Did Arnold Schwarzenegger pass the idiotic CA DMV motorcyclelicense test?

It's what Bugs Bunny called a moron...

 

(Astonishment!) Krusty finally got something right!

 

On September 24, 2004, in a reeky thread titled "California DMV
Motorcycle Driving Test (bribery or
idiocy?)",

Someone under the nym of "Paul Franz" posted the following to reeky:

*********************************************************************************************************************
I'm new to California & need to know if the existing riding skills
test at the CA DMV is sheer idiocy by the California bureaucracy or if
it's merely a method to funnel kickbacks to the motorocycle
foundations who run the 200 dollar alternative test (which everyone
passes).

I'm told that the new riding test test is different than it used to
be, so older riders who passed previous tests will not know what I'm
talking about; but new riders who tried to pass the test in anything
above, say about a 650, will back me up. It's nearly impossible. And
it proves absolutely *nothing* about your ability to ride a bike.

WHo *approved* this idiotic riding test anyway?

In a K1200RS, you can't even *SEE* the turning circle, let alone pass
the test. In the last two years (or so), it seems some organization (I
don't know which) has profited immensly from the fact that nobody can
pass that idiotic driving skills test, yet *everyone* (well,
parapalegics have to take it twice) passes the 200-dollar alternative
test provided as an alternative to the 15-dollar government test.

What am I missing?

Q1: What does that idiotic test prove where you can only pass it in a
borrowed 250cc motorcycle (even for 20 years' experienced riders)?

Q2: Who approved this idiotic CA DMV motorcycle riding test?

Q3: Are those approvers the same group who profits from the
alternative 200-dollar 16-hour class?

Q4: Does *anyone* in a 750 or above pass this (new) CA riding skills
test? (Prove it if you say it because I watched a dozen riders fail
and not one made it to the second half of the test.)

I know I can't change the system (I basically have to take the 200-
dollar 16-hour class as a bribe to the american motorcycle association
or whomever who sanctioned the idiotic CA DMV test. Even so, I'll be
it's on a 125 cc or 200 cc toy bike instead of a 750 or larger (where
the riders really ride).

Please help me in my frustration.

Is it just me? Or is this test a classic case of government with too
little brains and too much power coupled with a motorocycle
association which cares merely about its profits.

Does anyone have any statistics about who actually can PASS this
idiotic CA DMV riding test (and what bikes they rode)?


***************************************************************************­
*************************************
(End of quoted posting)


On December 14, 2005, in alt.scooter, in a thread titled "California
DMV Motorcycle Driving Test" someone under the nym of "Tony Susa"
wrote:

*********************************************************************************************************************

Is there a trick to passing the California DMV motorcycle "Driving"
test?

I just failed for the second time the California DMV motorcycle
'driving' test on my 2005 FLTRI Road Glide. I am astounded. I just
can't see how anyone can pass this test on a good sized touring bike.

I had ridden to the nearby DMV parking lot a week before my first test
and ran up and down and around a pretty tight circle for a few hours.
During that first test a week later, I failed because my front wheel
touched the outside of the line on the first loop which we had to
traverse twice.

On my second test, I made it past the handful of cones and the two
circles only to find that there was another part of the test
consisting of a straightaway and those same two circles, which again,
my wheel strayed outside the line according to the DMV clipboard
holder. I swore to her that my wheels were within the lines but she
didn't care one tiny bit.

I have only one more shot at the California motorcycle DMV test so I
ask your advice as I can't see more than a handful of touring riders
passing this test without knowing all the tricks beforehand.

Is there a trick to getting the California motorcycle license that I
need to know before I take the third (and last) riding test?

Tony Susa

*******************************************

Later he wrote:

I should have mentioned that I've taken the MSF class before but in
Arizona about 6 or 7 years ago. I remember laughing at how badly the
riders did, especially the older folks, who missed the u-turn box by
an entire bike length and still passed. So, I'm fully aware of how lax
that MSF class is. I agree if I took the class, wasting a weekend in
the process, that I'd pass in a cinch. So could anyone with two arms
and two legs.

A buddy of mine also lectured me "don't be an idiot - take the MSF
class". So I am not doubting your advice. We won't learn anything at
the MSF class but we'll at least get the California motorcycle license
which is the main point. My buddy said the MSF long ago petitioned the
California polititians to make the DMV test so unnatural that riders
would be forced to take the MSF class in droves, hence making money
for the MSF. If that's true, then it's a crime.

I'm not sure if the MSF is *that* evil (but I do admit you'd have to
be nearly a parapalegic to fail the MSF class that I took in
Arizona).

