Flintstones-style pedal car gets its day in court
Lars Haeh says
The pedal powered Flintstones car covered earlier on boingboing makes its way to court in Toronto today. Their lawyer, from the legal department of the Canadian Automobile Association thinks they will win. The highway traffic act does not categorize vehicles powered by muscle, friction drive, or wind as being "motor vehicles" for the purposes of the law.LinkPeople can see the trial at old city hall courthouse, in courtroom "R" at 3:00PM today.
the latest
latest episodes
It's perfectly legal as a pedal-powered art car, but is prone to hassles because the cops don't want to get into trouble when the art car smashes somebody. It's like how cops can arrest you if you carry a small bag of flour during a party.
Can't say the cops are lame or something, they are just doing their job. A necessary evil, and it can prove the legal system is at work, I would say.
The problem is much of the cars legally required safety features may have been stripped out to save weight. The car would have to pass whatever passes for a vehicle safety inspection in Canada.
I know one thing, I wouldn't want to get sideswiped by an 18-wheeler in that.
here's a better example of government stupidity in Canada
http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/editorial/story.html?id=a0a02732-a45a-4f7f-ab35-61ab0becb93d
And yet, the people on normal bicycles are allowed to roam free.
Honestly, there's no way this thing is less safe then a normal bike.
The question is, is it a car? or is it a 4 person bike with a metal thing around its passengers? Can you call it a car because it looks like a car, but has no other features or characteristics of a car? Why can't you call it a multi-person bike just because it looks like a car?
They have 4 person bikes you can ride that has its passengers sitting in the same orientation.
The real problem is that it takes up significant space on a road for automobiles and disrupts traffic where an accident can happen.
None the less it's still a real cool attempt to test those sort of boundaries.
@4: It's not like regular bicyclists have to follow special rules while on the road in order to help protect them from other motorists, let alone not being in the middle of the road with quicker traffic. Oh, wait ...
I'm not certain whether or not the guy broke any laws, but outside of his artistic purpose, he's just another guy on the road making life painful for the rest of us, similar to the 'ultramilers' who drive extremely unsafely to improve their MPG.
Contrary to what the cop said when he pulled them over, he would not be responsible if he, "let it go and it got into a wreck." Even if the car actually was unsafe, the cop is protected from civil and criminal prosecution as long as he is acting within his discretion. That the Montreal police let them go strongly suggests that an ordinary cop would not consider it an abuse of their discretion to deem it safe.
The safety factor is .... unsafe!
"the safety factor is .... unsafe"
Wow, sums up the police perspective well. I wonder if they'd get hassled if it has been just a polished aluminium car-shaped frame around essentially a four-person tandem bike. Which might have merit either way as we move into a fuel-free society...
From the link:
UPDATE: A judge has just found Michel de Broin not guilty of operating an unsafe vehicle. Keep watching here for more.
no matter how big it is, it is human powered. In other words, mass does not make it dangerous without speed, which is the definition of a motorized vehicle capable of causing damage. With a speed of 5 MPH or less it is incapable of causing damage to anything else allowed on the road (Check physics tables)unless it is made of paper. Also since it is not motorized, it does not need license plates. No definition of what is legal on road, be it two wheeled, three wheeled, or ten wheeled.
If there's ever a funeral procession held for the eventual death of the petrol-powered vehicle, I vote this to lead the procession. The hulking shell of a classic gas-guzzler slowly and solemnly drifting past, silent save for the squeaking noise of frantic pedalling. Poignant, ridiculous and comical: an absolutely fitting tribute.
what an image! brillant! Better than a Hoover Buggy.
Someday cars may be just things made of taffeta that groups of revelers wear on Chinese New Year.
I usually come down pretty hard on cops, but I actually think these two did the right thing. It was obstructing traffic, and was unsafe. Not as in, it could hit someone, but as in it was moving so slowly that it was likely to be hit, and that would be extremely unsafe for the bike-car passengers.
Of course he wouldn't be LEGALLY responsible if there was an accident after he let them go, but I can imagine his superiors would give him an earful. He wasn't rude or abusive; he just got an obstruction out of traffic.
I'm also glad the charges were dropped. The cop was just being prudent.
OK, how about the same motive force rig,but a water fog generator and holographic projector creating the image of a rusty, four door piece of Detroit crap?
I can't believe no one pointed out that the Flintsone's car was not pedal powered but was powered by the occupants feet directly on the ground. Sort of like walking only with a big stone car along for the ride.
was wondering about that
The highpoint of the video for me was when the gang of bicycle pedaling cops cruised by and stopped. They were clearly conflicted...
Results of this trial are now IN. Summary: Prosecutor laughed out of Court, case DISMISSED!
see:
http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/410165