have a digitized license (issued after July 1, 1997), you will receive a new license instead of a sticker.

Florida law requires that you destroy your old license as soon as you receive a new one.

Florida drivers have 20 days to notify their local tax collector's office about a change of address for tag renewal notices. You'll be required to provide the license plate number of the registered vehicle, as well as updated address information.

http://www.dmvflorida.org/drivers-license-identification.shtml
When I renewed my Florida license last year, I had to provide multiple pieces of identification. Check the above linked page for the options.

I provided ... birth certificate, social security card, car insurance with my new address, and copy of my bank statement for the new address. You need 4 pieces of identification now, if you're a naturally born citizen. More is required if you're an immigrant.

I was technically in violation for about a week, while I waited for stuff to come in the mail. The bank hadn't sent me a new statement yet. When I went back, there were plenty of people being turned away because they didn't have "enough" proof.

And for New York...
http://www.dmv.ny.gov/forms/mv232.pdf

f you have a New York State driver license, learner permit or non-driver ID card, or a registration for a vehicle, boat or snowmobile, you are required by law to notify DMV within 10 days of any PERMANENT address change.

Write your new address on your current state or enhanced license, permit, or non-driver ID card and/or registration document.

Motor Vehicles does not require you to get a new license, permit, non-driver ID card or registration document, but many people
prefer to do so. To purchase a replacement document(s) complete Parts 1 and 2 on Page 2.

And for Washington...
http://www.dol.wa.gov/forms/520039.html

You must report your new address to us within 10 days after moving. If you already have a Washington State driver license or ID card, you may change your address:

        Online:
                The address on your driving record will be updated at no charge.
                If you want a new license or ID card with your updated address, you can order one for an additional fee and pay with a Visa, MasterCard, or American Express debit or credit card.

If these batteries are partially exposed from below, they won't do too well in northern states in spring. Melting snow and ice combined with leftover salt used to try to melt winter snow and ice could easily splash up onto the batteries, and if it's been a heavy precipitation winter that could do a number on the batteries.

http://www.dmv.org/how-to-guides/road-salt.php

An AC posted below that yes, you do. Likely because the law was made broad enough to cover all the variety of ways people could use snowmobiles. There are plenty of incidents where children get killed/injured on snowmobiles, so the laws clamped down on children driving them. http://www.dmv.org/ak-alaska/other-types.php

The kind of information they want to put in these codes could just be printed in clear text. This is just one company trying to get into a middle-man position where no middle-man is needed.

Exactly. Or link it to a drivers license or state ID, there's no reason to have an extra sticker that emergency medical personal are trying to search for. I can just see them running around searching for a sticker.
EMT #1: Check his wallet
EMT #2: Not there
EMT #1: Where's the helmet?
EMT #2: I don't see it on there either
EMT #1: Well screw it, we can't spend all night searching for a sticker!

WE already have state IDs, why not just use those? Even children can get a state ID. Put your ID number in a database and update that with medical information. Done. The irony here is on Lifesquare's website they have the EMT looking at the person's wallet and finding the sticker in the wallet. FAIL.

And how is this going to be profitable? Are you going to charge users for the stickers? Maybe a monthly subscription fee? Good luck with that. Or the hospitals should all pay monthly? A project like this is too big for a tiny startup, this needs to be done on a state wide government scale to be successful at all.

But it looks like Lifesquare is available in Marin County, CA. That's great, funding January 2011 and by June 2012 you have 1 county covered and only 3,140 counties to go.

Whenever I hear about these horrible startups I always wonder how much funding they've received. Unfortunately it doesn't say the amount, but it does say someone gave them venture funding for this really bad startup.

In California, the law requires you turn on your lights if you have to turn on your windshield wipers.

As you noticed, not everyone is perfectly law abiding around here...

It will become very hard to avoid.

Unless you move to a state that doesn't treat its citizens like toddlers, such as New Hampshire where you are not required to have insurance of any kind, much less wear seatbelts, motorcycle helmets, or bicycle helmets.

You can always re-paint your car when you want to sell it.

Let's do some math.

Cost of painting a car = $400 (source) * 2 = $800
Cost of auto insurance = $1837/year (source)
Insurance reduction for anti-theft devices = up to 30% (source), we'll assume 10% for just this ($183/year)

Thus, you need to keep your car for 800 / 183 = 4.5 years for painting to be a good use of your money.

Er, it would be nice if that were the case, but it's not so. In every state I've lived in, you could get your license suspended for failure to pay municipal parking tickets.

Here's some information on Connecticut's policy (read about halfway down, or search for "Unpaid Connecticut parking tickets"), and Googling "license suspension unpaid parking tickets" will find you many more states. Generally, you get a written warning note in the mail telling you to pony up, and if you don't, then they'll pull your license, at which point in order to drive again, you have to pay the fines, any late fees on them, and an additional $100+ to get your license back.

But don't take my word for it...check Texas Transportation Code, Chapter 545, Subchapter B. This concept was apparently important enough that it be the first set of rules enumerated in the vehicle operating code. Most states have similar statutes in place, and most civilized nations either observe these rules of driving behavior by ordinance or by simple courtesy.

Now hold on just a bit, there, Pardner. I checked my state's driver's manual and the manuals from some neighboring states. I was shocked and surprised to find that driving in these states is not regulated by the Texas (Yaa-hoo!) Transportation Code. None of these states has a mention of the need to "move over, little dogie" when being signalled by another driver. In fact, I found no mention of signalling to another driver, visibly or audibly, of one's intention to pass.

They do provide for the left lane of a multiple lane highway being used for passing slower traffic. They do not state that one must evacuate the left lane, real pronto-like, cowboy, when being overtaken. To the contrary, they emphasize the need to merge right more cautiously, so as not to cut in on other drivers. One manual even makes a special note of travelling at the speed of traffic even when they are moving too slowly for your taste.

I'm sure you're totally right about Texas, Slim -- I'm taking your word for it, since the cowboy code doesn't allow lying. The attitude is definately borne out by Texans driving in my area. But now we know why -- it's required by law.

One final note: non-accident-related traffic jams aren't generally caused by not having enough lanes for everyone to get from point "A" to point "B". They are due to intersections with other roads. Changing lanes, merging and exiting acutally cause the slowdown, because the interchange is almost always the lowest capacity node in the system. The fewer unnecessary lane changes, the better traffic will move for everyone, not just you. You're not the only one driving with a pregnant lady about to give birth and a dog having a heart attack.

OK, I lied, one more point: http://www.dmv.org/ has links to driver's manuals and traffic codes from 40-some states. They'd also like to sell you DVDs on driver's ed, etc. I have no financial interest in this site.