• The California Department of Motor Vehicles
• Age discrimination and car rentals
• Driving on Interstate 280, 680, and California Highway 101
• Marital and Associative Disclaimer

The Woes of the California Department of Motor Vehicles

How maddening!

When you move to California, you must get a new driver's license within 10 days of arrival in the great Golden State. In other states, this is relatively easily accomplished. For instance, when I moved to Utah, I took the written test. The driving examination was waived, since I had a valid Alaska license that I was willing to trade in on a Utah license. I had to take an eye test. I had to have my picture taken in a room full of stinky high school kids. After that, I waited approximately 10-15 minutes while my picture and license were laminated, and I was out the door, a legal Utah driver. Fairly painless, other than having to put up with the ill-educated rednecks occupying the waiting room, but that is another rant altogether.

I moved to California. I went down to the DMV and tried to get a license. So far so good. I took the written test, and turned it in. NOW comes the good part. I was asked to show PROOF of birth. In other words, my birth certificate. Standing in front of the DMV guy with a valid Utah license apparently had NO bearing on whether or not I was born. Luckily, I actually WAS born, and so there were records of my birth. These were easily obtained through the Alaska Department of Vital Statistics.

The next trip that I took to the California DMV, proved interesting yet again. This time, I was prepared with my birth certificate, so I got one step farther. Then they asked me to surrender my Utah driver's license. This in and of itself is not unusual, nor unreasonable. However, when you couple it with the rest, it rapidly crosses the line. The catch is... you do not get to walk out with a license the same day. You must wait for your license to be mailed to you from the state capitol, Sacramento. This is supposed to take approximately 6 weeks.

To allow you to drive while you have no license, the state has made 'temporary licenses,' which allow you to drive your car until you actually receive the mailing from Sacramento. This temporary license does not work as a form of identification. If you go to a bank and try to utilize it to access your checking account, you will be quickly escorted to the nearest exit. If you need to write a check at a store, or use credit cards sometimes, you will not be allowed to. If you need to fly anywhere, forget it. FAA regulations require that you show picture identification before boarding any domestic or international flight. Good luck doing it with a pictureless California Temporary Driver's License. How about getting a new job? Usually an employer needs to make a photocopy of your driver's license to prove US citizenship. Good luck doing that with the fake-o driving paper.

Now for those of you thinking you can just beat the system, and tell the person at the DMV that you 'lost' your out of state license. I have been advised by DMV officials in 2 states, that this is a felony, and can lead to criminal prosecution.

The other way to do things, is to go to the DMV and get a state ID card. After you recieve this (again, 6 weeks), you can go get a license with your picture on it. This process takes a total of 12 weeks to accomplish. So much for getting a California driver's license within 10 days eh?

I have come to realize now, exactly how much our identity in society is dependent upon having a picture identification. If you don't have a picture ID, you somehow cease to exist. Sounds like a familiar episode of the Twilight Zone eh?

So I ask you, on your way to move to California... Can you afford to take 6 weeks out of your life, while you temporarily cease to exist?

Automotive Reverse Age Discrimination

Have you noticed that in the United States, there is a very big movement to abolish ALMOST all forms of discrimination?

I say almost because there are still some places that discrimination is still alive and well. I am not going to get into racial discrimination or even discrimination based on gender, since those are essays in and of themselves. The type of discrimination that I would like to confront here is one which seems to be completely sanctioned by Corporate America, and the public in general. This type is age discrimination against YOUNG people.

I would submit that this type of discrimination is alive and well based on the fact that I can't rent a car from any major car rental agency at any major airport in the US. This seems to have nothing to do with any kind of documentation other than the age on my drivers license (under 25). I can submit proof of insurance, driving record, and substantially greater income than the national average. None of this matters though. I can't rent a car. I can't even rent the car if I go on a trip for a company, and the company rents the car for me. This limits me to not being able to have jobs that require me to have to travel and transport myself. In my line of work, it is not uncommon at all to have this business need.

I have been informed that the reason for this discrimination is not one based on reliability or anything like that, but just that the rental companies are getting cheaper car insurance rates for not allowing anyone in the under 25 age group drive their vehicles. I would submit however, that if I started a car rental company of my own, and refused to rent to people over 65, because I had my insurance set up to give me cheaper rates as a result, that I would be immediately sued from several different directions at once for age discrimination.

I guess my point, is that I see a lot of bad drivers, and the only category that I can fit 100% of them into, is HUMAN BEINGS. I don't see ANY rental companies refusing to rent to humans, because they are bad drivers. Is this right?

I don't think so.

This is mostly designed for the drivers on Interstate 280 and 680, as well as California 101. However, the thoughts presented tend to be somewhat universal in their geography, so read on.

When I am driving, I tend to go by the same rule of thumb as the DMV...

That means that for every 10 M.P.H. (Miles Per Hour for those of you that had to take the driving test with pictures and not words...), I follow one car length behind the car in front of me.

That means that if I am going 60 M.P.H. (See above), I will leave 6 car lengths between myself and the next car in front of me.

SOME of you, and you KNOW who you are (may the bagpipers of hell be your next door neighbors), feel obligated to show how much of a hurry you are in by ducking into my little safety area between the cars, usually in front of me.

Contrary to your belief, I did NOT leave those 6 car lengths there for YOU. You may think that where you are going is more important than where I am going, and I think you do, based on the fact that it seems important enough for you to die for... but I think that maybe it is not as imperative as you seem to think it is.

For those of you who are busy scoffing at this little editorial right now, I just have one question: