I’ve just been digging in the US Library of Congress and came across something that kind of put a cap on the discussion of whether a Unicycle is a Vehicle, in the US anyway.
This is from US Code 1 sometimes referred to as the “Dictionary Act” as it defines the meaning of words used in all US Law.
United States Code
TITLE 1–GENERAL PROVISIONS
CHAPTER 1--RULES OF CONSTRUCTION
Sec. 4. ‘‘Vehicle’’ as including all means of land
transportation
The word ''vehicle'' includes every description of carriage or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on land.
(July 30, 1947, ch. 388, 61 Stat. 633.)
So if your in the US, any law that relates to vehicles also relates to Unicycles unless the law states otherwise.
The reason I was researching this act was the I was reading a news article on the “Shoe Bomber” having been let of one of the many charges he’s being prosecuted with. The Judge has ruled that since an aircraft doesn’t travel by land is can’t therefore be a vehicle as defined by the Dictionary Act. Some judge this guy is!
So if faced with this judge, if you only ever bunny hopped could you persuade him that your uni wasn’t covered under the Dictionary Act since it spends most of it’s time in the air?
In article <Noel.Holland.64vea@timelimit.unicyclist.com>,
Noel.Holland <Noel.Holland.64vea@timelimit.unicyclist.com> wrote:
)
)I’ve just been digging in the US Library of Congress and came across
)something that kind of put a cap on the discussion of whether a Unicycle
)is a Vehicle, in the US anyway.
)
)This is from US Code 1 sometimes referred to as the “Dictionary Act” as
)it defines the meaning of words used in all US Law.
Unless defined differently elsewhere. The California Vehicle Code, and
I believe the Uniform Vehicle Code, have this to say:
A “vehicle” is a device by which any person or property may be
propelled, moved, or drawn upon a highway, excepting a device moved
exclusively by human power or used exclusively upon stationary rails
or tracks.
So a unicycle is clearly not a vehicle in California. This is true of
many other states as well.
-Tom
OK, so if that’s the case then in California neither a Train or a Tram would be a vehicle either as they are on “stationary rails or tracks” which would mean that the only form of Mass Transport Vehicles in California are Buses. So under the recent Patriot Act, California would see it as OK to blow up or threaten to blow up a plane, train, tram, ferry but if you touch a bus they’ve got you banged to rights? I think they’ve been watching too many Keanu Reeves movies.
Who has priority, Federal or State Law? Does a state have the right to enact a law which conflicts with a Federal Law?
I’d say that things in the UK are simpler as only Parliment can pass laws but that isn’t true. Our District Council Acts would be equivalent to your State Laws and they and Town Councils have a long history of passing contradictory and just plain daft laws like “though shall not kiss a pig on a Friday”.
And why is that all the really daft laws involve farm animals no matter which country your in?