DC Ending Mandatory Bike Registration

So DC police were stopping bicyclists to check their papers, but don't have the resources to stop them for violating traffic laws? Nice.

Were the cops actually ever checking papers? Of all the laws that aren't enforced, this must be at the top of the list. Good for DC for figuring out that maybe 3 really uptight AU/GW/GU students registered their bikes each year and no one else did, making it a waste of money/time.

Cops are too busy pulling over all the cars who break traffic laws to pull over the few cyclists who do.

I realize this question is largely academic at this point, but I'm curious--the old law said "or unless it is validly registered in another jurisdiction, when required by applicable law of such jurisdiction, and bears readily visible evidence of being registered." Didn't that basically render it unenforceable? All the cyclist had to do was say "I live in Virginia" (since Virginia doesn't require registration) and that ought to have been the end of it.

"Cops are too busy pulling over all the cars who break traffic laws to pull over the few cyclists who do."

What a bunch of malarkey!

Actually the cops are too busy napping or feeling up their girlfriends in the backseat while "operating" spedd cameras on commuter routes.

As for the "few cyclists who break traffic laws", I suppose you've never noticed theclowns on bikes who ride on the sidewalks downtown, dangerously weave through traffic, and blow through red lights and stop signs - all while they demand that drivers "share the road". But I suppose that's alright because "bikes don't use foreign oil".

What a bunch of self-rightoeus hypocrites!

You forgot about eating donuts.

The FEW cyclists who violate traffic laws? The FEW cyclists? You have to be kidding.

I think the real reason for this law, and perhaps many like it, was to give police a reason to stop people when they really didn't have a reason to stop them.

It would be nice to have police stop someone...

Rich -- to answer your question, I think the answer is "no", that that exception means only if you have actually registered it pursuant to another state's requirement. If not, then you have to register it to ride it in DC, even if you live in Virginia. Silly, yes.

Bicyclists have as much right to the road as you fuel hogs. Why don't you go fight in Iraq for your ration of oil? This bicyclist hasn't used five gallons this year.

Traffic laws don't apply to bicyclists because we are special and everyone else is fascists

"Bicyclists have as much right to the road as you fuel hogs."

AND as much responsibility to follow the rules and obey the law. With rights come responsibilities. It's part of being a grown-up.

BTW, no one has the "right" to use the road. Road use is a priviledge.

"Why don't you go fight in Iraq for your ration of oil?"

Now we KNOW you don't know what you're talking about. A uninformed loudmouth like you has GOT to be a student instead of a taxpayer. And I'll bet you're s self-professed "environmentalist", too.

"This bicyclist hasn't used five gallons this year."

What do you think the generators to produce the electricity to power the computer you're using to post that nonsense is running on? And you think the machinery to build your bike runs on air? Like Bugs Bunny would say "what a maroon!"

Like I said, car-haters rarely know what they're talking about.

The law was used in open air drug markets. MPD could stop someone suspected of selling drugs via their bike and repossess it if it was not registered. Many complaints resulted, including an official report from the Office of Police Complaints. Hence, the change in law.

Bicycles should be prohibited with one exception: you can own one if you use it to generate all of the electricity for your home, including for heat and hot water.