"Drivers license" or "Driver's license"?
Grant Gottschall
see your driver(')s license. I believe it takes no apostrophe since it
is primarily considered to be a license for and not of drivers; she
believes otherwise. Who's correct? This is my first time posting to
this group, so please, go easy.
Grant
Antonio
Antonio
Grant Gottschall <gra...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
37F25C5D...@earthlink.net...
rka...@adsl-151-203-22-73.bellatlantic.net
wrote:
>My colleague and I have a dollar wager on this. The context is "Let me
>see your driver(')s license. I believe it takes no apostrophe since it
>is primarily considered to be a license for and not of drivers; she
>believes otherwise. Who's correct? This is my first time posting to
>this group, so please, go easy.
IMO, it's a license that a driver has, so it's a driver's license.
However, a cursory web search shows that "driver's license", "drivers
license", and "driver license" are all in use, even at DMVs.
Rachel
N.Mitchum
-----
> My colleague and I have a dollar wager on this. The context is "Let me
>......
You both lose, if you can believe my California license: it says
"Driver License." Other states may have other forms; you can look
at your own license or call an office of your state DMV. But if I
had to pick between your two spellings, I'd go for "driver's
license."
----NM
Bob Lipton
>
> My colleague and I have a dollar wager on this. The context is "Let me
> is primarily considered to be a license for and not of drivers; she
> believes otherwise. Who's correct? This is my first time posting to
> this group, so please, go easy.
>
Driver's License.
An alternate form might be "driving license" which I have never seen
used. I have never encountered "Driver License."
Bob
Peter Cooper
> "Driver License." Other states may have other forms; you can look
> at your own license or call an office of your state DMV. But if I
> had to pick between your two spellings, I'd go for "driver's
> license."
Not to sound pretentious, but in the United Kingdom I think we have it
correct:
Driving License.
As such, a license to be able to drive.. as opposed to a license that
belongs to a driver. While the context may be mixed here, it still sounds
nicer ;-) (I think)
--
Regards,
Peter Cooper
Associate Editor - Webdeveloper.com
internet.com Corporation
Brouhaha
<bobl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
It is "Driver Licence" here in Victoria (a state of Australia). Or at least
that's what's printed on the plastic card. Most people say and write
"drivers licence".
Stan
Jack Gavin
>Grant Gottschall wrote:
>-----
>> My colleague and I have a dollar wager on this. The context is "Let me
>>......
>
>You both lose, if you can believe my California license: it says
>"Driver License." Other states may have other forms; you can look
>at your own license or call an office of your state DMV. But if I
>had to pick between your two spellings, I'd go for "driver's
>license."
>
An organ donor card I have refers to "driver license".
My AAA (auto club) bail bond certificate refers to "driver's license".
I think that these two are both common enough that neither "driver" nor
"driver's" is wrong, but "drivers" is most dubious.
I'd choose "driver's license".
--
Jack Gavin
Antonio
> correct:
>
Correct? It's only one of the differences between British English and
American English. Driver's/Driving.
Antonio
> Correct? It's only one of the differences between British English and
> American English. Driver's/Driving.
>
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>Grant Gottschall wrote:
>-----
>> My colleague and I have a dollar wager on this. The context is "Let me
>> see your driver(')s license. I believe it takes no apostrophe [...]
>>......
>
>You both lose, if you can believe my California license: it says
>"Driver License." Other states may have other forms; you can look
>at your own license or call an office of your state DMV. But if I
>had to pick between your two spellings, I'd go for "driver's
>license."
In the U.S. it depends on the state and in the world, on the country.
My Maine license reads, inexplicably, "Drivers License" but I suspect
most states include the apostrophe or use "Driver License" (?). In
Ireland and in the U.K. it is called a "Driving Licence".
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
<pe...@thetechie.com> wrote:
>> You both lose, if you can believe my California license: it says
>> "Driver License." Other states may have other forms; you can look
>> at your own license or call an office of your state DMV. But if I
>> had to pick between your two spellings, I'd go for "driver's
>> license."
>
>Not to sound pretentious, but in the United Kingdom I think we have it
>correct:
>
>Driving License.
Licence.
Charles Riggs
furu...@ccsr.u-tokyo.ac.jp
"Antonio" <an...@tiscalinet.it> wrote:
> > Not to sound pretentious, but in the United Kingdom
> > I think we have it correct:
> >
>
> British English and American
> English. Driver's/Driving.
You're right. But, although I wouldn't say that
"driving license" is more _correct_, I would say
it may be more natural. I'm a native speaker of
Japanese, grown up entirely in Japan, and I've
learned English as a foreign language in the
junior-high, and high schools. I remember that
when I first tried to say _the thing_ in English,
what I came up with was "driving license". Later
when I learned that it should be a "driver's
license", I felt it rather strange. (In Japan,
the influence of US English is stronger than that
of British English.)
This may be only I. But, to my mind, there is a
grammatical reason why "driver's license" sounds
strange (OK, to me). In the US, you say "my
driver's license" when you refer to your driving
license. But, this sounds as if you were talking
about "the license of your driver". For example,
"my cat's food" means "the food of my cat", not
"my catfood". I think that in almost all cases,
the construction "<qualifier(s)> <human>'s <something>"
groups as "(<qualifier(s)> <human>)'s <something>".
So, "A driver's license was ..." sounds something
like "There was a driver in town. His license
was ...". Again, this may be only I, or because
I'm not a native speaker of English....
Ryo
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Mike Barnes
>Not to sound pretentious, but in the United Kingdom I think we have it
>correct:
If that's really what you want to say, I think it's hard *not* to sound
pretentious...
>Driving License.
... especially when you mis-spell "licence".
Mine says:
DRIVING LICENCE
Permiso de Conducción
Kørekort
Führerschein
?de?a ?d???s?? (Greek characters, probably won't come out right)
Permis de Conduire
Ceadúnas Tlomána
Patente de guida
Rijbewijs
Carta de Condução
As far I can tell they all say "driving", as opposed to "driver's",
licence.
If the USA ever joins the EU I suppose they'll have to add "Driver's
License" to the list.
--
Mike Barnes
Please note new e-mail address from 29th September 1999
Perchprism
>From: furu...@ccsr.u-tokyo.ac.jp
>Date: Thu, 30 September 1999 06:06 AM EDT
>Message-id: <7svcnu$n06$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>
>In article <7susb5$2th$1...@aquila.tiscalinet.it>,
> "Antonio" <an...@tiscalinet.it> wrote:
>> > Not to sound pretentious, but in the United Kingdom
>> > I think we have it correct:
>> >
>>
Who could tell? You're too humble. But, yes, I think you're right about the way
subtleties can elude the non-native speaker.
Spoken, the difference between "driver's license" meaning that thing in your
wallet and "driver's license," the license belonging to a particular driver, is
obvious. The first is accented on the first syllable in "driver" and the second
on the first syllable in "license."
As a native speaker, I think I can say that only rarely would I get them mixed
up in reading. Context would usually settle the matter pre-emptively, and I
don't think I'd ever even notice that the two are the same form. The writer
would have to have laid a false scent, as in "A driver's license can be revoked
for DUI," which is actually ambiguous, but I'm supposing he meant "The license
of any driver...."
"Your driver's license may be revoked for DUI" is unambiguous in print without
further context. Standing alone, it can only be referring to that thing in your
wallet, and the alternate interpretation would be outlandish, taking conscious
effort to even see it. If "Your driver's license may be revoked for DUI"
appeared in a passage explaining the pitfalls that come with having a
chauffeur, it would be a bad sentence because of the ambiguity.
The ordinary term around here is "driver's license," which I've always spelled
that way without a second thought. I think of it as "the license needed by a
driver."
The other two licenses in my wallet right now are a "1999 N.J. Resident Fishing
License" and a "General Radiotelephone Operator License." I think we can forget
about uniformity in the naming of licenses.
