[btilly]

Unsurprising verdict.

However the judge's reasoning is very weak.

I frequently drive in the carpool with one or more children who cannot drive in the car. By the judge's reasoning, this should not be allowed because our driving together does nothing to relieve congestion. Why not? Because I'm the only person present who is legally allowed to drive, so we'd be in one car regardless of the availability of the carpool lane.

If this was indeed the reasoning, I hope that this argument is made in the appeal.

[pinko]

Actually, insofar as the goal is to reduce cars on the road, it seems entirely sensible to me to exclude children -- or anyone without a drivers license -- from counting towards the passenger threshold.

I'd be all for having to produce N valid licenses in the car to avoid the ticket, rather than N human bodies. (That also neatly sidesteps the issue of corporate personhood.)

[ghshephard]

Should Taxi's be allowed to drive in the Carpool lane with a single passenger? Here, we have a situation in which the driver wouldn't normally be on the road.

[seanmcdirmid]

Relying on a taxi DOES reduce congestion: think about it, I could have chosen to rent a car at the airport and drive for my entire trip, but instead, I took a taxi to my hotel and walked/used transit a lot. Or...I could have bought a car, use that a lot, but instead I decide I only need such a luxury infrequently, and decide to rely on taxis occasionally.

Regardless, I live in a heavy taxi city and there is no such thing as a carpool lane (nor would it be very useful since most cars would have at least 2 passengers).

[marshray]

What if the passengers decline to produce drivers' licenses?

Should the driver be guilty of violating the carpool lane if it turns out one of the passengers had a suspended license or were uninsured?

What about a passenger who is validly licensed yet legally drunk? They couldn't legally drive a car.

What about passengers with valid licenses who have no car? What if they have a working car but its tank is empty and they have no money to buy gas. They're not reducing congestion either.

[pinko]

I don't really care; if we were writing the law we'd figure out a reasonable but inevitably imperfect policy for each question. The point isn't to get every possible situation right. It's to come up with the best-bang-for-your-social-buck heuristic.

[marshray]

I think whether or not passengers in a car pulled over for "driving in an HOV lane with suspected unlicensed passengers" are required to produce valid drivers licenses on demand is pretty important.

[btilly]

I would not disagree, except that there is the small detail that there actually is legal precedent on this one. A pregnant woman counts as one, a mother with a small baby, 2.

So this judge's line of reasoning flies in the face of existing precedent, and I wouldn't be surprised if a clever lawyer could make some hay out of that fact.

[frozenport]

This also relieves bus congestion which includes people who don't have licenses. Perhaps they should be burdened to show that they are maximizing the general vehicle occupancy, and thus kids count as passengers.

[logn]

All unlicensed passengers would create more traffic by taking a taxi alone. I think the only ones not allowed in the carpool lane should be a taxi with one passenger (of course, in addition to the lone drivers).

However, you could extend the logic further by saying that a lone taxi driver looking for a better fare causing a second taxi to pick up the unlicensed driver causes more traffic than a taxi with one passenger. So I've neatly saved the current carpool lane rules.

[gte910h]

You want to keep taxi's allowed to use the lanes because then taxis are as fast as renting a car, or owning a car, so you you do not do the above behaviors.

If getting to the airport took 2x as long in a taxi, few would use that.

[crazygringo]

Not entirely. If you're taking two children, then it's better than two adults driving the children individually. But if it's only one child, there's no alternative.

[fleitz]

Well in that case it could be argued that roads would be less congested than the corporation hiring a courier, taxicab, lawyer, etc to transport itself.

[fulafel]

I'm not from the US but doesn't the "carpool" term imply exactly this definition - people who would otherwise driving in separate cars.