View Full Version : Should cyclists be licenced?
Yesterday, I was walking along the road. I saw a cyclist come haring down the road. He had all the gear (helmet, bright clothing etc). The trouble is, he was on a busy main road, and cycling against the on coming traffic. It's worth noting, at this point, that the road in question has extremely brightly coloured (a lurid shade of green) cycle paths on either side, and the cyclist apparently ignored both.
When he reached the lights, he turned right. Because the lights were red, he decided to mount the pavement and bypass the lights.
This, combined with a report I read a while ago (trying to find a link now) in the Evening standard that said a staggering amount of cyclists have no idea about safe cycling, makes me wonder:
Should the law require that Cyclists be licenced in the same way as other drivers? I think they should.
While bad cycling isn't inherantly as dangerous as bad driving (lets face it, if you are hit by a car, the damage will be far more severe than if you are hit by a push bike), if you cycle badly, you can still put other road users at risk, as well as yourself.
I don't think a licence is going to improve anybodies skill or lack of it
look how many bad car drivers we've got........all with licences
As a cyclist I can only say this.......
definately!
I am sick of seeing ignorant cyclists causing problems on the roads. There are as many bad cyclists out there as there are bad motorists but at the moment there is no way of controling who can and who cannot take a cycle onto the main roads in this country. Something needs to be done and it needs to be done soon.
All bike frames should be stamped at the manufacturers and registered. The people buying them should then be registered against the bikes and should have to be prove themselves safe and competent cyclists before they are allowed on the roads.
Frankly I'm all for a license plate style system for cycles.
Tezcatlipoca
12-03-2006, 20:20
Cambridge is full of idiotic unsafe cyclists, and as a pedestrian, I despise them all.
Always going straight through red-lights at pedestrian crossings, mounting the pavement at other red lights, cycling without lights, etc etc.
I definitely think they should have to pass a test & be licensed before being allowed to cycle.
They should pass a test before they ue public roads, just like everyone else does.
Nice idea, but what about all the kids who go on bikerides?? Because surely there would be an age limit if there were a test?
afaik all bikes are stamped with a unique number on the underside of the frame - you can register this number with the police.
they should also have insurance as well
Macca371
12-03-2006, 21:41
I don't think that there should be a licence. Rules of cycling should be taught in schools maybe, about one lesson in PSE or something. I like the freedom of not needing a licence, and many cyclists do use the road responsably, this freedom shouldn't be taken away because a few cyclists are incapable of rational thought and lack common sense. If there were licences for cycling, then I fear that cyclist tax and cyclist insurance would soon follow and the government would capitalise on cyclists just as it currently does with motorists. I don't actually think a licence is required, just a bit of common sense. Although, admittedly, this is lacking in a lot of the population.
I definately think they should pass a test.
The car theory test would be good enough and it is mostly common sense anyway. It would help make people aware of the highway code.
In fact, I sometimes wonder if people ever read the highway code.
It costs £1.50 in the shops and would really help out a lot of the people on the roads who just don't seem to have a clue what they are doing.
As a road user, they should have to have the same restrictions as other road users - ala motorcylclysts, car users etc
And what about horses?
MovedGoalPosts
12-03-2006, 22:40
I don't think there is a need for licencing, so much as proper enforcement. Cyclists need to be aware that they are road users and subject to the road traffic acts like anybody else. Trouble is the anti speeding camera brigade would no doubt start jumping up and down that the police should target real criminals if they started to stop cyclists.
That cycles don't display number plates means unless they are stopped at the time they just cannot be easily idenfitifed. Maybe that's an option.
Insurance should be compulsory, but might be seen as another layer of beaurocracy, and a money spinning opportunity for the insurance companies.
Perhaps a large part of the blame for these issues should be laid at the hands of the sol called traffic planners. I have traffic lights near me that are supposedly set to identify someone is on the road waiting for lights to change. They do for cars but aren't sensitive to cycles, or are in the wrong place for the nice cycle marked area on the street - guess who gets frustrated? Even better we get "Town Planning Gain" modified road junctions which include cycle lanes. Trouble is the lanes start 10m from a roundabot, divert the cyclist onto the pavement where they have to give way from every entry and exit for vehicles, and then stops 10m past the roundabout at a ramp back onto the road where cars regularly park. Other cycle routes go a long way, until the busy junction where there is no space so they stop. No wonder cyclists show no respect.
bmxbandit
12-03-2006, 23:02
i really don't think having licensing / insurance would do anything at all.
where pedestrians, cyclists and motor vehicles are physically seperated, there are very few problems - i'd say this is the way forward. at the moment cyclists generally have the choice of trying not to annoy pedestrians, or trying to avoid bad / inattentive drivers.
Strzelecki
12-03-2006, 23:07
As a cyclist who rides to work every day on busy city roads, I think some sort of licensing may do the trick. It really annoys me when I see other cyclists riding dangerously. I personally think it should be compulsory to wear a helmet if you are going to ride on the public highway, on the spot fine and removal of your bike to the nearest police station would sort it. There is no excuse not to wear a helmet, they don't have to be expensive, granted I could be considered to 'have all the kit', but a decent helmet starts from around £25, not much for something that could save your life and not ruin a fellow motorists life if they accidentally knocked you off. I am insured and always wear a helmet and have a full set of lights attached as I often have to ride home after 8pm. I sometime wish fellow motorists would give cyclist who are cycling properly a bit of respect though, those green boxes at traffic lights are for cyclists to stop in not motor vehicles, and cruising alongside a cyclists in a single lane with cars in front when you cannot actually overtake them is also stupid and dangerous. The bad cyclist make it worse for us all though as other motorists think we're all the same and treat us like we are.
Undoubtedly, better town planning would help. But, I do know of several places where cycle lanes are present, but cyclists ignore them (like the aforementioned road above). Another part of the problem is that certain cyclists have this idea that they shouldn't have to take into account other road users.
I have seen cyclists do some silly things, the one above being one example, and a cyclist trying to nip round a bus that was just pulling out being another. I've also had a friend moan that when the green man appeared, he didn't have time to dismount, go onto the crossing, ride across then go on to the pavement on the opposite side and ride off before the lights changed to green. He moaned, until I pointed out that what he was doing was against the law.
Note: I am not having a go at cyclists. I realise that it is a few cyclists that give the rest a bad name. It's just that I think that people (all road users) should be careful on the roads.
I'll be sure to arrange insurance for my daughter as soon as the stablisers come off her bike....
etccarmageddon
12-03-2006, 23:12
why dont most cyclists I see on the roads stop at red lights?
MovedGoalPosts
12-03-2006, 23:26
why dont most cyclists I see on the roads stop at red lights?
I suppose a cyclists in this respect follow the rule of pedestrians who don't wait for the green walking man light at crossings :(
Undoubtedly, better town planning would help. But, I do know of several places where cycle lanes are present, but cyclists ignore them (like the aforementioned road above). Another part of the problem is that certain cyclists have this idea that they shouldn't have to take into account other road users.
Some cycle lanes are just stupid. There's one in Nottingham (near Castle Marina) which is less than a yard wide, and has a large tree in the middle of it every 20 odd yards. The rest of the pavement is for pedestrians. So you either:
- dismount every 20 yards
- cycle on the pedestrian bit
- cycle on the road.
That particular cycle lane I choose to ignore. Generally, I do use them, provided they are proper cycle lanes.
As for licences, as mentioned before: should every 10 year old kid get a licence? Sounds rather impractical to me.
Rather than licence cyclists perhaps a better way might be to confiscate the bikes and/or heavily fine these loonies who abuse the roads.
I agree with you Dan. Some cycle lanes are really bad.
I have seen some that are very short or actually are located where the road is the most narrow.
Half of these cycle routes are dangerous.
I agree with you Dan. Some cycle lanes are really bad.
I have seen some that are very short or actually are located where the road is the most narrow.
Half of these cycle routes are dangerous.
Most of them are, they give you the confidence that you have your own piece of road, and you'll be OK. Thats until you get to the bits people park on, or when cars start to drift into them without even checking for cyclists.
I have yet to understand the mentality of the people who design these lanes, as they seem to start and stop in the most awqward of places.
Most of them are, they give you the confidence that you have your own piece of road, and you'll be OK. Thats until you get to the bits people park on, or when cars start to drift into them without even checking for cyclists.
I have yet to understand the mentality of the people who design these lanes, as they seem to start and stop in the most awqward of places.
The problem is that there are just not many cyclists in this country. I lived in Holland for most of my life, where cycling is a lot more popular than it is here.
On major roads you will mostly have a separate road, cycle path (not lane) about 2 yards wide and pedestrian path. On inner city roads there often is a cycle lane which is clearly marked and generally respected by car drivers. Another big difference is that car drivers are a lot more aware of cyclists (as there's more of them).