Perchprism
(southern New Jersey, near Philadelphia)
Marion Gevers
>My colleague and I have a dollar wager on this. The context is "Let me
>is primarily considered to be a license for and not of drivers; she
>believes otherwise. Who's correct? This is my first time posting to
>this group, so please, go easy.
Around here it's a driver's licence, because it covers only one person.
(Grant, what would you call a collar that's for but not of a dog?)
In practice, though, the answer varies from country to country. In
some parts of the USA it's a driver license. (Aren't you proud of me?
I even remembered that 's'.) Some people would call this ungrammatical.
I call it an ingenious work-around for those people who can never
remember where the apostrophe is supposed to go.
I have the impression that this sort of thing is no longer taught in
the schools. If the teachers' no longer remember the rule's, the
language will have to change. I do'nt expect the change to be in my
lifetime, but my child'ren wi'll probably see it.
--
Peter Moylan
Marion Gevers
>It is "Driver Licence" here in Victoria (a state of Australia).
That's new. Before the Kennett era, Victoria had the best schools
in the country. NSW still has a crappy school system, but at least
my driving licence says "Driver's licence".
--
Peter Moylan
(Born and raised in Victoria, now resident in NSW)
Stephanie Punke
"Antonio" <an...@tiscalinet.it> wrote:
>
>> Correct? It's only one of the differences between British English and
>> American English. Driver's/Driving.
>>
>
I'm American... but I think here I'm going to have to side with the British.
"Driving license" may not be more correct, but it does makes more sense.
After all, we don't go get fisher's licenses, do we? or hunter's licenses?
Stephanie
Peter Cooper
> >> "Driver License." Other states may have other forms; you can look
> >> at your own license or call an office of your state DMV. But if I
> >> had to pick between your two spellings, I'd go for "driver's
> >> license."
> >
> >correct:
> >
>
> Licence.
Oops ;-) I guess I was just reading the post above too much and picked up a
bad habit.. Honest! :-)
Chris Malcolm
>In article <7susic$35t$1...@aquila.tiscalinet.it>,
> "Antonio" <an...@tiscalinet.it> wrote:
>>
>>> Correct? It's only one of the differences between British English and
>>> American English. Driver's/Driving.
>>>
>>Sorry, obviously Driving/Driver's.
>I'm American... but I think here I'm going to have to side with the British.
>"Driving license" may not be more correct, but it does makes more sense.
A Driving Licence is the certificate that drivers must carry to
legitimate their driving on the public highway. A Driver's License
consists of those little privileges granted drivers by the courts and
police, such as not being blamed for injuring a cyclist because it was
the cyclist's fault for being invisible. This is a useful distinction
in British English.
--
Chris Malcolm c...@dai.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 650 3085
School of Artificial Intelligence, Division of Informatics
Edinburgh University, 5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK
<http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/daidb/people/homes/cam/> DoD #205
jonathan miller
> >Driving License.
>
> ... especially when you mis-spell "licence".
It's getting pretty licentious here.
(Sorry. Couldn't resist.)
Jon
jonathan miller
> My colleague and I have a dollar wager on this. The context is "Let me
> see your driver(')s license. I believe it takes no apostrophe since it
> is primarily considered to be a license for and not of drivers; she
> believes otherwise. Who's correct? This is my first time posting to
> this group, so please, go easy.
>
> Grant
I call it a check-writing license. I never need it to drive, but I have to
produce it every time I want to write a check (unless I am in my own home).
Jon
Etaoin Shrdlu
> wrote:
> >My colleague and I have a dollar wager on this. The context is "Let me
> >see your driver(')s license. I believe it takes no apostrophe since it
> >is primarily considered to be a license for and not of drivers; she
> >believes otherwise. Who's correct? This is my first time posting to
> >this group, so please, go easy.
>
> However, a cursory web search shows that "driver's license", "drivers
> license", and "driver license" are all in use, even at DMVs.
>
> Rachel
Sad, isn't it? I used to have a Greek Fishermen Cap.
--Katrina
Matt Gibson
jonatha...@nashville.com says...
> I call it a check-writing license. I never need it to drive, but I have to
> produce it every time I want to write a check (unless I am in my own home).
My curiosity's getting the better of me now. What do you do in the US if
you want to write a check[1] but you don't have a driver's license[1]?
M
[1] This article will be spelled in American for consistency!
--
"It's the gaps between the rain that count,
and learning how to live amongst them"
-- Jeff Noon, _Pixel Juice_
Matt Gibson http://www.gothick.dial.pipex.com
Fabian
> My colleague and I have a dollar wager on this. The context is "Let me
> see your driver(')s license. I believe it takes no apostrophe since it
> is primarily considered to be a license for and not of drivers; she
> believes otherwise. Who's correct? This is my first time posting to
> this group, so please, go easy.
Both wrong in my idiotlect.
"driving license".
--
---
Fabian
May this missive repay the kindness of my patrons.
May it mitigate the sufferings of the lost and the damned.
May all that read it find their hearts turned towards Truth and Honour.
and in so doing, repay me for the ardours of my labour.
Richard Fontana
> In article <37F398ED...@nashville.com>,
> jonatha...@nashville.com says...
> > I call it a check-writing license. I never need it to drive, but I have to
> > produce it every time I want to write a check (unless I am in my own home).
>
> My curiosity's getting the better of me now. What do you do in the US if
> you want to write a check[1] but you don't have a driver's license[1]?
Producing identification is never necessary to *write* a check. It is
sometimes helpful if you want to *pay* for something by check. This
only comes up in limited situations, such as when you're purchasing
something in a store (shop). There are always alternative forms of
identification which are acceptable. A passport is always just as
acceptable as a driver's license. Some states have "non-driver's ID"s,
which are forms of identification which aren't driver's licenses. If
you don't have those things, you can usually use a combination of other
types of ID; the establishment in question dictates what form of ID is
acceptable.
My sense is that this sort of thing was more of an issue in the past.
Credit cards are very easy for the average consumer to get these days,
even if the consumer has a suboptimal credit history, and nowadays
most retail establishments will accept major credit cards for payment.
There are also "debit cards", which such establishments will often accept
too. Finally, ATMs are usually easy to find, sometimes even in the store
you're in, so it's always easy to get cash if you have some in a bank
account. So I suspect that fewer people are paying for things in person by
check than was once the case.
--
Richard Fontana "You know what I like about Manhattan?
No mosquitoes." -- Frank Costanza
Jack Gavin
re...@columbia.edu (Richard Fontana) wrote:
> Matt Gibson sez:
> > In article <37F398ED...@nashville.com>,
> > jonatha...@nashville.com says...
> > > I call it a check-writing license. I never need it to drive, but
I have to
> > > produce it every time I want to write a check (unless I am in my
own home).
> >
> > My curiosity's getting the better of me now. What do you do in the
US if
> > you want to write a check[1] but you don't have a driver's
license[1]?
>
> Producing identification is never necessary to *write* a check. It is
> sometimes helpful if you want to *pay* for something by check. This
> only comes up in limited situations, such as when you're purchasing
> something in a store (shop). There are always alternative forms of
> identification which are acceptable. A passport is always just as
> acceptable as a driver's license. Some states have "non-driver's
ID"s,
> which are forms of identification which aren't driver's licenses. If
> you don't have those things, you can usually use a combination of
other
> types of ID; the establishment in question dictates what form of ID is
> acceptable.
>
in the US. This is where the non-driver ID (which typically has a
photo) is put to best use.
I don't know if airlines accept the not-yet-common photo credit cards
(which have a picture of the customer thereon). Perhaps they want
something more official, like a military/college/employee ID.
--
Jack Gavin
Gwen Lenker
Gibson) wrote:
>My curiosity's getting the better of me now. What do you do in the US if
>you want to write a check[1] but you don't have a driver's license[1]?
You get a non-driver identification card from the Department of
Motor Vehicles. Do not ask me to explain further.
Evan Kirshenbaum
> I don't know if airlines accept the not-yet-common photo credit cards
> (which have a picture of the customer thereon).
