Bike Forums - Bike license?

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)

- Advocacy & Safety (https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/)

- - Bike license? (https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/1149462-bike-license.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by wphamilton (Post 20447209)

Please no bike licenses nor bike registrations. We accept even drivers licenses mainly because it's always been that way (for most of us) so we never think of "why" or why not. The only benefit - for the owner of a drivers license - is that we use it for identification. And people have to practice driving at least a little bit before taking a drivers exam. Neither of those benefits have a practical application to bikes.

The usual underlying reason for proposing bike regulation like this (and in large part a big initial reason for requiring a DL in the USA) is revenue generation, and that never actually works with bikes.

Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can correct me, but I had always considered a licence to be a permit for a practice that when abused or used incorrectly can be a risk for public safety. For example, doctors, engineers, hunters, boaters, and of course drivers all have licences for purposes of public safety. A driver's licence isn't just a diploma. A driver's licence tells the public that the holder has demonstrated safe operation of his vehicle. A bicycle licence does not have this reach. When a bicycle is used inappropriately, only the user is put at risk. The risk to the general public is recorded to be one pedestrian death in about five years - hardly comparable to drivers who abuse or misuse their motor vehicles.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel4 (Post 20447286)

Licenses are also issued to retailers, who have no risk of hurting anyone.

A license is something you have to pay for and can lose if you misuse it. And many licenses require zero training or qualification outside of a fee and information.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel4 (Post 20447286)

The D:L is no guarantee of competence, and in the USA wasn't originally intended as such. It was quite literally instituted as a revenue source, then and now has little if anything to do with public safety. I know that's what people are told since they were young, and probably the majority of people believe that without ever questioning it, but just take a logical objective look at it, based on your years of experience driving, and you might see clearly that the notion itself is kind of ludicrous. Obtaining the license is primarily administrative, and no particular skill or safe practice is required. Here, they drive around a parking lot at 10 or 15 mph, take a very simple test about traffic law, and that's it.

It is not even a permit to drive - since it's only applicable on public roadways, it is a permit to operate a motor vehicle on public roadways.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kontact (Post 20446732)

So you don't want licensing, you want international standardization of auto and bike traffic laws so everyone knows how it works wherever they go.

Or doesn't know how auto and bike traffic laws works wherever they go, as in the case of a 16 yo /unlicensed non driver without and road traffic experience or training as in the case of the OP.

DL equal one word: liability. Everything else is academic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kontact (Post 20446732)

So you don't want licensing, you want international standardization of auto and bike traffic laws so everyone knows how it works wherever they go.

Yeah I guess

Quote:

Originally Posted by KraneXL (Post 20442942)

Absolutely not, under normal circumstance. I say this because there are special instances where a operator certificate or pass might be necessary such as bring your bike into specially congested pedestrian locations or restricted/limited ride areas.

That certificate would indicate that you've been instructed with a set of standards for operating your bike safely while in that area. On public roads however, bikes are the least threat (cyclist vs motor vehicles), so its totally unnecessary for a cyclist to be licensed.

True but for the cyclists safety?

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianmcg123 (Post 20443005)

In those situations you are no different than any other vehicle. Take your lane and flow with traffic.

Licenses for for cars don't seem to make them behave the same.

I don't think car drivers realise how safe they feel in their cars 😂😂

Quote:

Originally Posted by sherrattsp (Post 20442930)

Hi all, I'm just wondering about your opinion on a training course or lisense for cyclists?

I'm writing this while I'm on a cycle tour and I cycled through Bordeaux the other day, my first taste at city cycling

I'll confess I can find it a little confusing when there are bikes, cars and trams are all going through the same junction!

And to make it worse you have to share some bike lanes with busses!

UPDATE:
I'll clarify what I mean 😂😂

I don't think that licenses should be required but available for cyclists to obtain so that there is a clear rule book for cyclists and car drivers to follow.

An example of this would be who takes priority when a cycle way joins a road? Car driver or cyclists? Personally I'd say the car driver takes priority but some people disagree. This is why I think there should be more clear rules around this area...I think a lisense is one way of making this clear as the cyclists would 'gain' something from it

Does anyone think that a lisense as it were would be a good idea so that there is a common way of thinking and doing thinks between cyclists and non cyclists to make things easier, safer and more understandable?

Eek, please read the update on the original post for an update on what I mean