Do you know if there is any truth to that rumor? Who determines what
the California lollipop test consists of anyway? Is it the CHP? The
DMV? The legislaters in Sacramento?

Is there some trick to passing the California lollipop test on my own
bike that doesn't entail wussing out on the MSF class


*********************************************************************************************************************

Later, he wrote:

*********************************************************************************************************************

Let's analyze these two statements rationally.

STATEMENT 1:
If you don't take the MSF (twice) - you should not be on the road.

REBUTTAL 1:
If one has already passed the MSF class with flying colors (albeit 6
or 7 years ago), would they really learn anything by taking the class
again? Would YOU take the class twice? To my astonishment, I asked the
MSF if I could take the advanced class instead - but they said it does
not qualify or the riding test in California. Does that make sense? At
this point I realized the CA MSF class is just like a money making
operation (otherwise why not allow one to pass the advanced class)?

STATEMENT 2:
The CA DMV tests proves you can *control* the bike on the road.

REBUTTAL 2:
If one's own bike strays over a line in a tight DMV lollipop (and
therefore fails to prove they can "*control*" the bike) - yet then
they completely miss a similar MSF test by an entire bike length (and
therefore succeed in proving they can "*control*" the bike!), that
qualifies one to ride on the public roads? Do these absolute facts
even come close to making sense to you? Add the fact that the rented
MSF bike where you missed the u-turn box by a mile is about ten times
smaller than the real bike where you missed a tougher test by an inch
and you STILL think this MSF class qualifies as a test of
"*control*"?

You can not compare the two tests rationally because the grading
system has nothing in common between them. I will agree that the AZ
MSF class tests more rational items (braking, signalling, swerving,
curving, parking lots) than does the DMV lollipop. But, since the MSF
class is merely a babysitting event (everyone passed my AZ MSF class
even those who knocked down the cones in the curve and who those
almost ran into the coach in the rather trivial braking test, not even
counting their laughable performance missing the u-turn box by a
complete bike length) - do you really dare to compare the two tests?


On February 26, 2005, someone posting under the nym of "shaft drive"
started a thread titled

"California MSF Basic RiderCourse for an experienced rider on a liter
bike?" and wrote the following:

What does the California MSF Basic RiderCourse(SM) consist of? And, is
it a viable substitute to the California DMV riding exam for an
experienced rider on a liter-sized motorcycle?

BACKGROUND:
While California residents can legally ride forever without
supervision on a California permit without ever taking a riding test,
they can not legally ride in California:
a) With a passenger
b) On the freeway
c) At night

So most riders in California eventually obtain an actual license:
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/dl/dl_info.htm

If they're under 21, there is only one way to obtain a California
motorcycle license, but, for those experienced riders over 21, there
are two possible avenues:
a) Pass the $25 DMV exam and riding test, or,
b) Pass the $25 DMV exam & the $198 MSF riding test & exam.

"California DMV Motorcycle Driving Test (bribery or idiocy)?" with
over 500 posts from almost 75 authors, it appears the choice between
the two (for an experienced rider on a liter bike) is not as simple as
it might first appear.

Fundamentally (for an experienced rider on a liter bike):
a) Many swear the DMV test is almost not passable
b) Just as many swear it is
c) Some consider the CHP-sponsored alternative a waste of time
d) Others consider it time well spent

Therefore, the need for an open & fair assessment by an experienced
rider of each of these two avenues seems obvious.

I have taken on that role, publically - right here - yet I invite any
and all opinions either in favor of my results or to the contrary so
as to help the reader form as unbiased and truthful an opinion as
possible.

My credentials:
a) I have been riding for decades on a variety of bikes
b) I have motorcycle endorsements from multiple states (MA & CA)
c) My current bike fits the stated liter-size category (BMW R1100RS)

Am I an above-average rider? No. (I've destroyed two bikes for
example.) Do I work for the government? No. (I'm self employed.) Do I
work for the MSF? No. See above.

SUMMARY:
I've signed up for both the CA DMV test & the MSF Basic
RiderCourse(SM) in order to post my experiences here so experienced
readers will benefit.

Let the blog begin.

****************************************************************************************************************************

Whew!

 

(snip)

You may feel all defensive about his allegations regarding how the MSF
seized power over motorcycle driver licensing in CA, but that doesn't
matter to me.

It's entirely possible that I might have to take the lollipop test
(requiring me to beg, borrow, or steal a small motorcycle and
practice, practice, practice!) or pay over $250 to take the MSF basic
rider course four years from now, when I'll be older and even more
decrepit than I am, if the DMV makes me take a driving test because of
my age.