I would hope not. A friend of mine attended a security conference at
which a speaker asked whether anybody had one of the (then new) photo-
bearing credit cards. A woman volunteered hers, and he took it and
made some points about it. He then continued speaking, holding the
card in his hand. When he was done, he looked down, realized that he
still had the woman's card and handed it back to her.
It had his picture on it.
> Perhaps they want something more official, like a
> military/college/employee ID.
I'm fairly certain that they will only accept official state or
national identification cards or passports. There are, I believe,
books that describe the validation features of each of these so that
they can check the ones they're not familiar with. An employee ID or
college ID might just as well have been printed up in the bearer's
study for all they know.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |As the judge remarked the day that
1501 Page Mill Road, Building 1U | he acquitted my Aunt Hortence,
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |To be smut
|It must be ut-
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |terly without redeeming social
(650)857-7572 | importance.
| Tom Lehrer
Mike Barnes
>I don't know if airlines accept the not-yet-common photo credit cards
>something more official, like a military/college/employee ID.
I don't know that photo credit cards will ever be common. Here they're
regarded as a failed experiment. I had one, but gave it up in 1996 or
thereabouts. It was quite useful in a country such as ours where there
is no common photo ID, other than a passport which is a bit bulky to
carry around all the time. Apparently they fell out of favour because
they weren't cost-effective.
When last in the USA I was surprised to see how little effort was made
to check signatures against credit cards. I saw other cardholders often
re-pocketing their card before signing the slip, assuming that the
signature wouldn't be checked. Unless people have got a lot more
careful, I can't see the photo card being any more use there than it was
here.
furu...@ccsr.u-tokyo.ac.jp
perch...@aol.com (Perchprism) wrote:
> Ryo wrote:
[...]
> >You're right. But, although I wouldn't say that
> >"driving license" is more _correct_, I would say
[...]
> >This may be only I. But, to my mind, there is a
> >grammatical reason why "driver's license" sounds
> >strange (OK, to me). In the US, you say "my
> >driver's license" when you refer to your driving
> >license. But, this sounds as if you were talking
> >about "the license of your driver". For example,
> >"my cat's food" means "the food of my cat", not
> >"my catfood". I think that in almost all cases,
> >the construction "<qualifier(s)> <human>'s
> > <something>"
> >groups as "(<qualifier(s)> <human>)'s <something>".
> Who could tell? You're too humble. But, yes, I think
> you're right about the way subtleties can elude the
> non-native speaker.
Yes. That's the reason why in this newsgroup, I
usually indicate my language background, which may
be informative to the reader when s/he interprets
my opinion. Anyway, thank you for the compliment.
> Spoken, the difference between "driver's license"
> meaning that thing in your wallet and "driver's
> license," the license belonging to a particular
> driver, is obvious. The first is accented on the
> first syllable in "driver" and the second on the
> first syllable in "license."
Yes, I know that. (I do differentiate the two
possible meanings of "driver's license" by differently
pronouncing it exactly as you describe.)
>[...] The writer would have to have laid a false
> scent, as in "A driver's license can be revoked
> actually ambiguous, [...]
But, my point was not ambiguity. I know that accent
or context helps and so ambiguity will not be an issue
in practice.
I said that in almost all cases, I think, the
construction "<qualifier(s)> <human>'s <something>"
groups as "(<qualifier(s)> <human>)'s <something>".
This was, and is, my point. I would like to see other
counter-examples than "driver's license". Of course,
your can create a rather strained example: suppose
you've seen "Creators' Corner" in websites often
enough (and you abhor it for some reason), and then
when you come across yet another such corner, you
might say, "Ah, there's _a creators' corner_, again!"
In this case, it's _a_ creators' corner. The article
"a" modifies "corner", and "creators'" works just as
an adjective. But, I think this is a strained example.
Ryo
Perchprism
>From: furu...@ccsr.u-tokyo.ac.jp
>Date: Fri, 01 October 1999 04:43 AM EDT
>Message-id: <7t1s6m$i75$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
<sni>
>I said that in almost all cases, I think, the
>construction "<qualifier(s)> <human>'s <something>"
>groups as "(<qualifier(s)> <human>)'s <something>".
>This was, and is, my point. I would like to see other
>counter-examples than "driver's license". Of course,
>your can create a rather strained example: suppose
>you've seen "Creators' Corner" in websites often
>enough (and you abhor it for some reason), and then
>when you come across yet another such corner, you
>might say, "Ah, there's _a creators' corner_, again!"
>In this case, it's _a_ creators' corner. The article
>"a" modifies "corner", and "creators'" works just as
>an adjective. But, I think this is a strained example.
There is an apostrophe called "the greengrocer's apostrophe," as in "fresh
carrot's." Some would say that it should be spelled "greengrocers'", but let's
use "greengrocer's" for this example. We aren't talking about any particular
greengrocer, but about some iconic, representative greengrocer. The same goes
for our "driver."
Take "chef's hat," that stereotypical white tube puffed out at the top. You can
think of it as "hat of a chef." "A big chef's hat" would not be read as "a hat
of a big chef," but as "a big hat of the kind chefs wear," whereas "a big
chef's shoes," clumsy as that phrase is, would be read as "shoes belonging to a
big chef." Is this what you mean?
More:
tinker's damn ("a" tinker's damn -- "'the' tinker's damn" is practically
unusable)
housemaid's knee (This one is different in that it cannot take an article in
the sense we're looking at, as with the many other names of disorders like
"Bell's palsy" and "St. Vitus' dance." )
carpenter's apron
dog's life ("a" dog's life -- "'the' dog's life" groups as (<qualifier(s)>
<human>)'s <something>)
man's life (same as "dog" -- both of these depend heavily on context)
king's ransom ("a")
I hope I understood you this time, and I hope others can give better examples.
Richard Fontana
> When last in the USA I was surprised to see how little effort was made
> to check signatures against credit cards. I saw other cardholders often
> re-pocketing their card before signing the slip, assuming that the
> signature wouldn't be checked.
I think many stores, banks, etc., have a policy of not bothering to check
signatures if the amount of money in question is relatively small.
Richard
Bunny Moo
>Not to sound pretentious, but in the United Kingdom I think we have it
>correct:
>Driving License.
That sounds right. The USians don't have Fishermen Licenses (or Fisherman's
Licenses, or whatever). They have Fishing Licenses, Hunting Licenses, and
even Poetic Licenses, I hear.
Etaoin Shrdlu
> >>> Correct? It's only one of the differences between British English and
> >>> American English. Driver's/Driving.
> >>>
> >>Sorry, obviously Driving/Driver's.
>
> >I'm American... but I think here I'm going to have to side with the
British.
> >"Driving license" may not be more correct, but it does makes more sense.
>
> A Driving Licence is the certificate that drivers must carry to
> legitimate their driving on the public highway. A Driver's License
> consists of those little privileges granted drivers by the courts and
> police, such as not being blamed for injuring a cyclist because it was
> the cyclist's fault for being invisible. This is a useful distinction
> in British English.
Man! Here (Amsterdam, the Netherlands), any accident involving a motor
vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor vehicle, under
law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
--Katrina
Etaoin Shrdlu
jonathan miller <jonatha...@nashville.com> wrote in message
news:37F398ED...@nashville.com...
> Grant Gottschall wrote:
>
> > My colleague and I have a dollar wager on this. The context is "Let me
> > see your driver(')s license. I believe it takes no apostrophe since it
> > is primarily considered to be a license for and not of drivers; she
> > believes otherwise. Who's correct? This is my first time posting to
> > this group, so please, go easy.
> >
>
> I call it a check-writing license. I never need it to drive, but I have
to
> produce it every time I want to write a check (unless I am in my own
home).
>
How many folks on here have tried to use an expired driver's license as ID?
They won't take it., The logic that who one is has not changed simply
because the license has expired does not seeem to get through. I even made
them call a manager once, and he said, "No, an expired ID is not a valid
ID." It didn't matter that I still looked like the photo, and that was still
my name, etc. This is aparrently quite common.
