Vehicular Cycling (VC) - Riding tests and bike registration?

When I was at school my friends and I all took the "National Cycling Proficiency" test. It was a voluntary test to teach kids how to ride safely, basically in a VC manner. Given the frightening way many cyclists ride, I wonder what's people's opinion about requiring a riding test to ride on the street. Also what about requiring bikes to be registered and to display a license plate of some sort. I think this would help in the quest to get bikes more respect and better treatment by government and other road users.

When I was at school my friends and I all took the "National Cycling Proficiency" test. It was a voluntary test to teach kids how to ride safely, basically in a VC manner. Given the frightening way many cyclists ride, I wonder what's people's opinion about requiring a riding test to ride on the street. Also what about requiring bikes to be registered and to display a license plate of some sort. I think this would help in the quest to get bikes more respect and better treatment by government and other road users.

I'm going to take a wild stab here and guess that nun does not have the word Freedom tattooed across his or her chest.

Testing hasn't seemed helped with the frightening way many motorists drive. My local government considers cyclists a priority road user group. And motorists disrespect me no more than they disrespect each other.

Is there any pedestrian training courses we should look into?

Government only wants us licensed so:
a. they can generate more revenue
b. keep tabs on us

My bike is my freedom machine, I dont want that freedom taken away from me. I obey the road rules and that's that.

Testing hasn't seemed helped with the frightening way many motorists drive. My local government considers cyclists a priority road user group. And motorists disrespect me no more than they disrespect each other.

Is there any pedestrian training courses we should look into?

Do you think that if no testing, or for that matter no license, was required to drive a motor vehicle on public roads that the driving conditions would be the same as today? (With same level of law enforcement in place)

I agree that cyclist licensing is a bad idea.

But yes, we should require a license to walk on public highways. That would stop pedestrians from jaywalking and overall help reduce their numbers making it safer for everyone.

Al

I'm going to take a wild stab here and guess that nun does not have the word Freedom tattooed across his or her chest.

That's right, but I am an anarchist. What I'd like to see is a test that is organized by cyclists and our organizations, I'm not necessarily big on mandates, but it would be good to get as many of us taking the course as possible. The registration thing is probably a step too far.

What I'd like to see is a test that is organized by cyclists and our organizations, I'm not necessarily big on mandates, but it would be good to get as many of us taking the course as possible.

There's Safe Routes to Schools in some communities, and LAB has Road 1 ... Unfortunately not enough cyclists aer involved.

Do you think that if no testing, or for that matter no license, was required to drive a motor vehicle on public roads that the driving conditions would be the same as today? (With same level of law enforcement in place)

No. Although a recent study conducted in Ontario determined that new drivers who take a training course prior to getting there license are involved in statistically more at-fault accidents than those who had no training and simply passed the test.

I was pointing out, of course, that road user groups with required certification are not by definition any less "scary" than anyone else. Certification is often based on vehicle size; Heavy commercial trucks, for instance, require even more stringent testing to get a license for operation. However this vehicle class is overrepresented in cyclist fatalities. Collisions with other bicycles are under-represented. For this reason combined with my own experience on the roads, I don't find other cyclists "scary".

I'm going to take a wild stab here and guess that nun does not have the word Freedom tattooed across his or her chest.

:lol:

If they also required a test to own a gun and reproduce, I might go along with it.

No way to enforce it, it's a waste of money, if people want education and safety there are more than enough resources for them to gather themselves.

I was recently pulled by a cop for turning left in the left turn lane - he didn't like it and told me I was wrong. Well I made the mistake of telling him he was wrong and the sh-poo hit the fan from there... he threatened to confiscate my bicycle (my only vehicle mind you) because it was not registered. I was upset and told him that was not in the law (apparently in my state it is not the law, but city to city it can be) and he got more upset - thankfully I got away with my bike - loaded with a week worth of groceries and he didn't want to deal with that - I got home and found out that the only violation that they can take your bike for in my city is no registration! So needless to say, all my bikes are registered, a big F-U to the local cops who do not know the bicycle laws - which do state that I am supposed to be in the left lane for a turn in a multiple lane road. They really should advertise that stuff

Of course the registration process was completely by the honor system - no one even came out (both times, 2 bikes) to verify that the bike was what I said it was before I put the sticker on it. Makes the whole process pretty pointless - just an excuse to confiscate when the cop feels that he isn't getting the "bow down" respect he wants :(

But yes, we should require a license to walk on public highways. That would stop pedestrians from jaywalking and overall help reduce their numbers making it safer for everyone.

Al

Al, you're so wrong here. What we need are dedicated lanes on sidewalks for slow moving pedestrians who have unique characteristics relative to other legged animals. Right now, there's no space on sidewalks for anyone who doesn't move at the speed of the runners. Put the lanes in (just cut a line in the concrete to clearly show where slow moving peds should walk/shuffle) and the number of slow moving peds will increase, and that will increase their safety. Don't you care that Grandma can't run?

The opportunity for cyclists to voluntarily get/know about a good safety course is virtually nil. It is a shame that in most people's eyes that in order to correct that they need require a cycling testing/license. How about providing and advertising a free (or low cost) course at all the community colleges or fire stations first and then if that does not work out then think about mandatory testing.

The bike club I paid $10/yr to be part of pays in full for any member to take the range of cycling in traffic courses.

Hardly anyone takes on this great offer as no one wants to 'waste' both a Sat and Sun taking the classes when they could instead be out on a recreational ride with the sense of 'safety' due to being in a large group.

Al

I tried to sign up for a LAB course and couldn't find one in my area. I even contacted one or two instructors and still nothing. Maybe I'll try again this spring.

I tried to sign up for a LAB course and couldn't find one in my area. I even contacted one or two instructors and still nothing. Maybe I'll try again this spring.

I had the same problem in trying to find a Road I course a few years back, now the local bike club gives a free instructional ride series and a community collage (20 miles away) offers a Road I course every year.

I'm going to take a wild stab here and guess that nun does not have the word Freedom tattooed across his or her chest.
I can tell you where you can get one of those, if you want.

:D

That's right, but I am an anarchist. What I'd like to see is a test that is organized by cyclists and our organizations, I'm not necessarily big on mandates, but it would be good to get as many of us taking the course as possible. The registration thing is probably a step too far.

What organizations would that be? You want to test yourself, fine, but I have little patience for so-called advocates that place barriers to entry into something as simple as riding a bicycle.

What organizations would that be? You want to test yourself, fine, but I have little patience for so-called advocates that place barriers to entry into something as simple as riding a bicycle.
Riding a bicycle is simple, but riding a bicycle in traffic is not. Arguably, it's more complex than driving a car or riding a motorcycle in traffic, though the potential to cause harm to others is significantly less.

While bike riding generally occurs at a relatively slow speed as compared to motoring, the relative slowness actually makes maneuvering in traffic more complex than it is when riding a motorcycle that can accelerate and keep up with other traffic easily.

I don't think this all adds up to requiring licensing for bicyclists, but I think it's important to keep in mind that cycling in traffic is not nearly as simple as riding a bicycle.

Riding a bicycle is simple, but riding a bicycle in traffic is not. Arguably, it's more complex than driving a car or riding a motorcycle in traffic, though the potential to cause harm to others is significantly less.

Bulltwinkle, Batman. The only thing that is hard about riding a bike in traffic for most people is overcoming their fear because they are not surrounded by a steel cage to protect them from their own stupidity. When you grow up doing it, taint hard at all...problem is too many people surrendered to the car culture and forgot how to ride a bike by the time they rediscovered it in middle age. The rules of the road are the same on a bike as they are in a car...the only rule that is different is who wins in a pissing contest.

...the only rule that is different is who wins in a pissing contest.
That's a cute way of putting it.

