This is not as silly as it sounds. The accessible rule means that you can’t have a center console in between driver and passenger. That’s in case the as yet unlicensed driver is about to do something to endanger someone and the testing inspector or driving instructor needs to prevent this. I believe this rule is in effect when you are on your learner’s permit, too.
The provide-your-own-car rule is not that silly. Look, the learner’s permit allows you to drive if you have someone in the car with you that is teaching you. Otherwise, how would you practice? Presumably that person, whether it’s a friend, relative or paid professional, has obtained a vehicle for that purpose. So one day instead of taking you out to teach you more driving skills he or she takes you to the DMV office, where a DMV person gets in the car while the instructor waits. Where’s the problem?
If you have no friends, no family, and no money to pay a driving instructor, you have greater problems than transportation, IMHO.
The answer has been provided here, and skipped over. If there was really a lot instances of this, the driving schools and car rental places would provide a car and a licensed driver to accompany you to the test for a price. In almost all cases, it’s not a problem, of course, so no market has developed for this solution. As pointed out by Mike H’s experience, if you actually take a course with a driving instructor, you can probably use their car for the test, accompanied by the instructor.
A variant of this was commonplace in high schools when I learned to drive. The insurance companies gave reductions if a teenage driver had completed driver’s ed, so almost every kid took it. The high school driver’s ed course included the teacher accompanying you to the test, and taking the test in the school car. In fact, the teacher generally spent your last couple of sessions driving around the course the cop was probably going to take you through.
BTW, I’m not suggesting that “driving instructor” = “solution”. I should have made it clearer that those remarks were an aside. My point was simply that if there were a lot of instances of the problem, somebody would be marketing a service to fix it.
I wish people were required to take their driving test in random cars. You show up without knowing if you’ll be driving a Mini Cooper or a giant SUV or a wobbling mini van. Better test. Like with an oral where you don’t know exactly which subject they’ll throw at you.
At least in Maryland it is impossible to obtain a drivers permit without a licensed driver with you. They have you drive around and check your companion to assure that they have a valid license. If you said mom is in the bathroom they would not allow you to begin the test, and would not even let you drive away. You would be screwed big time.
Here’s a big surprise: You don’t need a license to drive a car. Every citizen has the right to travel and transport his property on public roads. You only need the license to conduct a business on the road. So you are within your rights to drive to the exam. (Don’t expect the authorities to admit any such thing. They have jobs to protect.)
Here’s a bigger surprise: That is not the law in Indiana.
And
Note that nowhere in the law does it state anything about “conduct business” or words to that effect. Congressional regulation of “interstate commerce” is immaterial, since the Constitution states:
Licensure of drivers is one of these “powers”.
The Congress, therefore, has no right to interfere with the practice of state driver’s licenses, since it is only empowered to regulate commerce “among the states”, not commerce and travel within a state.
An argument might be possible that a purely interstate concern could get away with non-licensure of drivers might be raised–but in that case, an equally as strong case in favor of Federal licensure of such drivers (with all that would entail) could be made.
Your scofflaw claims have no basis, whatsoever, in fact.
Jeff, please be careful, this is not the forum for insults. There’s no evidence of trolling here, and in fact the Moderator has independent evidence of non-trolling. Perhaps the poster is a bit too gullible. But even if there were evidence of trolling, it should be reported to a moderator rather than commented on publicly in this forum, please. Thanks.
Here’s a big surprise: You don’t need a license to drive a car. Every citizen has the right to travel and transport his property on public roads. You only need the license to conduct a business on the road. So you are within your rights to drive to the exam. (Don’t expect the authorities to admit any such thing. They have jobs to protect.)
I don’t know where exactly you got this impression, but I’m assuming you’re in the US (since people outside this country generally don’t assume they have the right to do things just because there are no signs saying they can’t)… the suggestion that every citizen has the right to travel and transport his property on public roads is entirely true- on foot or by horse. Nowhere in the Constitution or assorted Amendments does it suggest that operation of a motor vehicle is a right reserved for the people… and I have yet to see or hear of a court that has suggested that the right to drive unlicensed comes along with the Ninth Amendment.
In any case, outside of Montana and Wyoming (and possibly the Dakotas), there are invariably laws which preclude an unlicensed driver from operating anything larger than a bicycle.
On to my real point… I have a better Catch-22, courtesy of my roommate…
Here in Florida, we have what are called ‘Bright Futures Scholarships’, which are basically guaranteed to anyone who graduates high school (in other words anyone who shows up more than half the time over a four year period)… easy to get, hard to keep… the reason they’re so easy to get is because everyone loses them during the first year of college, once they discover beer. My roommate did just that, and without the scholarship he can’t afford to pay his tuition. To get the scholarship back, he needed to improve his grades… but he wasn’t getting any grades, because, of course, he couldn’t pay for school anymore. He tried to get student loans… however, by the time he found out he’d lost his scholarship it was too late to apply for that year. So, he took the term off, and tried to apply for a loan when next term rolled around. He was turned down, because… he hadn’t completed enough school the previous term. In the end he found a rich girlfriend and she and lent him a big heap of cash, but an uglier man would have been screwed…
Actually, there are exceptions where people without licenses can operate motorized vehicles larger than bicycles. Most (possibly all) states do not regulate operation of farm equipment. That’s why you may have heard a story recently about a very elderly man who no longer had a driver’s license using his riding lawnmower to drive cross-country to visit his brother. Riding lawnmowers are considered tractors, and tractor operation isn’t usually regulated very much. It’s also common practise to allow underage people to drive regular vehicles (pickup trucks, cars, etc) on private property – and again, the exception to the law is mostly thinking about farming.
I’m pretty sure that we have those laws here, too. Certainly, we have a DMV, and the paper-shufflers at the University were very surprised to find that I didn’t have a license (nor a car).