--Katrina
Etaoin Shrdlu
When I worked at a pet store in the States, the manager's policy was that
when someone was writing a check, I should ask for ID (if it was not already
forthcoming) but then stop the customers before seeing it, while they were
opening their purse or wallet to get it, and tell them, "If you're willing
to show it to me, you must have one!" It had never occurred to her people
might tell their friends about this policy.
--Katrina
Etaoin Shrdlu
> carrot's."
This is perfectly true, and the above is an example of it, but I thought the
point of the greengrocer's apostrophe was to fit words onto signs, like
"tomato's" instead of "tomatoes", the ' being smaller than the e. However,
in the above example (and it's the greengrocers I'm criticizing, not the
poster) "carrot's" is definitely longer than"carrots".
--Katrina
Matti Lamprhey
news:7t2ds4$ko5$1...@news.inficad.com...
Well just to add confusion to the UK story here, what we usually call a
driving licence is issued by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. So it
would seem logical to call it a Driver Licence, even if we don't.
ObLegal: A licence is issued in respect of an activity which would
otherwise be illegal. So that would lead me to believe that "Driving
Licence" is the correct form. Do our lawyers agree with this
interpretation?
Matti
Jack Gavin
Etaoin Shrdlu wrote in message <7t4v7g$t95$3...@news1.xs4all.nl>...
>
>Man! Here (Amsterdam, the Netherlands), any accident involving a motor
>vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor vehicle,
under
>law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
>
the fault of the driver who parked the car?
--
Jack Gavin
furu...@ccsr.u-tokyo.ac.jp
perch...@aol.com (Perchprism) wrote:
> Ryo wrote:
> >From: furu...@ccsr.u-tokyo.ac.jp
> >Date: Fri, 01 October 1999 04:43 AM EDT
> >Message-id: <7t1s6m$i75$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>
> <sni>
>
> I hope I understood you this time, and I hope others can give better
> examples.
Yes, I understand now! I didn't know there are so many examples.
You enlighten me. Thank you for answering my questions!
Cheers,
Scott Robert Dawson
Punke) wrote:
>In article <7susic$35t$1...@aquila.tiscalinet.it>,
> "Antonio" <an...@tiscalinet.it> wrote:
>>
>>> Correct? It's only one of the differences between British English and
>>> American English. Driver's/Driving.
>>>
>>Sorry, obviously Driving/Driver's.
>>
>
>I'm American... but I think here I'm going to have to side with the British.
>"Driving license" may not be more correct, but it does makes more sense.
>
>After all, we don't go get fisher's licenses, do we? or hunter's licenses?
>
>Stephanie
But here in Canada at least, we do get pilots' licenses... (note
plural possesive). On the other hand, they are in the process of
introducing "boating" licenses.
-Scott
Scott Robert Dawson
wrote:
[snip]
>You both lose, if you can believe my California license: it says
>"Driver License." Other states may have other forms; you can look
>at your own license or call an office of your state DMV. But if I
>had to pick between your two spellings, I'd go for "driver's
>license."
[looks at own license]
Hmm... mine says "Permis de conduire". :)
-Scott
(Okay, it also says "Driver's license")
Scott Robert Dawson
wrote:
I'm not sure what the Ministry of Transportation here in Ontario does
in this situation... but I'm beginning to think they might as well
rename it and its counterparts to something like "the Bureau of
Identification"... :/
I believe there is an 'age of majority' ID card which can be used in
situations where you need to prove that you can legally buy alcohol
but do not have a driver's/drivers/driver/driving licence/license. But
I'm not sure whether it has any other uses, or even where to get it.
Since I have a driver's license and don't drink alcohol, I've had no
need for one.
I seem to remember going to a club once where they were checking ID at
the door, and a driver's license or age-of-majority card were the
*only* two forms of ID accepted. They would *not* accept a passport!
This was very puzzling.
-Scott
Skitt
Jack Gavin <jackgavi...@home.com> wrote in message
news:zdqJ3.3085$Di5....@news.rdc1.nj.home.com...
Is a driver, when not driving, still a driver?
--
Skitt (on Florida's Space Coast) http://i.am/skitt/
... information is gushing toward your brain like a fire hose aimed
at a teacup. -- Dogbert
John O'Flaherty
>
> Etaoin Shrdlu wrote in message <7t4v7g$t95$3...@news1.xs4all.nl>...
> >
> >Man! Here (Amsterdam, the Netherlands), any accident involving a motor
> >vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor vehicle,
> under
> >law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
> >
> So, if a car is legally parked, and a drunken bicyclist plows into it, it's
> the fault of the driver who parked the car?
This question made me wonder- is it illegal anywhere to bike drunk?
john
Evan Kirshenbaum
> This question made me wonder- is it illegal anywhere to bike drunk?
CALIFORNIA CODES
VEHICLE CODE
SECTION 21200-21212
21200. (a) Every person riding a bicycle upon a highway has all
the rights and is subject to all the provisions applicable to the
driver of a vehicle by this division, including, but not limited
to, provisions concerning driving under the influence of alcoholic
beverages or drugs, ...
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |The great thing about Microsoft
1501 Page Mill Road, Building 1U |dominating the world is that
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |there's no shortage of support
|opportunities.
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com | Sam Alvis
(650)857-7572
Charles Riggs
<ofla...@kcnet.com> wrote:
>Jack Gavin wrote:
>>
>> Etaoin Shrdlu wrote in message <7t4v7g$t95$3...@news1.xs4all.nl>...
>> >
>> >Man! Here (Amsterdam, the Netherlands), any accident involving a motor
>> >vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor vehicle,
>> under
>> >law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
>> >
>> So, if a car is legally parked, and a drunken bicyclist plows into it, it's
>> the fault of the driver who parked the car?
>
>This question made me wonder- is it illegal anywhere to bike drunk?
Yes, here in Ireland anyway, it is against the law.
Charles Riggs
Matt Gibson
>
> This question made me wonder- is it illegal anywhere to bike drunk?
Well, I don't know the exact law, but I believe it is here in the UK.
Bending the topic even further, a local guy just won his appeal after a
judge decided to take away his driving licence for several years after he
was found drunk in charge of a go-ped (motorised skateboard.)
M
ObAUE: My most hated, overused word of the 90s: synergy. Maybe I've been
working for a large corporation for too long.
Mark Brader
> Hmm... mine says "Permis de conduire". :)
That's odd -- are you also in Ontario, Scott? Mine also says "Permis
de conduire", but above that, "Driver's Licence". British spelling :-(
and both words capitalized.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto \ "*Nature*, Mr. Allnutt, is what we are put in this
msbr...@interlog.com \ world *to rise above*." -- The African Queen
My text in this article is in the public domain.
David McMurray
[...]
> ObLegal: A licence is issued in respect of an activity which would
> otherwise be illegal. So that would lead me to believe that "Driving
> Licence" is the correct form. Do our lawyers agree with this
> interpretation?
>
> Matti
You mention the activity -- driving, in this case -- in respect of which
the licence is issued but fail to mention the person -- the driver, in
this case -- to whom it is issued. I think both matter and can see no
compelling reason to prefer one over the other when choosing a title for
the licence (which is not to say that I don't have a preference).
As a matter of law, of course, the correct form is the one prescribed by
the issuer of the licence, whatever one may think of the logic of it.
--
David
Marion Gevers
>Jack Gavin wrote:
>>
>> Etaoin Shrdlu wrote in message <7t4v7g$t95$3...@news1.xs4all.nl>...
>> >
>> >Man! Here (Amsterdam, the Netherlands), any accident involving a motor
>> >vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor vehicle,
>> under
>> >law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
>> >
>> So, if a car is legally parked, and a drunken bicyclist plows into it, it's
>> the fault of the driver who parked the car?
>
Practically everywhere, I believe. Certainly there have been cyclists
around here booked for DUI.
Slightly off-topic, but I got my first traffic conviction at about
12 years old. I was riding my bicycle on the footpath - AND my
headlight wasn't working properly. (I never rode at night, so I
didn't bother replacing the battery when it went flat.)
I still get a little annoyed about the laws that say that cyclists,
regardless of age, have to take their chances in the traffic.
