Tiered License for Motor Cycles

[bem136]

Well, this might be a topic we can air, with no expectation of consensus.

I read every now and then about a new motorcycle rider who has purchased a liter + bike as his first machine. It seems totally rational to me that some guanidine in the area of access to the high performance machines is in order. That is a persons credit limit shouldn't be the determining factor in what kind of machine he can purchase. However, what kind of criteria should be used in determining a riders skill, judgment or general competence for operating these awesome modern motorcycles? Should we continue to rely on Darwinism?

If you're the next Secretary of Transportation, what is your position?

 

[GunMD]

Natural Selection at work...let it be. If there was some kind of tiered approach then who would decide which bikes fit into each tier? The lawmakers? The DMV? The manufacturers? I don't see a good answer there. And then what...a 30 day waiting period to buy a bike that has more than 80hp? Screw that. I don't need to be protected from myself anymore than I already am.

 

[twowheelnut]

Tiered licensing for every vehicle type and make the license friggin' outrageously expensive and the exam ridiculously hard, including a motor skills section and you only have two shots at passing. If you don't pass on the second time, buy a great pair of walking shoes.

 

[Orient_Express]

Count me in with GunMD..

On any given day, slightly more people die in auto related accidents that home accidents. But when it comes to disabling injuries, over three times the number of people have those kinds of accidents at home than from autos. Should we regulate the home environment as well??

My $.02 is that the goverment is already too involved in my personal affairs. I wish they'd all butt out, but that's like wishing for an honest politician.

In Illinois, you get fined $50 bucks for not having your child restrained in some contraption while operating your vehicle (not that that's a bad thing) but school buses roll up and down these country roads with no regulations for child restraint devices at all...

Darwin was a politician...

 

[sprint_st]

If it were illegal to be a dumb ass, we would all be in jail because we all have dumb ass moments. Legislating certain safety devices has some logic behind it, but definitely within limits. Legislators really don't have a good track record in defining anything which really is a vote for Darwinism. That being said, I really think way too many people are getting bikes they can afford but can't safely operate. What to do about it? I'm not sure if there is anything. Brown's First Law is "It is a waste of time to inform a dumb ass that they are a dumb ass."

 

[GunMD]

To some degree don't the insurance companies "dictate" what bike you can ride? I mean, how many 17 yr old kids can afford the insurance on a brand new R1?

 

[dcarver]

Ok, I'll stir the pot and be devil's advocate.

I endorse tiered licensing for motorcycles.

Restrictions exist on young drivers, why not inexperienced motorcycle pilots and/or pilots that simply don't have the reaction/motor skills necessary to safely operate a bike.

It's not the same now as when you old farts first started riding Honda 50's, Suzuki 90's, AT1 Yamahas in the dirt and like. Now you just talk mommie into 8k, walk into a dealer, purchase a 130 mph 600cc bike then go kill yourself. The current DMV Ca test for licensing is a complete joke. Some stupid circles, some easy stops, ta-da you're licensed. Stupid and a killing farce is all the test is now.

The real difficulty lies in the implementation of a tiered system. By each state? no. By the Feds? even worse. By voluntary compliance? not a chance.

So, I like the idea of having a tiered, practical approach but fully detest any implementation process as applied by our government. (last statement not political, as it applies directly to motorcycling! :blink: )

Maybe something along the line of having to prove successful completion of an Advanced Riding school at a track teaching a street wise curriculum would be the ticket.

Dog Pile ON!

 

[twowheelnut]

If it were illegal to be a dumb ass, we would all be in jail because we all have dumb ass moments. Legislating certain safety devices has some logic behind it, but definitely within limits. Legislators really don't have a good track record in defining anything which really is a vote for Darwinism. That being said, I really think way too many people are getting bikes they can afford but can't safely operate. What to do about it? I'm not sure if there is anything. Brown's First Law is "It is a waste of time to inform a dumb ass that they are a dumb ass."

You know, I would normally agree with this thought, but when Mr. Dumb Ass violates my right of way or threatens my ability to drive or my well being, then I say, legislate his ass off the road. Quite frankly, it's too easy to get licensed and stay licensed and this situation puts good drivers/riders like me in jeopardy.'

Now, if we could have an open season on Mr. & Mrs. Dumb Ass driver/rider, I'd drop my stance for tiered licensing in a heartbeat and load up on ammo, tout de suite.

Sadly, this, though a good topic, is destined for the scrap heap.

 

[dcarver]

...and what about the aspect of RV's? No extra licensing required.. purchase that 40' diesel pusher, grab the keys and drive! Scary.. :blink:

now back to motorcycles. Ever seen the size of a Honda Wing? As long as a Winnebago, and no extra mc license required! (come on now, laugh, it's a joke! )

 

[GunMD]

The real difficulty lies in the implementation of a tiered system. By each state? no. By the Feds? even worse. By voluntary compliance? not a chance.

Agreed...and CA does have some of this (as you mentioned) with the age brackets. I don't recall the details but basically the younger you are the more formal training you need in order to get a MC license. Good idea. The idea behind this approach is probably along the lines of thinking that the older you get the more responsible you get. While this isn't a hard rule by any means, I think it's safe to say that it's generally true that we get smarter with age. I cannot, however, explain the disparity between TWN's age and his IQ.

 

[evil_henchman]

If you're the next Secretary of Transportation, what is your position?

My position would be to stay the f**k out of the peoples lives and business. I'm not a nanny and adults worth having around don't need one. That would be my position.

Oh and I just bought my first motorhome so pipe down there DC :lol:

 

[Fencer]

Ok lets tier it

Young folks 14-22 no more than a 250 (which will still break all speed limits just not as quickly)

folks with a min of 10,000 miles (not years as I have a cousin with a V-star that would match Brunddog for lack of milage / 4,000 in 4.5 years)

can get up to a 999 cc

" I have over 30+ years riding behind me (but only 3,000 miles )

Squids will never hit this mark on 75-100 mile days.

Then when you get 20,000 under your belt you can get a 1000 +

BUT when you hit 50 and your reaction times are slower you have to scale back to a 600.

Screw that. I don't need to be protected from myself anymore than I already am.

I am in complete agreement

 

[user 213]

When I first got a moto endorcement for my licence in the 80's, Oregon had a tiered licencing system. Mopeds were in a separate class, (and still are), then it went 0-600cc, 601-999cc, and 1000+. I took my skills test, at the time a brand new, pretty comprehensive test, on my '40 HD with a 8" over springer front end and mechanical brakes, which was 60 ci, or 1061cc, so I passed for the 1000+ endorcement which meant I could ride anything except a moped. I was cool with that! First time too. I dropped two points during the test. The 20 year old kid on a 125 dual sport before me failed horribly.

A lot of people fail the Oregon skills test the first time. One of the smartest things the OR DMV ever did was to accept a Team Oregon, (Similar to MSF), Beginning Rider Course cert as acceptance of passing the skills test for DMV. IOW, come in with a BRC pass cert, and all you have to do is take the written test. Enough people failed the DMV skills test that most people spend the $100 or so bucks to take the Team Oregon BRC instead of trying to take the DMV test first.

I feel this is a good compromise. More people spending two weeks taking the BRC and actually learning skills that might save their butt on the street means fewer idiots killing themselves, but the idiots will still find a way. What I'd like to see added, is a track taught course that moves the new riders up to the next level. That would be ideal for car drivers too. Take the Basic Course, pass, then take the Track Course and have to pass that before being given a licence to drive/ride on the public streets. Think of the variety of skills that could be taught on a closed course. Skid cars for the driving, etc. Then teaching new drivers/riders how to corner and what happens when the do it wrong Vs do it right where it can be seen, filmed and re-played in the classroom. How to deal with over and under steer, what low pressure tires feel like and how to react to it.

When my 8 year old niece is 16, I plan on sending here to a week long Skip Barber Motorsports school to learn to drive. It's not cheap, but it will be money well spent.

Bottom line, we can regulate all we want, but if we're not getting skills taught to those new riders and drivers, they won't improve. Learning how to pass the test isn't the same as learning how to ride or drive.

 

[sprint_st]

We can talk this thing to death but IMO there isn't a "fair" or "logical" way of building the tiers that would be enforceable or practical. Then there is the question of why would a legislator even want to step into this mess. Remember that in the world of politics it takes 100 ataboys to offset one ah shit. What does a politician have to gain by sponsoring such a bill other than two tons of grief. As long as we are killing ourselves by our own f--k ups, they don't care. Now if we are killing little Suzy in the school yard, maybe they might do something.

 

[FJRottie]

Bottom line, we can regulate all we want, but if we're not getting skills taught to those new riders and drivers, they won't improve. Learning how to pass the test isn't the same as learning how to ride or drive.

Bingo !!

 

[madmike2]

A quote from an old-timer, "They's grownups en yew kaint tell grownups nuthin".

 

[twowheelnut]

I think it's safe to say that it's generally true that we get smarter with age.

Yer kiddin' me, right? I think all that summer heat you have to deal with out in 29P has completely fried your basic ability to observe.

I cannot, however, explain the disparity between TWN's age and his IQ.

Well, that figgers... It's generally true that morons can't add or subtract. :****:

Bottom line, we can regulate all we want, but if we're not getting skills taught to those new riders and drivers, they won't improve. Learning how to pass the test isn't the same as learning how to ride or drive.

Bingo !!

Yeah, but in order to pass the tests you have to learn to drive/ride. Right now, there is no incentive to learn and therein lies the key. Tier systems give reason to teach/learn.

AutoWeek recently did a superb article on teen licensing and driving. It's free to download here, but you'll need to register.

 

[bikerskier]

Although I totally agree with having less gov't in my life and not more, I do favor some way to measure skills prior to bike licensing.

Last summer I sold an 04 Hayabusa and you would not believe some of the dickheads who called or came to look. 2 were first bike buyers, 3 had no bike endorsement. I even stated in my ads that I would only sell to an experienced rider, they still persisted. Maybe I was trying to hard to keep someone out of the ER or morgue but thats how I felt about it. I did find a good buyer with experience.

I like the idea of obtaining a cerificate from a certified school but there are likely far too many applicants to be handled by the schools.

In the end it is Darwinism scaping the bottom of tank in the many situations where idiots drink and drive or ride in conditions or speeds that they have no skill set to handle.

As always, IMO.

 

[Ric in Sac]

IIRC the two-tiered system is used in England. Rookie motorcyclists have horsepower limits. I personally think may be a great idea. Approaches to implementation could be interesting. There is discussion in California that riders below age 21 should have HP limits. In theory, they would learn there skills before they hop on 1000 cc bikes rather than when on them.

I would like to hear from our english brethren on the pros and cons of this system. They have firsthand experience that could be quite enlightening.