However, the poster whom you depise so much has offered an inexpensive
solution: I can ride the rest of my life on a learner's permit, as
things stand now.

And that's a viable solution, because I don't ride on freeways around
here because they are full of big trucks and speed demons, I don't
ride at night, and I don't carry passengers.

So the nymshifting OP has done *me* a service, even if you feel like
you're being attacked.

 

No the problem is you. You can't ride you fucking whiney bitchy
troll...It can be passed on ANY motorcycle that is in good running
order, period. No do toddle off you incomepetant unintelligent pussy
wimp troll you make me want to kill puppies and kittens just so your
existance can be explained you are stupidity and evil incarnate.

Oh and your motorcycle is a obese bloated pig that is prone to failure
at a rate higher than that of a Triumph commando.

 

I don't feel the least bit defensive. As I said, I am familiar with
the rider training program here in Virginia, and I am not familiar
with the program in California. However, it is very simple to respond
to his unfounded and unmerited allegations regarding the MSF "getting
rich" at the expense of California motorcyclists simply by looking up
the relationship between the California Motorcyclist Safety Program
and the California Highway Patrol.

I was merely setting the record straight, and correcting erroneous
information that the OP has been propagating for at least six years,
and possibly longer.

Sounds like a reasonable policy to protect California road users.

I don't despise the poster. I am bemused by his quixotic quest, and
bewildered by his need to pursue it anonymously via multiple nymshifts
and multiple newsgroups.

When I didn't like the fact that the Virginia goverment had banned
motorcycles from HOV lanes, I worked with the AMA and the Virginia
chapter of ABATE as the legislative affairs officer of my (then)
riding club to successfully lobby the federal government to modify the
1991 ISTEA act to require states to permit motorcycles in HOV lanes
that are partially or wholly federally funded - including the HOV
lanes on I-66, I-95, and Virginia Route 267 in Virginia. I even used
my own name in that effort.

I don't despise the poster. He obviously feels strongly about this
issue. I would suggest that he drop his misguided, groundless,
baseless accusations, his obsession with the Governor, and work with
California biker's rights groups to see if together, they can get the
DMV's motorcycle riding test altered to something that more
appropriately demonstrates an applicant's vital motorcycle control
skills.

The fact that you might need a "workaround" is indicative that the
current system doesn't necessarily meet the needs of older, infirm
riders.

I never said anything to indicate that I "feel" like I'm being
"attacked." That perception is wholly in your own imagination.

 

I can think of better ways to protect Californians than arbitarily
testing senior citizens and denying them a license renewal.

Getting drunken Mexicans off the road would make me feel a lot safer,
as would reducing the number of non-commercial 1-ton pickup trucks by
raising registration rates sky high.

The Goobernator is a target well suited to ridicule...

When I first read the California motorcycle rider handbook, I thought
that it was insightful and revealed lots of experience on the part of
the law enforcement officers who contributed to its writing.

I haven't had to take the California written motorcycle exam in the
last 25 years, but, at that time, I thought to myself, "Where are they
getting this stupid *shit* from?"

Like, one of the questions on the exam was, "Which can be seen from
the furthest distance at night?"

(a) A reflector or reflectorized tape
(b) The motorcycle tail light

According to the DMV, (a) is the correct answer!

So far as the lollipop test is converned, the examiner waived it,
knowing full well that a whole bunch of longtime riders were going to
get really, really, really pissed off if they were told they could no
longer ride.

No, it isn't just my imagination. The fact that you used the first
person pronoun indicates to me that your *ego* has been stimulated by
this discussion of DMV and MSF collusion in making the California
riding test impossible for most riders to pass on a normal-sized road
bike.

The MSF wants riders to start out on a little bike, but what is the
rider going to *do* with the damned toy after he's passed the lollipop
test?

 

Yes, it is. I have now told you that I don't feel as though I am
being attacked. If you believe that I feel any other way, then you
are imagining that.

I don't live in California. I'll never take the California motorcycle
riding test, nor will I take a class from the California Motorcyclist
Safety Program. Any idea that my ego is involved in this discussion
is simply a manifestation of your over-active imagination. My sense
of curiosity was piqued by the massive overreaction of the OP, and my
sense of humor has been awakened by many of the responses to his
complaints.

You can buy and sell used small displacement bikes with very little
depreciation from a season or two's worth of riding.

 

If you had actually taken the test on a big-bore bike such as a K1200LT,
there's absolutely no way you can see the lines under the wheels to know
if you were straying outside of the 21' 9" lines.

You shouldn't be looking there either.

Only an observer can/should pass/fail you on this test; it's highly
unlikely anyone who is their own judge can be taken seriously.