Especially when it's the skateboarders who are knocking over the
pedestrians.
--
Peter Moylan
Marion Gevers
>I seem to remember going to a club once where they were checking ID at
>the door, and a driver's license or age-of-majority card were the
>*only* two forms of ID accepted. They would *not* accept a passport!
>This was very puzzling.
In my experience, a passport is not an acceptable form of identification
anywhere in North America. If you don't have a driver's licence, you're
a nobody.
I once went to live in the USA for a year, and one of the first things
I wanted to do (after finding an apartment) was to get a telephone.
Sorry, man, you can't get a phone without ID. I had to go and get one
of those cards that's identical to a driver's licence in every respect
except for allowing you to drive. Even then it was touch and go.
Can't get a phone without a social security number.
That identity card ran me into trouble a month or so later. I decided
to get a driver's licence. The person testing me discovered that I was
already on their records as having a licence. Wanted to know how I had
my licence cancelled. Couldn't believe that someone my age had a
non-driver's ID card.
--
Peter Moylan
Richard Fontana
>Scott Robert Dawson <suns...@interlog.com.placeholder> a écrit:
>
>>I seem to remember going to a club once where they were checking ID at
>>the door, and a driver's license or age-of-majority card were the
>>*only* two forms of ID accepted. They would *not* accept a passport!
>>This was very puzzling.
>
>In my experience, a passport is not an acceptable form of identification
>anywhere in North America. If you don't have a driver's licence, you're
>a nobody.
I've found this to be true when dealing with Americans who don't know
what a passport is, which may possibly be a not insignificant segment of
the population. For example: I had a passport before I had a driver's
license, and I didn't get a driver's license till I was 22. When I was 21,
I was in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and attempted to enter a bar, but I was
stopped by the bar's bouncer, because I didn't have a driver's license
to prove I was 21. I offered to show him my passport, but he wouldn't
accept that. I had a number of similar experiences (involving attempted
entry into bars) when I was around that age. What is somewhat amusing
about this is that the bar owners should actually prefer customers who
don't drive, to minimize their potential liability.
Government bureaucrat or civil servant types, at the state or local as
well as federal level, tend, in my experience, to recognize the significance
of the passport.
>I once went to live in the USA for a year, and one of the first things
>I wanted to do (after finding an apartment) was to get a telephone.
>Sorry, man, you can't get a phone without ID. I had to go and get one
>of those cards that's identical to a driver's licence in every respect
>except for allowing you to drive. Even then it was touch and go.
>Can't get a phone without a social security number.
That's bizarre. I've never had to provide ID to get a phone or phone
service.
Richard
Robert Lieblich
<snip>
> I still get a little annoyed about the laws that say that cyclists,
> regardless of age, have to take their chances in the traffic.
> Especially when it's the skateboarders who are knocking over the
> pedestrians.
Come to downtown Washington, D.C., and observe the daily demolition
derby staged by the bicycle messengers. I don't recall any fatalities,
but we've had some people literally maimed for life by these guys.
Talking about "tak[ing] their chances in traffic"!
The District is trying to regulate them, but reports of success are
mixed.
Bob Lieblich
David McMurray
> Scott Robert Dawson writes:
> > Hmm... mine says "Permis de conduire". :)
> > ...
> > (Okay, it also says "Driver's license")
>
> That's odd -- are you also in Ontario, Scott? Mine also says "Permis
> de conduire", but above that, "Driver's Licence". British spelling :-(
> and both words capitalized.
How can you tell it's the British spelling? Mine also says "Driver's
Licence", but it's the Canadian spelling.
--
David
Skitt
Evan Kirshenbaum <ev...@garrett.hpl.hp.com> wrote in message
news:v9hn1u1...@garrett.hpl.hp.com...
Evan, do you remember, or are you too young, whether California used to have
an "Operators License" instead of a "Driver License"? I seem to remember
that.
Skitt
Marion Gevers <mar...@eepjm.newcastle.edu.au> wrote in message
news:7t7bpn$t4s$1...@seagoon.newcastle.edu.au...
> Slightly off-topic, but I got my first traffic conviction at about
> 12 years old. I was riding my bicycle on the footpath - AND my
> headlight wasn't working properly. (I never rode at night, so I
> didn't bother replacing the battery when it went flat.)
I see that your batteries flatten themselves, while ours just die.
Einde O'Callaghan
>
> >Not to sound pretentious, but in the United Kingdom I think we have it
> >correct:
>
> >Driving License.
>
spelt "license" (as in "licensed premises" meaning pub or bar).
eo'c
Jesse the K
> On Sat, 02 Oct 1999 23:22:03 -0500, John O'Flaherty
> <ofla...@kcnet.com> wrote:
> >This question made me wonder- is it illegal anywhere to bike drunk?
>
> Yes, here in Ireland anyway, it is against the law.
This seems massively unfair to those who have had their licen{s|c}es
revoked for driving under the influence. If you can't bike home after a
few pints, is it still legal to *walk* under the influence?
--
Jesse the K -- Madison WI USA -- <mailto:je...@mailbag.com>
Where am I going, and how did I get in this handbasket?
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Evan Kirshenbaum <ev...@garrett.hpl.hp.com> wrote in message
> news:v9hn1u1...@garrett.hpl.hp.com...
>
> Evan, do you remember, or are you too young, whether California used
> to have an "Operators License" instead of a "Driver License"? I
> seem to remember that.
I'm fairly certain (but only fairly so) that it was a "Driver License"
when I got my first California one in around 1986.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |The purpose of writing is to inflate
1501 Page Mill Road, Building 1U |weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning,
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |and inhibit clarity. With a little
|practice, writing can be an
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |intimidating and impenetrable fog!
(650)857-7572 | Calvin
Evan Kirshenbaum
> In article <37F6D9EB...@kcnet.com>, ofla...@kcnet.com says...
> >
> > This question made me wonder- is it illegal anywhere to bike drunk?
>
> Well, I don't know the exact law, but I believe it is here in the UK.
>
> Bending the topic even further, a local guy just won his appeal
> after a judge decided to take away his driving licence for several
> years after he was found drunk in charge of a go-ped (motorised
> skateboard.)
I recall a case a few years ago (I believe here in California) which
involved someone leaving a bar in a motorized wheelchair. I don't
recall the details (perhaps the straight shot required going down a
step), but the exit was such that in order to get onto the sidewalk,
he needed to go down out the driveway and up the next one. This meant
that he had to be in the street for all of about ten feet. He got a
ticket for driving while intoxicated.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Those who would give up essential
1501 Page Mill Road, Building 1U |Liberty, to purchase a little
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |temporary Safety, deserve neither
|Liberty nor Safety.
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com | Benjamin Franklin
(650)857-7572
Kai Henningsen
> ObAUE: My most hated, overused word of the 90s: synergy. Maybe I've been
> working for a large corporation for too long.
"Groupware".
Kai
--
http://www.westfalen.de/private/khms/
"... by God I *KNOW* what this network is for, and you can't have it."
- Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu)
Kai Henningsen
> I still get a little annoyed about the laws that say that cyclists,
> regardless of age, have to take their chances in the traffic.
> Especially when it's the skateboarders who are knocking over the
> pedestrians.
I don't know the exact rules (never needed them), but over here, I believe
cyclists under a certain age are _supposed_ to use the footpath.
Kai Henningsen
> Jack Gavin wrote:
> >
> > Etaoin Shrdlu wrote in message <7t4v7g$t95$3...@news1.xs4all.nl>...
> > >
> > >Man! Here (Amsterdam, the Netherlands), any accident involving a motor
> > >vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor vehicle,
> > under
> > >law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
> > >
> > So, if a car is legally parked, and a drunken bicyclist plows into it,
> > it's the fault of the driver who parked the car?
>
> This question made me wonder- is it illegal anywhere to bike drunk?
Over here in Germany, you'll lose your (car) driver's certificate
(Führerschein) if you get caught and happen to have such a thing.
