(Brent P) wrote in
:

> In article >, Jim Yanik
> wrote:
>
>> But the license "renewal fee" IS a user fee,it gives you license to
>> USE the roads;no pay,no use.
>
> Just produce the IL law that says so.

More dishonesty;you KNOW that even in IL,if your plates are expired,you can
be ticketed and that's it's illegal to drive that vehicle,and that
unregistered autos cannot legally be driven on public rodas.

>
>> So what? why does it HAVE to "cover" unlimited usage?
>
> If it's a user fee, then it should.

"should";that's your opinion.Doesn't mean squat.

> Otherwise taxes are coming from
> somewhere else to pay for the roads too.
>
>>> And cig taxes aren't user taxes for anything.
>
>> But I have not claimed that cig taxes are user fees.
>> I merely said that the sticker on the packs is a tax stamp.
>
> Then it's an irrelevant example.

Only to you,blind to apparently everything.
>
>>> The obvious is your being picky with tax labels for bicycling and
>>> not being so with autos.
>
>> You appear to tbe the "picky" one about labels.
>> I'm flexible enough to understand what is actually a user fee and
>> what's not.And honest enough about it.
>
> This all started because you don't like bicycling being more than
> covered by various non-automotive sources of tax revenue that go to
> roads. You bitched there wasn't a specific 'bicycle user fee'. Yet
> there is no specific 'automotive user fee' either.

Sure there is,I've been telling you about it for a while,now.
You pay it every year.
It's not my fault you cannot(will not) recognize it for what it is.(because
it would prove my point about bicycles not paying any user fees;the sole
reason you persist,IMO.)
>
>>>> License plate fees ARE a "user fee";for the *license to USE* the
>>>> vehicle on public roads.(state permission)
>>>
>>> Not that I have seen in the law.
>>
>> You just refuse to see.(actually refuse to admit,I know you
>> understand)
>
> Show me the relevant law.
>
>>>> I suspect that if this were not part of the argument about
>>>> licensing bicycles for road use,you'd have admitted it to be a user
>>>> fee long ago.
>
>>> It's not a user fee in IL. I've had a car ticketed that was parked
>>> on private property for expired registration. It never left the
>>> property.
>
>> Due to LOCAL laws about junk or abandoned cars that are not
>> garaged,but left outside.
>
> Not what it was ticketed for. Car appeared perfectly functional and
> was.

That doesn't matter.Many locales require that any motor vehicle with
expired or no plates be garaged,to prevent junkers and abandoned vehicles
from littering the neighborhoods.Some locales will even tow them at your
expense,right off your "private" property.

>
>>> Bogus ticket, because the law doesn't require it, but the cops
>>> certainly don't share your interpetation of it as just a 'user fee'.
>
>



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net