Bike license?
 

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!
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?

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.

Here is this thread:
https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-...s-e-bikes.html

It does wander a little bit.

Keep in mind that cycling covers many different people with different skills and needs. A good number of adult cyclists have driver's licenses, but not all of them, or some have had their licenses revoked.

I would support more training, perhaps even bicycle specific court mandated training for various offenses, rather than hefty fines.

However, also keep in mind that cycling can be extremely situational with different skills needed at different times. There are some valid variations such as using a left turn lane, vs a square turn, going straight through the right side of an intersection, turning the bike, then proceeding across the intersection on the next green.

There is also debate such as lane positioning with no simple universal answer.

Bike riding licences are a solution in search of a problem. Driving licences were introduced as a result of rising death rates from poor driving and a lack of awareness of how to drive in traffic (inc. pedestrians, cyclists, horses and horse-drawn vehicles. Deaths of other road users as a result of poor riding are few and far between and it would
a) be an expensive solution to a near non-existent risk
and
b) be almost impossible to enforce, given the difficulty of identifying individual law breakers

Bike licensing, you say? Well, most everybody here in Sunny California has a DMV issued Driver's License, and a measurable percentage of the people here in Sunny California can't drive worth a damn.

My wife had her car totaled out from under her, rear-ended on the freeway by an 18-year-old with two at-fault accidents already on her record. A buddy of mine, same thing, only his was to a 20-year-old with no insurance and a suspended license.

Enforcing licensing for bicycle riders would be impossible, and ultimately pointless. You either know how to ride safely or you don't. A Driver's License doesn't make a person a good driver.

Besides, you let them license us, next thing you know, mandatory cycling insurance.

I agree with the additional training. Some can be done online from the comfort of the living room. It's a safe bet that the OP did a great deal of research to be sure to have selected a successful vacation. Being a bike trip, included in the research could have been safe bicycling techniques. I have found however that most people don't even know this training is available either online or in a class . And some do not think they need it until they are caught in a situation they do not know how to handle resulting in a negative feeling about cycling. If there was greater awareness of the training tools, I think it would benefit the entire cycling community by growing the number of cyclists and making their experience positive.

You know, I think the o.p. is onto something. Licensing requirements will mean testing and/or instruction. I'm well qualified to provide either. Bring it. But, and I'm just saying a DMNV (Dept. of Non-Motorized Vehicles) will need to expand the definition to stay ahead of costs. I suggest we require pedestrian training and licensing. Anyone out in public will need to be licensed. I can't see a downside.

No.

Who will be required to get a license?

That 3 year old with training wheels on their bike pushing it out onto the public streets (flat and easy riding)?

7 year old bike commuting to the neighborhood school?

The family that just dumped the kids off in the park?

Just the cyclists that managed to survive till adulthood?

Maybe license the "serious cyclists".... but ignore any that aren't serious.

License the roadies?

Definitely the roadies ...

Noooo!

Yaaasss!

I have a license. It says I'm a Cat 3 on the road, Cat 5 on the track.

So, did you want to be barred from biking in Bordeaux until you got a French bicycle license? It isn't like your US cycling prepared you for France, so why would a US license have helped?

Concur! There may even be benefit in requiring a license to think....

Too late. Consider professions.

I'm leaving for a cycle tour of France tonite. A&S debating cycling licenses will be figuratively the last place I'll be while I'm over there.

Enjoy your vacation, just remember to attack the tram tracks perpendicular, don't try to take a shallow line across them. Also remember wet cobblestone is slick :thumb:

Haha cheers! Fortunately we didn't have any falls!

Hope you enjoy your trip!

Don't have a license yet, I'm 16!

I suppose I might just be getting used to things as we drive on the left in the UK
I only thought that a common way of thinking could be of benefit

How would a UK bicycle license, that trains you to ride on UK roads, help you understand French or Japanese roads?

You'd still need a car lisense to drive on European roads, road signs in Europe are pretty much the same over the continent it's more to do with joining and leaving cycle ways with regards to road traffic. If car drivers and bike riders followed the same rule book, it's a bit of a grey area atm, the I think it would be much safer

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.

There's already a history of bicycle licence studies all over major North American cities.

So I wouldn't mind bicycle licenses provided all of the following are offered:

1) Optional;

2) paid by motorists during drivers licence and plate renewals;
3) no fault- all fault automatically attributed to the nearest motorist(s);
4) municipal, provincial and federal tax breaks;
5) perks offered by merchants and hotels on top of other promotions and membership prices you already are entitled.
6) Mandatory road test every two years for motorists;
7) install separated bike lanes wherever motor vehicles are legally allowed to drive;
8) bike racks at all public and commercial places.

We already know that bike licensing are a waste of taxpayers money. So if you don't like any of these conditions, don't ask for bicycle licensing.

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.