Maybe I should add that a Fahrschein (which looks like a mostly-literal
translation of "driving certificate") is actually a ticket.
Kai Henningsen
> Führerschein
> As far I can tell they all say "driving", as opposed to "driver's",
> licence.
Nope, as I pointed out in another article.
Kai Henningsen
> > Mike Barnes sez:
> > > When last in the USA I was surprised to see how little effort was made
> > > to check signatures against credit cards. I saw other cardholders often
> > > re-pocketing their card before signing the slip, assuming that the
> > > signature wouldn't be checked.
>
> > I think many stores, banks, etc., have a policy of not bothering to check
> > signatures if the amount of money in question is relatively small.
> > Richard
>
> When I worked at a pet store in the States, the manager's policy was that
> when someone was writing a check, I should ask for ID (if it was not already
> forthcoming) but then stop the customers before seeing it, while they were
> opening their purse or wallet to get it, and tell them, "If you're willing
> to show it to me, you must have one!" It had never occurred to her people
> might tell their friends about this policy.
<shakes head>
Did she never see the obvious ploy of "it was in here just this morning"?
Marion Gevers
>
>Marion Gevers <mar...@eepjm.newcastle.edu.au> wrote in message
>news:7t7bpn$t4s$1...@seagoon.newcastle.edu.au...
>
>> Slightly off-topic, but I got my first traffic conviction at about
>> 12 years old. I was riding my bicycle on the footpath - AND my
>> headlight wasn't working properly. (I never rode at night, so I
>> didn't bother replacing the battery when it went flat.)
>
>I see that your batteries flatten themselves, while ours just die.
Well, it's a good deal neater. Have you noticed that cats on roads
are easier to bury when they have been properly flattened?
--
Peter Moylan
Scott Robert Dawson
wrote:
>Scott Robert Dawson writes:
>> Hmm... mine says "Permis de conduire". :)
>> ...
>> (Okay, it also says "Driver's license")
>
>That's odd -- are you also in Ontario, Scott? Mine also says "Permis
>de conduire", but above that, "Driver's Licence". British spelling :-(
>and both words capitalized.
I'm in the Toronto area.
[takes second look at ...uh, licence]
You're right! I'd gotten so used to seeing 'license' that that's what
I saw printed on mine... %?
Scott
Larry Phillips
<Bunn...@ChickMail.Com> wrote:
>
>That sounds right. The USians don't have Fishermen Licenses (or Fisherman's
>Licenses, or whatever). They have Fishing Licenses, Hunting Licenses, and
>even Poetic Licenses, I hear.
But they have pilot's licences and mechanic's Licences and chauffeur's
licenses.
Larry Phillips
(Scott Robert Dawson) wrote:
>I seem to remember going to a club once where they were checking ID at
>the door, and a driver's license or age-of-majority card were the
>*only* two forms of ID accepted. They would *not* accept a passport!
>This was very puzzling.
When I returned from Germany in 1966, I was in possession of three
pretty good pieces of identification: my International Driver's
Licence, my RCAF Driver's Licence, and my RCAF ID card. All of these
had pictures of me, and the RCAF ID had a description as well, and was
(apparently) tamper-proof.
One day I tried to write a cheque for groceries (not an excessive
amount, just a typical week's worth of food), and was told that none
of my identification was acceptable. I was also informed that an
Ontario Driver's Licence was acceptable. I had to leave the groceries
there, because the banks were closed for the weekend. We did manage to
come upwith the money, through a loan from a friend, but the
experience rattled me.
During the next week, I applied for, and was given, an Ontario
Driver's License, without a road test, on the strength of my already
having two Driver's Licences. They did not ask me for proof of
identity or proof of residence address. Imagine my surprise when I
found out that the Ontario Licence had no description or picture of
me! Quite acceptable as proof of identity, though.
a1a5...@sprint.ca
Gevers) wrote:
> Have you noticed that cats on roads
>are easier to bury when they have been properly flattened?
>
>--
>Peter Moylan
Only after folding, surely.
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>In article <3807f05b...@news1.tinet.ie>, ri...@eircom.net wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 02 Oct 1999 23:22:03 -0500, John O'Flaherty
>> <ofla...@kcnet.com> wrote:
>> >This question made me wonder- is it illegal anywhere to bike drunk?
>>
>> Yes, here in Ireland anyway, it is against the law.
>
>This seems massively unfair to those who have had their licen{s|c}es
>revoked for driving under the influence. If you can't bike home after a
>few pints, is it still legal to *walk* under the influence?
After only a few pints it's probably safe to yourself and others to
ride a bicycle but even walking when drunk can make you subject to
being arrested for drunk in public, or disorderly, or whatever. Ah,
the evils of the demon drink.
Charles Riggs
Mark Brader
> How can you tell it's the British spelling?
I recognize only two kinds of English spelling, American and British.
That's already more than enough.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Pleasant dreams!"
msbr...@interlog.com | "I'll dream of Canada." -- THE SUSPECT
Etaoin Shrdlu
> >Man! Here (Amsterdam, the Netherlands), any accident involving a motor
> >vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor vehicle,
> under
> >law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
> So, if a car is legally parked, and a drunken bicyclist plows into it,
it's
> the fault of the driver who parked the car?
> Jack Gavin
Oops... sorry. A moving motor vehicle with a driver/rider. On the other
hand, I think the law _might_ apply even if the car is stopped at a red
light and the cyclist ploughs right up behind.
--Katrina
Etaoin Shrdlu
> > >Man! Here (Amsterdam, the Netherlands), any accident involving a motor
> > >vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor vehicle,
> > under
> > >law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
> > So, if a car is legally parked, and a drunken bicyclist plows into it,
> it's
> > the fault of the driver who parked the car?
> Is a driver, when not driving, still a driver?
If he's got a license. ;-)
--Katrina
Etaoin Shrdlu
> >>> American English. Driver's/Driving.
> >>Sorry, obviously Driving/Driver's.
> >I'm American... but I think here I'm going to have to side with the
British.
> >"Driving license" may not be more correct, but it does makes more sense.
> >After all, we don't go get fisher's licenses, do we? or hunter's
licenses?
> >Stephanie
> But here in Canada at least, we do get pilots' licenses... (note
> plural possessive). On the other hand, they are in the process of
> introducing "boating" licenses.
> -Scott
Each individual pilot has a plurally possessed license?
--Katrina
Einde O'Callaghan
>
> Mark Brader <msbr...@interlog.com> wrote:
>
> > Scott Robert Dawson writes:
> > > Hmm... mine says "Permis de conduire". :)
> > > ...
> > > (Okay, it also says "Driver's license")
> >
> > That's odd -- are you also in Ontario, Scott? Mine also says "Permis
> > de conduire", but above that, "Driver's Licence". British spelling :-(
> > and both words capitalized.
>
> Licence", but it's the Canadian spelling.
>
Canadian English tends to use the AE spelling for the greatest
proportion of the words where there is a difference between BE and AE.
eo'c
jonathan miller
> How many folks on here have tried to use an expired driver's license as ID?
> They won't take it., The logic that who one is has not changed simply
> because the license has expired does not seeem to get through. I even made
> them call a manager once, and he said, "No, an expired ID is not a valid
> ID." It didn't matter that I still looked like the photo, and that was still
> my name, etc. This is aparrently quite common.
Because it's the rule. We've always done it that way.
Jon
Fabian
Jesse the K <je...@mailbag.com> wrote in message
news:jesse-03109...@msn-11-35.dial.binc.net...
> In article <3807f05b...@news1.tinet.ie>, ri...@eircom.net wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 02 Oct 1999 23:22:03 -0500, John O'Flaherty
> > <ofla...@kcnet.com> wrote:
> > >This question made me wonder- is it illegal anywhere to bike drunk?
> >
> > Yes, here in Ireland anyway, it is against the law.
>
> This seems massively unfair to those who have had their licen{s|c}es
> revoked for driving under the influence. If you can't bike home after a
> few pints, is it still legal to *walk* under the influence?
