Motorized Bicycles Under Attack in Indiana!!!

I have much to say about that TV report....but I will try to be succinct.

First of all, how do you "never see him" if you get hit in the right front of your bumper? Maybe he did make a mistake, but part of driving is watching out for others. It would be one that if she said: "I thought he was going to stop because i had the right of way", but that is not what she said. "Never saw him" tells me someone else shouldn't be driving.

Second, what's this about "don't have to be registered bu can be"? Really? Show me where a bike in Indiana that fits the "moped" or "motorzied bicycle" definition can be registered. I've never seen it...by the way, I'm a lawyer who has closely watched all the related laws in my home state on this subject.

Third, so sue the guy in small claims court. That's what it there for.

Fourth, pay attention to your own deductibles. If you can not afford the deductible, you have the wrong one.

Fifth, TV "journalist" how many of those moped accidents were the fault of someone besides the moped rider? Great research there. You identify a "problem" and then present only the information to support your chosen position. Nice.

Typical low quality local "news". Hey where do idealists who don't have the brains to get into law school go? Jounalism school.

HoughMade said:

Fifth, TV "journalist" how many of those moped accidents were the fault of someone besides the moped rider? Great research there. You identify a "problem" and then present only the information to support your chosen position. Nice.

Click to expand...

I think you're confusing journalism with reporting the facts. If the reporter had to go to all the trouble of actually researching his story there probably wouldn't have been one. Most reporters follow the rule of thumb that if the facts don't fit your story you change them until they do.

Kevlarr said:

I think you're confusing journalism with reporting the facts. If the reporter had to go to all the trouble of actually researching his story there probably wouldn't have been one. Most reporters follow the rule of thumb that if the facts don't fit your story you change them until they do.

Click to expand...

Well there you go.

I called 3 different insurance companies and not 1 would insure a motorized bicycle, theres no VIN, no DOT safety equipment. Like 2door said in a post until Im standing before a judge Im riding a bicycle with a helper motor. And I guarantee you when that time comes my bike will be with me to show the judge what hes dealing with and Ill have a copy of Colorados new law in my posession to read from. GRAY GRAY GRAY.......

His son is a moron, so blame the legislature for not stopping him from being an idiot. No personal responsibility, punish everyone because you raised a low-life moron.

What a bunch of BS.

Yeah, 48 already lost his license to DUI and hit someone hard enough to give himself brain damage while not wearing a helmet. Hmmmm, sorry Chuck your son is a dip****. No laws can prevent death by stupidity, though they do try!

I anticipate this issue will be revisited routinely by the Indiana legislature. One of the major problems is a lack of existing law enforcement regarding these unlicensed vehicles being ridden by unlicensed operators at a local level (police/marshal/sheriff). The dirt cheap, throwaway < 50cc/2BPH/25MPH scooters are becoming more popular with kids too young to have a driver's license. Worse than local officers not doing much (if anything), there's also a lack of parental supervision or enforcement.

Is every kid with one of these things blatantly violating the laws? No, but there are enough juvenile scofflaws that do to make it a fairly visible problem that becomes increasingly irksome to the general public. Their behavior includes disregarding numerous traffic laws, unpredictably erratic driving, no helmets or eye protection (obviously under 18 years old), and I daresay they very likely do not have the required Indiana ID card. Encountered a pair of these hoodlums riding side-by-side up and down a paved "Rails for Trails" trail this past weekend in a manner that clearly threatened the safety of runners, walkers and (non-motorized) cyclists also using the trail (not to mention their own). The younger of the pair looked under 15 too. A number of people on the trail, aside from me, were thoroughly pissed. No form of motorized vehicles are allowed on these trails.

There's also a general public outrage that someone who has had their license suspended or revoked, especially for DUI(s), can buy one of these unlicensed vehicles and drive them without any insurance using only an Indiana ID card. An example is the West Lafayette van/moped collision this past May. The 48 year old moped driver was driving a moped because of license revocation from past DUIs. He was found once again to be legally intoxicated when tested following this collision. IMHO the guy shouldn't have been operating anything motorized, and I don't think I'm alone in that. I've little sympathy for the moped driver, but the event was not without "cost" to the van driver, who had to remain at the scene of collision (undoubtedly for some time due to moped driver injuries), had to file reports with the state, and more reports with her insurance company.

The city I live in has had an ordinance for about five years now that beefs up state laws with a few modest enhancements for easier enforcement by the local police. Doesn't go much beyond what the state already has on the books, but it does enable impounding a moped under some circumstances, sets the amounts for the fines, and ratchets up the penalties for repeat offenders. Covers only the city, not the surrounding county (in which there are continuing problems). If the current statutes and enforcement of them are perceived by enough of the public as ineffective, unworkable, and not being enforced sufficiently, the solution will be the state acting to regulate these mopeds the same as motorcycles to include titles, registration, insurance, and requiring operators to have drivers' licenses with a MC endorsement.

I don't believe there needs to be more laws. There is a need for greater enforcement of the existing laws. Absent ability or willingness to do that by local law enforcement, some other more effective method of regulating and controlling the behavior of "moped" drivers is required.