But even so, you have to pass it EVERY time, not just once (anyone can do
it once). You have to be so proficient that you pass it every single time
(or almost every single time).

Arnold isn't that proficient. He simply paid his $250 to the MSF and
that's the irony of the entire situation. Funny isn't it.

 

Interesting how you reacted to the proof that the MSF class in California
is $250. You didn't admit you were wrong. You merely found some other
item to nit pick about. Interesting how your character shows.

Anyway, the point is, and always was, that Arnold didn't, and most likely
couldn't pass his own test. This is not only ironic, but, it's a
tellingly sad admission that the system is designed to funnel money into
the MSF (and they more than double the price because they have a captive
audience).

The loser in all of this is the motorcyclist.
The winner is the MSF (to the tune of tens of millions of dollars).

I would WELCOME someone showing me otherwise on any statement above,
including that about Arnold being incapable or unwilling to take his own
test.

 

Hi WW,
Yes. Things have changed.

What happened is someone smelled money.

The test costs $250. That's something on the order of 10,000 riders a
year in California paying $250. Big bucks.

For that $250, you get to buy your license.

It's not any more complicated than that. Just as simple as your test,
except the tens of millions of dollars funneled into MSF coffers.

Even Arnold funneled his $250 into the MSF coffers (not that it will make
a dent in his net worth) ... but the point is that even he fell prey to
his own system. How ironic.

 

He wasn't. The prices in California vary depending on who's putting
on the class. The *maximum* charge can be $250, but many schools offer
the basic class for $150.

Don't you *ever* get tired of lying?

 

As Tim pointed out very carefully -and repeatedly- the MSF doesn't get
*any* of the money. It goes to the individual schools/organizations
that teach the safety classes, and it just about covers their
expenses.

And you don't seem to understand that nobody is *ever* going to
respect the judgement of someone who spends all his time intentionally
lying.

 

Except the MSF isn't charging California student riders to take the
course, the California Motorcyclist Safety Program, administered by
the California Highway Patrol, charges California student riders to
take the course. The money goes to the state of California to cover
the costs of administering the classes.

 

Except the MSF isn't charging California student riders to take the
course, the California Motorcyclist Safety Program, administered by
the California Highway Patrol, charges California student riders to
take the course. The money goes to the state of California to cover
the costs of administering the classes.

Because the MSF isn't charging California student riders to take the
course, the California Motorcyclist Safety Program, administered by
the California Highway Patrol, charges California student riders to
take the course. The money goes to the state of California to cover
the costs of administering the classes.

It's not nitpicking to correct your completely bogus claim that the
MSF is running motorcycle training classes for profit in California.

Hey, I'm not the one who has been anonymously and publicly propagating
a lie for six years..

Except the MSF isn't charging California student riders to take the
course, the California Motorcyclist Safety Program, administered by
the California Highway Patrol, charges California student riders to
take the course. The money goes to the state of California to cover
the costs of administering the classes.

 

The test does NOT cost $250 dollars. The California Motorcyclist
Safety Program's basic rider course costs $250.

Except the MSF isn't charging California student riders to take the
course, the California Motorcyclist Safety Program, administered by
the California Highway Patrol, charges California student riders to
take the course. The money goes to the state of California to cover
the costs of administering the classes.

Except the MSF isn't charging California student riders to take the
course, the California Motorcyclist Safety Program, administered by
the California Highway Patrol, charges California student riders to
take the course. The money goes to the state of California to cover
the costs of administering the classes.

Except the MSF isn't charging California student riders to take the
course, the California Motorcyclist Safety Program, administered by
the California Highway Patrol, charges California student riders to
take the course. The money goes to the state of California to cover
the costs of administering the classes.

 

Twitbull amused us with the following bit of irony:

So whines the psychotic nut job who lies about peoples' deceased
mothers while hiding and cowering behind its killfile - and it
spews its shit brained lies only because it was challenged to
read, think, and defend its impossible 9-11 cartoon fairy tale.
twitbull, if nothing else, your cowardice, lies, hypocrisy, and
simple minded insanity do keep us slightly amused... ;-)



--



"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance." --
Albert Einstein.

http://911research.wtc7.net
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
http://www.ae911truth.org

 

Right - you shouldn't be looking there, you don't NEED to be looking
there, so the whole question of whether or not "you can see the lines
under the wheels" is irrelevant.

Find yourself a big ol' slab o' asphalt with an understanding owner.
Paint yourself a circle - whatever radius you feel comfortable
with - such that you have a 2' wide circular path. You think you
need to see what's under the wheels to stay within the paint?

Bob M.