Bulltwinkle, Batman. The only thing that is hard about riding a bike in traffic for most people is overcoming their fear because they are not surrounded by a steel cage to protect them from their own stupidity. When you grow up doing it, taint hard at all...problem is too many people surrendered to the car culture and forgot how to ride a bike by the time they rediscovered it in middle age. The rules of the road are the same on a bike as they are in a car...the only rule that is different is who wins in a pissing contest.
Well, "hard", "complex" and "simple" are relative terms - meaningless when not comparing something to something else.

I'm just saying that on the simple-complex scale, regardless of where "riding a bike" may fall, "riding a bike in traffic" falls a significant distance to the right of that, and arguably right of (more towards complex) "driving a car in traffic" and maybe even right of "riding a motorcycle in traffic".

I also think many people underestimate the amount of additional complexity that "in traffic" adds to "riding a bike", though many also over-estimate it, believing that it is so complex that doing it safely is not possible. Perhaps that's what you're trying to say?

Well, "hard", "complex" and "simple" are relative terms - meaningless when not comparing something to something else.

I'm just saying that on the simple-complex scale, regardless of where "riding a bike" may fall, "riding a bike in traffic" falls a significant distance to the right of that, and arguably right of (more towards complex) "driving a car in traffic" and maybe even right of "riding a motorcycle in traffic".

I also think many people underestimate the amount of additional complexity that "in traffic" adds to "riding a bike", though many also over-estimate it, believing that it is so complex that doing it safely is not possible. Perhaps that's what you're trying to say?

I don't agree...having 'driven' bikes, motorcycles, cars and trucks 'in traffic' for most of my life. Of the three, the bicycle is the simplest, the motorcycle the most enjoyable (and most dangerous), IMO, the car/truck the most complex. On a bike, you only have to pay close attention to what is going on around you and much less attention (relatively) on the vehicle and its controls, features and toys. The rules of the road are the same, no matter the vehicle, less vehicle specific laws and capabilities. I understand that you like to think it is complex...but really it isn't. I think you tend to over think it in an attempt to explain it, while I just do it and don't try to over analyze it.

In Maryland 68% of our traffic bike crashes are under the age of 30. By the age of 30 you have pretty much figured out "the rules of the road." To me this implies it is hard for kids to figure out how to ride a bike safely and for adults it is almost second nature how to ride "safely".

In Maryland 68% of our traffic bike crashes are under the age of 30. By the age of 30 you have pretty much figured out "the rules of the road." To me this implies it is hard for kids to figure out how to ride a bike safely and for adults it is almost second nature how to ride "safely".

Having been a kid myself once (rly I was!), I don't think the issue was figuring out the rules of the road, that was easy...it was giving a crap that took years to develop. ;)

Having been a kid myself once (rly I was!), I don't think the issue was figuring out the rules of the road, that was easy...it was giving a crap that took years to develop. ;)
LOL Perhaps change the name of the forum to "Advocacy and giving a crap"

Could be very fitting in a lot of different contexts. ;)

I don't agree...having 'driven' bikes, motorcycles, cars and trucks 'in traffic' for most of my life. Of the three, the bicycle is the simplest, the motorcycle the most enjoyable (and most dangerous), IMO, the car/truck the most complex. On a bike, you only have to pay close attention to what is going on around you and much less attention (relatively) on the vehicle and its controls, features and toys. The rules of the road are the same, no matter the vehicle, less vehicle specific laws and capabilities. I understand that you like to think it is complex...but really it isn't. I think you tend to over think it in an attempt to explain it, while I just do it and don't try to over analyze it.
I wouldn't say I like to think it's complex in any absolute fashion, but I do think it's useful to point out that riding a bike in traffic is about as complex, and arguably more complex, than driving a car or riding a motorcycle in traffic.

If you think about it, reaching over to grab a pencil is arguably a complex task too; we just tend to discount the complexities that are managed subconsciously (like calculating how far the pencil is from the hand, and how much effort needs to put into the arm to move the hand to the pencil, etc.). So just because you're not consciously thinking about it doesn't mean it's not complex. Of course, the more your subconscious can take care of it automatically for you, the easier the complexity is to manage. That's what we achieve with practice and experience.

Anyway, I think most people find the gears on a 10+ speed bicycle to be more complex than what is required to be managed by the driver of a car, especially one with an automatic transmission. The rules are the same, but you're working physically when you're on the bike, which adds complexity. Then, compared to the car driver, who typically only has one lane position, there are always multiple lane positions to consider for the cyclist, and which lane position is most appropriate may change from one moment to the next. That too adds complexity over driving a car, additional complexity which is shared with motorcyclists. Also, bicyclists have the same additional complexities that drivers of slow moving vehicles have in terms of paying attention to how much they are delaying others, and the additional challenges presented when merging because of the relatively slower speeds.

Having been a kid myself once (rly I was!), I don't think the issue was figuring out the rules of the road, that was easy...it was giving a crap that took years to develop. ;)
I would say that realizing that following the rules is in your own interest is what takes most people to about age 30 to figure out. But some figure it out much sooner, and others never seem to figure it out.

I wouldn't say I like to think it's complex in any absolute fashion, but I do think it's useful to point out that riding a bike in traffic is about as complex, and arguably more complex, than driving a car or riding a motorcycle in traffic.

If you think about it, reaching over to grab a pencil is arguably a complex task too; we just tend to discount the complexities that are managed subconsciously (like calculating how far the pencil is from the hand, and how much effort needs to put into the arm to move the hand to the pencil, etc.). So just because you're not consciously thinking about it doesn't mean it's not complex. Of course, the more your subconscious can take care of it automatically for you, the easier the complexity is to manage. That's what we achieve with practice and experience.

Anyway, I think most people find the gears on a 10+ speed bicycle to be more complex than what is required to be managed by the driver of a car, especially one with an automatic transmission. The rules are the same, but you're working physically when you're on the bike, which adds complexity. Then, compared to the car driver, who typically only has one lane position, there are always multiple lane positions to consider for the cyclist, and which lane position is most appropriate may change from one moment to the next. That too adds complexity over driving a car, additional complexity which is shared with motorcyclists. Also, bicyclists have the same additional complexities that drivers of slow moving vehicles have in terms of paying attention to how much they are delaying others, and the additional challenges presented when merging because of the relatively slower speeds.

I really pity the students in your classes now. Christ on a crutch! by the time you've done overexplaining every minute detail, the class time must be up, and no-one gets to ride.

I would say that realizing that following the rules is in your own interest is what takes most people to about age 30 to figure out.

Again with 'most people' crap? Even if I had any confidence in your observational abilities, it's still pretty arrogant.

Intelligence We’re a community with quality standards and expect our members will make a sincere effort to contribute their thoughts on interesting subjects in a meaningful and respectful manner. Posting messages and otherwise interacting on BikeForums is completely optional; many members often prefer to just read what others have to say. But if you do post, we expect that you’ll be respectful of the time of others by posting meaningfully.

Respectfulness We expect our member to show respect for others. Respecting their person, their views, their time and their opinions, and their belief systems ... even if you disagree with them.

http://www.eikongraphia.com/wordpress/wp-content/sauron.jpg

Again with 'most people' crap? Even if we had any confidence in your observational abilities, it's still pretty arrogant.

Again with the 'we' crap? Even if we had elected you to be our representative, it's still pretty arrogant.

Sorry but everyone b*** about HH is worst then HH. Please start a different thread and posts your complaints to that and lets try to stay on topic. Thanks.

Again with the 'we' crap? Even if we had elected you to be our representative, it's still pretty arrogant.

Fair point. Edited.

But 'again'? I'm hardly in the habit of speaking for anyone but myself, unlike our mate, Serge, but feel free to try and prove otherwise.

Intelligence We’re a community with quality standards and expect our members will make a sincere effort to contribute their thoughts on interesting subjects in a meaningful and respectful manner. Posting messages and otherwise interacting on BikeForums is completely optional; many members often prefer to just read what others have to say. But if you do post, we expect that you’ll be respectful of the time of others by posting meaningfully.

Respectfulness We expect our member to show respect for others. Respecting their person, their views, their time and their opinions, and their belief systems ... even if you disagree with them.



I think this pic gets everybody's attention better (not to mention their lunch)

http://www.chipcom.net/pvt/bdg1.jpg

Fair point. Edited.

But 'again'? I'm hardly in the habit of speaking for anyone but myself, unlike our mate, Serge, but feel free to try and prove otherwise.

Has this turned into a game of Survivor where we get to vote someone out? If not don't feed the troll or use the ignore feature, that's all I am saying.

I think this pic gets everybody's attention better (not to mention their lunch)

Seriously, that pic should be against forum guidelines.

Seriously, that pic should be against forum guidelines.

Hell it should be against humanity guidelines!
Admit it...you like me, you love me, you wanna marry me!

Hell it should be against humanity guidelines!
Admit it...you like me, you love me, you wanna marry me!

Well with that body and a few beers... wait what am I saying? :eek:

Holy rods and cones Kato! Looks like it's time to roll, the mastermind CC is at it again with his villianous use of the dpi airwaves.

I am also given to what some might call "over-analysis", and I completely see HH's points about the added complexity due to speed differentials and additional lane positioning choices. Yet, I also feel that if you already know how to drive a car in traffic, really most of what you need to do is just follow the same principles and approach it with the same attitude. The rest is refinement.

It is tempting to think of licensing and/or registration as an attempt to solve the "scofflaw cyclist" problem. (If you agree it is a problem.) Although I would only support it for riding integrated with cars on major roads, not on minor streets or paths. But practically, I think others here are probably right that it is unworkable, not least because it it would require more of an effort from already overworked law enforcement with too little to gain. Also because, as Chipcom so eloquently put it, but others have also stated repeatedly, knowing and caring are two different things, with the latter being the bigger problem.

Given that, probably the best answer is simply to enforce existing traffic laws on cyclists equally with motorists, which I completely support. Even that is challenging enough, between law enforcement knowing what the laws regarding cycling are, and caring enough to enforce good traffic behavior from cyclists.

I am also given to what some might call "over-analysis", and I completely see HH's points about the added complexity due to speed differentials and additional lane positioning choices. Yet, I also feel that if you already know how to drive a car in traffic, really most of what you need to do is just follow the same principles and approach it with the same attitude. The rest is refinement.

It is tempting to think of licensing and/or registration as an attempt to solve the "scofflaw cyclist" problem. (If you agree it is a problem.) Although I would only support it for riding integrated with cars on major roads, not on minor streets or paths. But practically, I think others here are probably right that it is unworkable, not least because it it would require more of an effort from already overworked law enforcement with too little to gain. Also because, as Chipcom so eloquently put it, but others have also stated repeatedly, knowing and caring are two different things, with the latter being the bigger problem.

Given that, probably the best answer is simply to enforce existing traffic laws on cyclists equally with motorists, which I completely support. Even that is challenging enough, between law enforcement knowing what the laws regarding cycling are, and caring enough to enforce good traffic behavior from cyclists.

I frequently start my talks about traffic cycling by asking for a show of hands by all those who have motor driving licenses. It is rare that an adult fails to raise his or her hand. So I present a puzzled face and say, "I don't know why I'm here. You all know what you need to know about traffic operation. Just go out and drive your bikes in the way you already know." But, as many of us know, it is not as easy as that; there is some psychological impediment preventing these people from using their traffic skills developed for motoring when riding a bicycle. Most Americans have been raised to believe that cycling in traffic is dangerous enough, while trying to act like a driver is so dangerous that it requires extreme (or elite, as they say) levels of courage, skill, and physical power. That psychological condition is the impediment that exists and whose long-continued existence provides the excuse for the bikeway program and the other social errors regarding bicycle transportation.

is that the same psychological condition than has you declaring negotiations with faster traffic "impossible", why you ride in an ambigous 'road sneak' position on the dividing lines of roads, or choose not to take the lane of some high speed roads, john?

