[Bruce Parker (RIP)]

Come to think of it, the definition of "historic military vehicle" in this Kansas 2805 Bill is full of holes. The vehicle must be manufactured for use in the US military, but also must maintain it's original design AND markings. All this would put it under the restrictions of the Bill for where and when it could be driven. This is a condition of the permit that would be given by the state.

Where in this Bill does it in any way restrict someone from owning and licensing any MV from the US or anywhere that has been altered in some way (better lights, wrong markings, non-US used)? I'm not so sure this is an attack on MV's so much as a way of limiting all historic, antique, and 'street rods' on roads in their original condition. I expect that if you didn't want to register your MV as an "historic military vehicle" you could get a regular permit for it? If you had a non-American vehicle in 100% accurate condition and markings, would it be banned, or simply not be eligible for a special antique permit?

(what, only American vehicles are worthy of being historic? You imperialist Americans! And how would the guy in the licensing office know original condition and markings anyway?)

If this Bill, or any other, said that all MV's were banned from the road unless permitted by this Bill, I'd be more worried.

If this Bill is being used to deny permits except for those that fit the "historic military vehicle" definition, there is nothing in it that supports that.

I'm thinking the reason for this Bill is to get odd, and strange vehicles off the road, and for the first time, MV's made the radar scope. I dare say 'street rod' owners are more likely to make trouble for the motoring public than MV owners.

Correct me if I'm wrong?