Cyclists in the UK are generally very well behaved compared to those in Holland. They may not cycle on the pavement in Holland, but generally lights are for loosers. That's traffic lights as well as the lights on your bike. I've ridden a bicycle in the city centre with two passengers (one on the back rack, one on the handle bar) at night with no lights... I wouldn't dream of doing that here (even if I could find someone that was willing to sit on the handle bar)
I'm surprised at the responses really, after all we normally hear the chanting about the nanny state around here!
homealone
13-03-2006, 00:58
licencing for cycles on the road will happen when riding a bike on the pavement is stopped - i.e. at the moment it isn't going to happen ;)
Strzelecki
13-03-2006, 01:18
Yeah that really annoys me. I will try to get in the way of a cyclist delibrately cycling on the pavement, maybe they'll fall of and realise? What about helmets, I think they are more important than licencing, no one deserves to die no matter how badly they cycle, if you can't be bothered to wear a helmet then you shouldn't ride on the road, same as the seatbelt rule.
I think going back to the original post that cyclists should be required by law to use cycle tracks that are provided for them and fined on the spot for not using them.
I also think that licencing would help along side a cycling proficiency test. And yes I did read those posts about it wouldn't stop bad cyclists but you could say that licencing car drivers and testing them would be a waste of time as well if you use that reasoning.At least it would introduce the majority of cyclists to the highway code and ensure that there will be some who obey the rules.They would also HAVE to wear helmets and protective gear or no biking.
There used to be a scheme in my local junior school that those children going onto the nearest secondary school(year 6) and who would be cycling to secondary school had to have a cycle proficiency test or the secondary school wouldn't let them use their bikes to ride to school.I'm not sure if it happens anymore though.The wearing of helmets and protective gear is still compulsary at the local secondary but not at the one I teach at.
A few more spot checks by the police to test for faulty bikes wouldn't be a bad idea either.The number of cyclists riding to work in the early morning at the moment without fecking lights is a disgrace.:rolleyes: Pointless wearing the shiny gear if you don't have lights especially if it's raining.:rolleyes:
Chimaera
13-03-2006, 06:40
I also think that licencing would help along side a cycling proficiency test. And yes I did read those posts about it wouldn't stop bad cyclists but you could say that licencing car drivers and testing them would be a waste of time as well if you use that reasoning.At least it would introduce the majority of cyclists to the highway code and ensure that there will be some who obey the rules.They would also HAVE to wear helmets and protective gear or no biking.
There used to be a scheme in my local junior school that those children going onto the nearest secondary school(year 6) and who would be cycling to secondary school had to have a cycle proficiency test or the secondary school wouldn't let them use their bikes to ride to school.I'm not sure if it happens anymore though.The wearing of helmets and protective gear is still compulsary at the local secondary but not at the one I teach at.
The cycling proficiency test is still popular around these parts - I teach the litle blighters! :D
Some secondary schools make it a requirement that before a student is allowed to ride their bike to school, they have to produce a certificate, if not the bike stays at home. Schools in this area are also producing 'School Travel Plans' in an effort to improve student's journeys to and from school and to attempt to have less cars blocking the roads, as a result of this more kids seem to be taking bikes to school. Risk assessments have to be done for all modes of transport (I think), so hopefully more schools will make passing the test a requirement, in that way, thek kids should at least have a bit more regard for road safety.
The worst bike riders round here are the postmen! :Yikes:
Graham M
13-03-2006, 11:15
The cycling proficiency test is still popular around these parts - I teach the litle blighters! :D
Some secondary schools make it a requirement that before a student is allowed to ride their bike to school, they have to produce a certificate, if not the bike stays at home. Schools in this area are also producing 'School Travel Plans' in an effort to improve student's journeys to and from school and to attempt to have less cars blocking the roads, as a result of this more kids seem to be taking bikes to school. Risk assessments have to be done for all modes of transport (I think), so hopefully more schools will make passing the test a requirement, in that way, thek kids should at least have a bit more regard for road safety.
The worst bike riders round here are the postmen! :Yikes:
How the hell can you police this, what's to stop the Kid Locking his Bike up around the corner?
I cycle to / from work every day (whatever the weather) and I count my self lucky if I don't get nearly 'taken out' at least once a day by some thoughtless driver. :(
They pull out in front of me, overtake and then turn left in front of me, squeeze me into the kerb or mount the pavement to undertake right turning vehicles, I even had someone in a queue open a nearside door to get out right in front of me (that's a heart stopping moment), oh..and pedestrians NEVER see cyclists. :erm:
Remember also the kerb / gutter is not the nicest place to cycle being full of glass, rubbish, pot holes, sunken gullies, gravel, ice and snow (even after gritting / salting), puddles (which can hide other nasties and wet your feet) :shocked:
Thing is most cyclists are very safety conscious since they realise it is they who will always come off worse in an accident. I go through several rather nasty traffic light controlled junctions on my journey and unless I get the timing just right it is far safer for me to use short lengths of pavement, cross with the red light and re enter the road after the junction. For the most part it is far easier and safer to use the road for cycling distances, pavement use is only useful for short local navigation round tricky areas.
