Just failed the CA DMV motorcycle popsicle test (and I thought Ihad passed)

I thought I'd seen both, but you could be right.

It's sort of difficult to concentrate on his exact
words when you're laughing that hard.

 

1.) You *don't* really know how to ride, as you've
demonstrated repeatedly; most lately with your silly
"physics stops working at low speeds" nonsense.

2.) You can't follow a chain of logic either.

3.) That's all anyone needs.

 

I think every class can charge whatever the market will bear.
Sort of like airline ticket costs.
So, a class here will cost differently than a class there.

At least that's how I think it works.

 

Well, I know that you didn't dare try to explain how the
laws of physics suddenly stop working at a certain
speed.

That in itself is a pretty good clue.

 

Ah, the idiot is at it again.

So if a lie doesn't work the first time, you keep telling it over
and over again on the theory that maybe some idiot will believe
it if you tell it enough times?

Once more: the state of California doesn't make any M-O-N-E-Y
on the classes because they're taught by P-R-I-V-A-T-E schools
that work on the theory of free enterprise.

You've heard of that?

 

Not according to the state of California's website.

 

Now try to show us where he said that countersteering stopped
working at low speeds: which is what *you* said.

Tsk. The stupid cliche' again. I *am* professional
help: a retired track instructor for the Motorcycle safety
Institute.

 

It took awhile, but I found a 2008 rate table for Anchorage, AK. BRC -
$250; ERC - $150.

2013 BRC in Juneau is $275
2013 BRC in the Valley (Wasilla, etc) is $275, and $150 ERC
A2009 Valley table said Anchorage and Valley BRC was $275.

Rates must have gone up in 2009.


Classes here are given by A.B.A.T.E (Alaska Bikers Advocating Training and
Education).

 

Based on my observation, I contend that it would be silly for anyone to
expect civility from a pompous ass such as yourself.

 

Hello Twibil,
I think you wholly missed the point; so I'll kindly try to clarify.

The point is that the DMV doesn't want to run the free test, yet
the CA-MSP does want to run the test (for a fee vastly greater
than the cost of a California motorocycle license).

They're both clearly in cahoots because California must accept MSP
test results, and even mandates young riders take the MSP class, and,
for those young riders, California clearly mandates the max MSP fee.

I'm not sure who designed the popsicle test, but given that this is
the California government, I wouldn't doubt that the MSP designed the
popsicle in cahoots with the DMV expressly for the purpose of
diverting riders to the MSP class (which, incidentally, has a test
which is absolutely nothing like the DMV popsicle - which tells you
a lot!).

Remember, Home Depot sponsored the bill in California that mandated
C02 alarms in, essentially, every household in California, which took
effect in only one year (2013) from conception to completion.

Why do you think Home Depot did that?
(HINT: Same reason as MSP helped the DMV with their laws.)

 

The fee limit is only for those riders who are forced
to take the class because they are under age.

However, from a practical matter, it would be illogical
for the MSF to charge a different price so, in effect,
the mandated fee cap most likely applies to all riders,
in practice (but not in law).

 

Poor little thing. "Want" doesn't come into it.

Any DMV office will give you the "popsicle" test: all you have to
do is make an appointment.

Translation of "clearly in cahoots": "I'm a paranoid idiot who
thinks
that it's a conspiracy".

1.) Oh wow! You used "cahoots" again! Well, that *PROVES*
it's a conspiracy!

2.) The tests you take in one school district are quite
commonly not the same as the ones you take in another.
This does not mean that the different school districts are
in "cahoots", and that tells you a lot.

To save lives? Yeah, that's pretty much the same thing
all right.

So tell us: where did you ever get the idea that it's
wrong to make a profit for providing a useful service?

'

 

Once again; not according to the state of California's
website.

 

Plus some insurance companies give discounts for having taken it.

Ben

 

The popsicle was around long before the class. I posted
http://groups.google.com/group/ba.motorcycles/msg/4f2a3e4fb0607e65
referring to when I took it in 1983. After that, the Yamaha dealer
put in some kind of retrofit below the carbs to smooth out the gas/air
mixture flow, mostly to fix a mid-throttle problem.

Things changed in 2004:
http://groups.google.com/group/ba.motorcycles/browse_thread/thread/96f36fea2e95f0ed/686a1f93eb2e764a

MSF was around at least 10 years before that:
http://groups.google.com/group/ca.driving/browse_thread/thread/c3c9abd4b30a08cf/3383663a5dd6d8f8

I didn't ride to work at the job I had around 1990 (street riding for
17 years by then) because it was on a military base and as a
contractor, I would have had to take 3 unpaid days off work to take
the course they required. Then I'd see jarheads pulling wheelies on
the freeway and wonder wtf kind of good that requirement did.

Shirley, they did it to make a profit. Stupid people still die every
year, but at least some don't. Sometimes the profit motive is
congruent with the right thing to do. If you are going to complain
about something, at least pick an example that lacks such congruency.

jg

 

jgar the jorrible wrote on Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:41:33 -0800:

I think the profit motive of the MSF is noble in that they DO serve a purpose.
On the other hand, the Kalifornia DMV lollipop test serves no useful purpose.

 

The MSF is a non-profit organization.

 

In <>, on
02/27/13

Posted without ever having owned an iphone or any apple product.

Cheers, Bjorn.

 

If there is any correlation between training and execution as applied
to operation of motor vehicles, it probably leans toward negative
results.

The change from "I got my license!" to "All the rules are stacked
against me!" can only be measured by factors of the speed of light.

 

No, it *does* serve a useful purpose.

It sends the riders who have questionable control
over their bikes to a class they no doubt need to take.

Personally, I'd have no problem with requiring that
class for all new riders; no matter their ages. But
so far the state of California does not agree.