I agree. While being drunk makes you more likely to move into something
regardless of what mode of transport you use, it seem,s reasonable to
suppose that Cars may hurt the strikee more than bikes. Which presumably
hurt more than pedes.
--
---
Fabian
May this missive repay the kindness of my patrons.
May it mitigate the sufferings of the lost and the damned.
May all that read it find their hearts turned towards Truth and Honour.
and in so doing, repay me for the ardours of my labour.
Skitt
Evan Kirshenbaum <ev...@garrett.hpl.hp.com> wrote:
> "Skitt" <sk...@i.am> writes:
>
> > Evan Kirshenbaum <ev...@garrett.hpl.hp.com> wrote in message
> > news:v9hn1u1...@garrett.hpl.hp.com...
> >
> > Evan, do you remember, or are you too young, whether California used
> > to have an "Operators License" instead of a "Driver License"? I
> > seem to remember that.
>
> I'm fairly certain (but only fairly so) that it was a "Driver License"
> when I got my first California one in around 1986.
Thanks, Evan, but by the time I read this I had verified that it was
indeed called an Operator's License (I don't know if there was an
apostrophe there, or not), but that was a long time ago when the one
handed out was a flimsy photocopy, black with white letters, of the
original, which was kept by the DMV. My first one was in 1949.
I had forgotten that you are a Johnnie-come-lately in California.
--
Skitt http://i.am/skitt/
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
David McMurray
> David McMurray schrieb:
> >
> > Mark Brader <msbr...@interlog.com> wrote:
[...]
> > > [...] "Driver's Licence". British spelling :-( [...]
> > How can you tell it's the British spelling? Mine also says "Driver's
> > Licence", but it's the Canadian spelling.
> >
> What he means is that it isn't the US American spelling
I doubt it. I'm quite sure he means that it's the British spelling.
(What does "US American spelling" mean, by the way?)
> whereas
> Canadian English tends to use the AE spelling for the greatest
> proportion of the words where there is a difference between BE and AE.
Canadian English uses Canadian spelling.
If you mean that where there is a difference, Canadian spelling more
often coincides with American spelling than with British spelling, I
would be very interested in knowing your authority for this claim --
apart from anything else, I find it difficult to believe that anyone
thought it worthwhile to do the enumeration.
--
David
Brian J Goggin
Kahn) wrote:
[...]
>This isn't as far-fetched as you might think. I was waiting for a
>light in Berkeley and was rear-ended by a bicycle. Neither of us was
>cited, and I was merely relieved that the bicyclist was all right.
>But we were on a downhill slope, and she was clearly going too fast to
>stop -- and probably not paying sufficient attention.
Crashing into parked cars is something that anyone might do while
cycling --- especially if one's book is particularly interesting.
bjg
Einde O'Callaghan
>
> Jack Gavin wrote:
> >
> > Etaoin Shrdlu wrote in message <7t4v7g$t95$3...@news1.xs4all.nl>...
> > >
> > >vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor vehicle,
> > under
> > >law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
> > >
> > So, if a car is legally parked, and a drunken bicyclist plows into it, it's
> > the fault of the driver who parked the car?
>
>
are caught riding a bicycle while over ther limit. And in Ireland I've
heard of a case where a man was convicted of being drunk in charge of a
horse.
eo'c
eo'c
Evan Kirshenbaum
> In Germany you can lose your driving licence (driver's license) if you
> are caught riding a bicycle while over ther limit. And in Ireland I've
> heard of a case where a man was convicted of being drunk in charge of a
> horse.
CALIFORNIA CODES
VEHICLE CODE
SECTION 21050-21062
21050. Every person riding or driving an animal upon a highway
has all of the rights and is subject to all of the duties
applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this division and
Division 10 (commencing with Section 20000), except those
provisions which by their very nature can have no application.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Voting in the House of
1501 Page Mill Road, Building 1U |Representatives is done by means of a
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |little plastic card with a magnetic
|strip on the back--like a VISA card,
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |but with no, that is, absolutely
(650)857-7572 |*no*, spending limit.
| P.J. O'Rourke
Jesse the K
<ev...@garrett.hpl.hp.com> wrote:
[wide ranging discussion of multimodal drunkeness]
> I recall a case a few years ago (I believe here in California) which
> involved someone leaving a bar in a motorized wheelchair. I don't
> recall the details (perhaps the straight shot required going down a
> step), but the exit was such that in order to get onto the sidewalk,
> he needed to go down out the driveway and up the next one. This meant
> that he had to be in the street for all of about ten feet. He got a
> ticket for driving while intoxicated.
The ticket was thrown out. Motorized chairs are "pedestrians"; it's legal
for a ped to cross a street or even travel in the street. Many places in
US don't have sidewalks (footpaths). As far as wise: see Stephen King.
--
Jesse the K -- Madison WI USA -- <mailto:je...@mailbag.com>
Where am I going, and how did I get in this handbasket?
Jack Gavin
>
>Jack Gavin <jackgavi...@home.com> wrote in message
>news:zdqJ3.3085$Di5....@news.rdc1.nj.home.com...
>>
>> Etaoin Shrdlu wrote in message <7t4v7g$t95$3...@news1.xs4all.nl>...
>> >
>> >Man! Here (Amsterdam, the Netherlands), any accident involving a motor
>> >vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor vehicle,
>> under
>> >law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
>> >
>> So, if a car is legally parked, and a drunken bicyclist plows into it,
>it's
>> the fault of the driver who parked the car?
>
>
If the parking brake/gear/clutch fails and (because the driver forgot to
"cut" the wheels to the curb on an incline) the car rolls down the hill
into some mischief, I believe NJ law holds that the person who parked it is
still the driver.
--
Jack Gavin
Donna Richoux
> I finally looked, and my current license says "Driver License."
Since this question has come up before, and will quite likely come up
again, I wonder if someone who saves posts would be willing to take
twenty minutes and tally up the reports? It's only been five days.
Driver License
Driver's License
Drivers' License
Driving License
and Licence, and whatever else.
A bit of geographical distribution would be nice. Then we can tuck the
summary into Bob C's Supplement and get on with those lives that
everyone is always telling us to get.
Best --- Donna Richoux
Skitt
How would they know who parked the car? The person ticketed will have
to be the registered owner, whether he parked it there or not. (Yes, it
is possible to own a car, but not have driving privileges.)
Parking tickets are always issued to the registered owner, no matter who
parked the car.
Evan Kirshenbaum
I've seen books which have pictures of Driver's Licenses and other IDs
from every state (and, I believe, each Canadian Province and perhaps a
few others) used by bars and others to verify that the out-of-state
license that's being proffered as proof of age is a real ID. If
anybody has access to one of these, it would be a simple matter to
tally them up. This would give the distribution for at least the US.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Its like grasping the difference
1501 Page Mill Road, Building 1U |between what one usually considers
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |a 'difficult' problem, and what
|*is* a difficult problem. The day
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |one understands *why* counting all
(650)857-7572 |the molecules in the Universe isn't
|difficult...there's the leap.
| Tina Marie Holmboe
Richard Fontana
>tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) writes:
>
>> Mimi Kahn <nj...@spamfree.cornell.edu> wrote:
>>
>> > I finally looked, and my current license says "Driver License."
>>
>> Since this question has come up before, and will quite likely come up
>> again, I wonder if someone who saves posts would be willing to take
>> twenty minutes and tally up the reports? It's only been five days.
>>
>> Driver License
>> Driver's License
>> Drivers' License
>> Driving License
>> and Licence, and whatever else.
>>
>> A bit of geographical distribution would be nice. Then we can tuck
>> the summary into Bob C's Supplement and get on with those lives that
>> everyone is always telling us to get.
>
>I've seen books which have pictures of Driver's Licenses and other IDs
>from every state (and, I believe, each Canadian Province and perhaps a
>few others) used by bars and others to verify that the out-of-state
>license that's being proffered as proof of age is a real ID. If
>anybody has access to one of these, it would be a simple matter to
>tally them up. This would give the distribution for at least the US.