So however much you hate us poor cyclists, please give us more attention and more room. After all we are saving you room on the road and your lungs from more CO. ;)
homealone
13-03-2006, 12:00
I cycle to / from work every day (whatever the weather) and I count my self lucky if I don't get nearly 'taken out' at least once a day by some thoughtless driver. :( <snip>
So however much you hate us poor cyclists, please give us more attention and more room. After all we are saving you room on the road and your lungs from more CO. ;)
I agree 100% with that, basa, I also cycle to work & back & have experienced every issue you have, even to the point of being hit from behind by someone emerging from a junction I had just ridden past :(
The point about the state of the sides of the road is moot - perhaps the suggestion of a licence would be more palatable if there was a decent surface to ride on. One section I have to negotiate is so bad that hanging on to a pneumatic drill is akin to how I have to cling to the handlebars, and don't get me started on the glass - the common practice seems for anyone drinking from a glass bottle to just smash it in the gutter, when they have finished. (I have had so many punctures I am seriously thinking of getting Kevlar re-inforced tyres).
In principle I would like to see a proper licencing scheme for cyclists, but, seeing as the current issues of people riding on pavements & without lights are basically ignored, I don't see how it would be enforced.
UncleBooBoo
13-03-2006, 12:30
I agree there are some idiotes out there, but they don't only ride bikes they drive and walk to!
Let's be honest I doubt very much that there will ever be the need for a license to ride a bike, as someone pointed out, what about the children who enjoy going on a family bike ride? There would have to be an age limit as with everything!
If they ban bikes on pavments etc and only allow them on roads then those kids are f***ed if you have to pass a test and get a license & insurance etc!!!
(I can't see a 5 - 6 year old apllying for a license!)
And to be honest where I live it is those teenagers with skateboards that pose more of a threat!
They are darn right dangerous!
I agree there are some idiotes out there, but they don't only ride bikes they drive and walk to!
No one is saying that cyclists are the only idiots on the road. At the end of my road, there is a busy main road (the one I talk about in post 1 actually). About 10 metres up the main road from the end of my road is a crossing. People still run across the main road where my road ends. Risking their life so they don't have to walk 20 meters further to Sainsburys.
I have to admit, I have no idea how licencing cyclists would work (if at all), but I do think we do need to try and install a minimum level of competance before people are allowed to ride on the road.
In the wrong circumstances, roads can be extremely dangerous places.
I agree 100% with that, basa, I also cycle to work & back & have experienced every issue you have, even to the point of being hit from behind by someone emerging from a junction I had just ridden past :(
<snip>
Unless I've established eye contact with a driver at a junction, I assume they haven't seen me...
homealone
13-03-2006, 13:00
<snip>I have to admit, I have no idea how licencing cyclists would work (if at all), but I do think we do need to try and install a minimum level of competance before people are allowed to ride on the road.
In the wrong circumstances, roads can be extremely dangerous places.
That seems to have been the reason why increasing numbers of cyclists started using the pavements. It used to be only young children using them, now seeing a cyclist use the road is unusual - although I suspect it is also because if they ride on the path they don't have to use lights.
Cycling on the road is good preparation for driving, in terms of learning 'road sense', I agree that the roads are extremely dangerous, but until you get out there, you don't learn how to deal with it.
Chimaera
13-03-2006, 13:02
How the hell can you police this, what's to stop the Kid Locking his Bike up around the corner?
I don't police it, as the kids I teach are at primary school and they take their bikes when they go to senior school. It's up to the individual schools involved to police who takes their bikes and who doesn't, some schools aren't bothered who has passed their cycling proficiency and who hasn't, but they could well come unstuck if one of these pupils has an accident - they may be seen to be negligent, in that they haven't ensured that their pupils are as safe to ride their bikes as possible. Some schools will only issue bike lockers to pupils who can prove they have passed their test - no kid will take a bike to school round here if it can't be properly secured! Bikes that are locked up 'around the corner' don't stay that way for long!
homealone
13-03-2006, 13:09
I agree 100% with that, basa, I also cycle to work & back & have experienced every issue you have, even to the point of being hit from behind by someone emerging from a junction I had just ridden past :(
<snip>
Unless I've established eye contact with a driver at a junction, I assume they haven't seen me...
but I would have had to be looking behind me in this case, Dan ;)
- I know why it happened, the junction is in a crescent, i.e. imagine a Y shape, with the junction the 'tail', he came to the junction to turn left into the crescent - but because he assumed no-one would be coming from the right (normally correct, who enters a crescent just to drive out the other end) he pulled straight out, just as I passed in front of him - and buckled my back wheel.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.