That psychological condition is the impediment that exists and whose long-continued existence provides the excuse for the bikeway program and the other social errors regarding bicycle transportation.

Maybe we need a group of psychologists instead of bike advocates put in charge of all bike advocacy efforts.

forget the psychologists, and hire a bunch of public relations spin doctors

is that the same psychological condition than has you declaring negotiations with faster traffic "impossible", why you ride in an ambigous 'road sneak' position on the dividing lines of roads, or choose not to take the lane of some high speed roads, john?


It is quite interesting to read Bekologist's repeated claims that I am insufficiently obstructive to other drivers. That means, of course, that he thinks that proper cycling is being deliberately obstructive to other drivers. It is quite obvious that our social views are somewhat different, just as are our cycling views. I think it reasonable to be cooperative, he thinks it best to be obstreporously obstructive. As I have often written, in American bicycling affairs, everything is topsy-turvey.

hardly concerned about your 'obstruction' of other traffic, john. i'm commenting on your display of a psychological childish condition you ascribe to other riders, how it is evident in your riding style, john.

at what speed does a vehicular cyclist go from 'taking a lane' to 'playing road sneak?' and why is this NOT an indication of some type of psychological inferiority regarding your riding style, john?

your techniques of "playing road sneak" because traffic negotiations with faster traffic is impossible when motorists are moving 15 miles faster than the bicyclist is a very clear indication of some sort of inferiority disorder, john.


this is just using the metrics you would use to describe these maladies of other riders.

I frequently start my talks about traffic cycling by asking for a show of hands by all those who have motor driving licenses. It is rare that an adult fails to raise his or her hand. So I present a puzzled face and say, "I don't know why I'm here. You all know what you need to know about traffic operation.

This statement pretty much sums up why your philosophies on cycling circa 2008 are
so out of touch with the realities a daily, transportational cyclist faces.
Possessing license is a qualification for cycling in traffic ? The two are not even remotely
connected in any way as an actual bicycle ride in any sprawling 'Smart Growth' area will
show. Large numbers of people do NOT know how to drive correctly, know the laws or
possess the sense of responsibilty to drive a car. Because they do doesnt change this
fact. We already suffer enuff wrong-way, redlite running, ped terrorizing imbeciles.
We dont need any more people riding the way they drive.

hardly concerned about your 'obstruction' of other traffic, john. i'm commenting on your display of a psychological childish condition you ascribe to other riders, how it is evident in your riding style, john.

at what speed does a vehicular cyclist go from 'taking a lane' to 'playing road sneak?' and why is this NOT an indication of some type of psychological inferiority regarding your riding style, john?

your techniques of "playing road sneak" because traffic negotiations with faster traffic is impossible when motorists are moving 15 miles faster than the bicyclist is a very clear indication of some sort of inferiority disorder, john.


this is just using the metrics you would use to describe these maladies of other riders.

In order to make your argument you maliciously misstate my position, but, that aside, here is the answer to your question and your implied question. My words merely describe a practical way of cycling when most of the traffic is much faster than the cyclist is moving, without any implication of inferiority or fear, and in conformity with the rules of the road. By the way, the decreased ability to negotiate with motorists moving more than 15 or so mph faster is also evident when both drivers are motorists. I suppose that you pride yourself on not having the ability to notice that.

My position is entirely different from that of the bikeway-promoting bicycle advocates such as yourself or, perhaps, your dupes. You rely upon lies and superstitions regarding traffic operation, laws, accidents, cyclist incompetence, and such that exaggerate the fear of same-direction motor traffic and therefore produce the desire for facilities and methods of operation that contradict the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles to the disadvantage of cyclists.

you admit to riding on the edges of narrow lanes, something contemporary bicycling education and yes, even government publications, recommends strongly against.

If i were administering a riding test, and you rode the edge of a narrow lane of traffic, I'd flunk ya, john!