It's unclear what it would show, though, other than the preferences
of state DMVs. I checked out the situation in New York state; their
drivers' licenses say "Driver License" on them, but the legislation
dealing with such licenses calls them "Driver's Licenses".
Richard
John O'Flaherty
>
> Einde O'Callaghan <einde.oc...@planet-interkom.de> wrote:
>
> > David McMurray schrieb:
> > >
> > > Mark Brader <msbr...@interlog.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > > [...] "Driver's Licence". British spelling :-( [...]
>
> > > How can you tell it's the British spelling? Mine also says "Driver's
> > > Licence", but it's the Canadian spelling.
> > >
> > What he means is that it isn't the US American spelling
>
> I doubt it. I'm quite sure he means that it's the British spelling.
> (What does "US American spelling" mean, by the way?)
The way us americans spell it.
john
Etaoin Shrdlu
> >> >Man! Here (Amsterdam, the Netherlands), any accident involving a motor
> >> >vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor vehicle,
> >> under
> >> >law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
> >> >
> >> So, if a car is legally parked, and a drunken bicyclist plows into it,
it's
> >> the fault of the driver who parked the car?
> >
>
> around here booked for DUI.
>
> Slightly off-topic, but I got my first traffic conviction at about
> 12 years old. I was riding my bicycle on the footpath - AND my
> headlight wasn't working properly. (I never rode at night, so I
> didn't bother replacing the battery when it went flat.)
>
> regardless of age, have to take their chances in the traffic.
> Especially when it's the skateboarders who are knocking over the
> pedestrians.
Here they are building more and more separate bike lanes set apart from the
main street by a line of trees, but meanwhile there are very few roads
without bike lanes and the traffic has to respect the cyclists anywhere, as
mentioned above. This is due to there being millions and millions of
cyclists on the roads at any given moment, many of them listening to a
walkman while carrying a ladder under one arm and rolling a cigarette with
the other hand, while the bike sports at least one small child. Small
children on their own abound, as well; I saw a three-or-four-year-old cut
off a tram the other day. Not that I'd recommend doing that.
--Katrina
Etaoin Shrdlu
> > When I worked at a pet store in the States, the manager's policy was
that
> > when someone was writing a check, I should ask for ID (if it was not
already
> > forthcoming) but then stop the customers before seeing it, while they
were
> > opening their purse or wallet to get it, and tell them, "If you're
willing
> > to show it to me, you must have one!" It had never occurred to her
people
> > might tell their friends about this policy.
> <shakes head>
> Did she never see the obvious ploy of "it was in here just this morning"?
> Kai
Apparently not. On the other hand, she _was_ a complete (and dangerous)
idiot. One day I asked her why one of the very small kittens she'd found
dumped in the alley didn't have any food. She said it was because it was too
young to handle the dry and had turned down the wet, so there was nothing
she could do. She also said she'd washed the kittens outside in cold water.
I took the kitten and quit, and turned the shop in to the animal protection
people.
--Katrina
Etaoin Shrdlu
> >Oops... sorry. A moving motor vehicle with a driver/rider. On the other
> >hand, I think the law _might_ apply even if the car is stopped at a red
> >light and the cyclist ploughs right up behind.
> >--Katrina
>
> light in Berkeley and was rear-ended by a bicycle. Neither of us was
> cited, and I was merely relieved that the bicyclist was all right.
> But we were on a downhill slope, and she was clearly going too fast to
> stop -- and probably not paying sufficient attention.
Oh, it's not far-fetched at all (except that "downhill" is an alien concept
here)! I'm in Amsterdam! We get cycle pile-ups, bikes plunging into canals,
bikes crashing into parked moving vans (that's vans you use to move house
with, not vans which are both parked and moving), you name it! We also get
tourists who think they're at a theme park and wander along the bicycle
lanes, who turn around and yell "Ding! Ding! Ding!" if you ring your bell,
but that's usually only downtown.
--Katrina
Bob Cunningham
said:
>Evan Kirshenbaum sez:
[ . . . ]
>>I've seen books which have pictures of Driver's Licenses and other IDs
>>from every state (and, I believe, each Canadian Province and perhaps a
>>few others) used by bars and others to verify that the out-of-state
>>license that's being proffered as proof of age is a real ID. If
>>anybody has access to one of these, it would be a simple matter to
>>tally them up. This would give the distribution for at least the US.
>It's unclear what it would show, though, other than the preferences
>of state DMVs. I checked out the situation in New York state; their
>drivers' licenses say "Driver License" on them, but the legislation
>dealing with such licenses calls them "Driver's Licenses".
Good point. California, for one, has 'Driver License' on the license
itself, but uses 'driver's license' every place I've looked in the
_State of California 1997 Vehicle Code_.
Ross Howard
<malgran...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>California, for one, has 'Driver License' on the license
>itself, but uses 'driver's license' every place I've looked in the
>_State of California 1997 Vehicle Code_.
This suggests wonderful potential for a 17-year-long class-action case
ending up with the Supreme Court, with 2,751 Californians fined for
having an out-of-date "Driver's Licence", according to the indictment
(or whatever you call the summons for a traffic violation), claiming
that no Californian can possibly have a valid, since such a document
does not exist.
Ross Howard
Etaoin Shrdlu
Brian J Goggin <b...@wordwrights.ie> wrote in message
news:SBj5N5BDn2fwB3IMGQcpZ=iDq...@4ax.com...
> >light in Berkeley and was rear-ended by a bicycle. Neither of us was
> >cited, and I was merely relieved that the bicyclist was all right.
> >But we were on a downhill slope, and she was clearly going too fast to
> >stop -- and probably not paying sufficient attention.
>
> cycling --- especially if one's book is particularly interesting.
>
> bjg
>
True--that's why I limit my moving-around-the-city book reading to while I'm
walking. It's tempting to crack open a novel on my bike, but too dangerous.
--Katrina
Jack Gavin
Skitt wrote in message <7tdbc6$7gn$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <mJdK3.5200$Di5....@news.rdc1.nj.home.com>,
> "Jack Gavin" <jackgavi...@home.com> wrote:
>> Skitt wrote in message <7t5km6$ptg$1...@ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>> >
>> >Jack Gavin <jackgavi...@home.com> wrote in message
>> >news:zdqJ3.3085$Di5....@news.rdc1.nj.home.com...
>> >>
>> >> Etaoin Shrdlu wrote in message <7t4v7g$t95$3...@news1.xs4all.nl>...
>> >> >
>motor
>> >> >vehicle and a bicycle is automatically the fault of the motor
>vehicle,
>> >> under
>> >> >law, no matter how many witnesses say otherwise.
>> >> >
>> >> So, if a car is legally parked, and a drunken bicyclist plows into
>it,
>> >it's
>> >> the fault of the driver who parked the car?
>> >
>> >
>> For some purposes, yes.
>>
>> If the parking brake/gear/clutch fails and (because the driver forgot
>to
>> "cut" the wheels to the curb on an incline) the car rolls down the
>hill
>> into some mischief, I believe NJ law holds that the person who parked
>it is
>> still the driver.
<NJ Statute>
39:4-137. Vehicle without driver; brakes set; motor stopped; wheels
turned to curb
No person having control or charge of a motor vehicle shall allow it to
stand on a highway unattended without first effectively setting the brakes
thereon and stopping the motor thereof, and, when standing on a grade,
without turning the wheels thereof to the curb or side of the highway.
</NJ Statute>
Not quite "still the driver", I'll grant.
>
>How would they know who parked the car?
If it had done something decidely untoward, like run over somebody, I
suppose the police might try to get fingerprints from the steering wheel.
>The person ticketed will have
>to be the registered owner, whether he parked it there or not. (Yes, it
>is possible to own a car, but not have driving privileges.)
>
>Parking tickets are always issued to the registered owner, no matter who
>parked the car.
Yes, but the owner can (theoretically) turn around and sue the operator for
reimbursement. (39:4-139.5)
--
Jack Gavin
a1a5...@sprint.ca
wrote:
Man. did you ever miss your vocation!