Latest online debate about cyclist registration and insurance

[theclaud]

I get that you're taking the yellow rain, but we DO do that sort of thing for pedestrians. It's called the Green Cross Code (or whatever its present day incarnation is called), and parents teaching their kids how to cross safely.

Don't even start me on Tufty the Squirrel. The fluffy-arsed t**t.

 

[jonny jeez]

Nothing in that proposal explains why it shouldn't apply to pedestrians too. And pigeons, and urban foxes

The OP or mine?

If its mine then you're right, there is nothing that does. I'm more than happy for it to apply to peds and pigeons (if you feel you could explain it to them)

Thats kind of my point.I dont want a universal license, just one that entitles use of a busy city network for all city users.

Cyclists included.

Abuse of the license takes away the right to enter

 

[jonny jeez]

Why should I pay £20 (and IMHO it would never be this cheap, a CBT is £100+ in London) to learn what is readily available elsewhere for free and can be gained through experience?

So that you sign the agreement, abuse of which removes your entitlement to join in. To be honest, those that would be happy to be licensed probably already know everything the course will "teach" them, so its not just about education, its a contract. One that can be extended to ALL city users...pigeons included

 

[theclaud]

Argh!

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

So that you sign the agreement, abuse of which removes your entitlement to join in. To be honest, those that would be happy to be licensed probably already know everything the course will "teach" them, so its not just about education, its a contract. One that can be extended to ALL city users...pigeons included

I wonder whether it might be worth looking at the efficacy of licensing, training and registration. We might take drivers as a suitable category of licensed, trained and registered road users. It doesn't seem to me like licensing, training and registering has been a great success.

 

[StuartG]

A one day course, run by CTC or some other respected cycle body for a nominal fee , Say £20.This takes you through YOUR rights as a cyclist and explains basic stuff that WILL keep you safe and make you a better city rider How to use/not use lanes, negotiating Junctions, observation, ASL's, safe(er) filtering, Shared use areas, CSH zones. Over 30,000 people have read our own "essential guide" post above, so clearly there is an appetite to understand how to stay safe

Many boroughs in London already offer a free lesson from an accredited trainer to help you ride better and more safely. As a rider of over 50 years experience I found it beneficial (if only to get me out of the bad habits taught on the Proficiency test of yesteryear).

What we should be doing is making sure that spend is protected, if not increased, and making more people aware of it. Training is the best protection you can wear.

Charging people £20 and requiring signatures is not a clever way to encourage four wheel riders to convert to two. That's the bottom line.

 

[jonny jeez]

I wonder whether it might be worth looking at the efficacy of licensing, training and registration. We might take drivers as a suitable category of licensed, trained and registered road users. It doesn't seem to me like licensing, training and registering has been a great success.

oh that's not fair.
The vast majority of (almost all in fact) drivers drive within the rules and fear loosing their license. I'd suggest the opposite is true in reality.

 

[jonny jeez]

Jonny jeez - it's an interesting topic. I find myself reading both sides of the argument and agreeing....

All really valid points. To be clear though, i'm not talking global licences, just a licence to enter the city. I hate the thought of licensing casual riders and small kids, thats daft.

Boris users , good point, perhaps the user agreement could include an online test and then a signature of the same contract i refer to to gain a licence.

Enforcement is a good one, i guess i would have to concede to a small id flag of sorts, perhaps a seat post flag like many riders wear with pride...weeks after entering a race or triathlon... Perhaps make your city registration a badge of honour, in the same way.

Personally, i'd be pretty happy to show that flag off. I agree numbers would plummet, but only the numbers of idiot riders...specifically in the city where they are most at risk to themselves ...and me.

The problem i see that it would solve is the breakdown in relationship between city users, we all suddenly become part of the same club and have been educated in the challenges we each suffer. It also allows legitimate removal of those who wont play the game. So we can relax knowing that

Remember its not ALL about education, its about the agreement of a contract.

Still not convinced, ask a cabbie or lorry driver if they would like to see cyclists pass a test to ride in town and hold a licence to do so. Then ask them, if that happened would they have more respect for those that actually did?

Thanks for your considered reply though.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

oh that's not fair.
The vast majority of (almost all in fact) drivers drive within the rules and fear loosing their license. I'd suggest the opposite is true in reality.

True, and it's hard to imagine how it might be without those official safeguards and sanctions. However, who does the killing and maiming? That's the group that do it more to other drivers, and their passengers, followed by pedestrians and then cyclists*

*Cyclists, however, are higher up the list of casualties from HGVs, particularly in urban environments. But the appropriateness and safety of HGVs in cities is a different issue.

 

[DRHysted]

So what you're saying is that should I need to go into the city, I would first need to stop at the training centre. Thus turning a 20 minute job unto an all day affair. The reason I wouldn't automatically of got that license is because I don't go into the city, work is the opposite direction.
Of course this also would need a defination of "city". Would my nearest town 'Totton' be considered a city, or would that be 'Southampton'?
Really stepping into a complicated world here.
Also lorry drivers wouldn't care, or at least the one's I know wouldn't. A lot of them cycle to the yard where their lorries are kept, so the family car is not sitting there all week.

 

[jonny jeez]

True, and it's hard to imagine how it might be without those official safeguards and sanctions. However, who does the killing and maiming? That's the group that do it more to other drivers, and their passengers, followed by pedestrians and then cyclists*

*Cyclists, however, are higher up the list of casualties from HGVs, particularly in urban environments. But the appropriateness and safety of HGVs in cities is a different issue.

Totally agree but I'm not *directly* trying to stop deaths...indirectly yes but first I would want to remove barriers and put us all in the same pot. Once we, car drivers, lorriests and motorcycly-ers are all in the same "City" family, with the same training, same understanding of all the mixed up rules and miscommunication/misconceptions...and importantly, the same contract...we can start to save lives.

 

[jonny jeez]

So what you're saying is that should I need to go into the city, I would first need to stop at the training centre. Thus turning a 20 minute job unto an all day affair. The reason I wouldn't automatically of got that license is because I don't go into the city, work is the opposite direction.
Of course this also would need a defination of "city". Would my nearest town 'Totton' be considered a city, or would that be 'Southampton'?
Really stepping into a complicated world here.
Also lorry drivers wouldn't care, or at least the one's I know wouldn't. A lot of them cycle to the yard where their lorries are kept, so the family car is not sitting there all week.

No.

I'm saying that if you take a one stop test (taking no more of your time than it takes to sit in city traffic for one trip, in a car and certainly nowhere near as much time as it takes to take your driving test), you can ride/drive/motorcycle/fly on your pigeon wings, into any city forever.

So long as you behave.

PS the "city" would be defined by those taking part in the scheme. It would be a physical boundary not a historic or social one....many cities have many such physical boundaries, London has a congestion charge zone that is well mapped and signposted.

I shall stop banging on now, I feel as if I'm peddling this idea and I'm not.

I'm not even sure it would be effective myself but I am sure we should be trying to think of ways to break down the boundaries and make the cities a much more inclusive place.

That, I suspect comes from education and consent.

 

[BentMikey]

oh that's not fair.
The vast majority of (almost all in fact) drivers drive within the rules and fear loosing their license. I'd suggest the opposite is true in reality.

Probably no different to most cyclists and most pedestrians. We're all the same human beings. I'd suggest, however that a slightly larger proportion do things to a lesser quality than you suggest. Most of all, the driving test has done nothing to affect this, it's simply a part of human nature.

If you really want to affect people's attitude to road sharing, then what you need is traffic enforcement. There's currently almost none, and there's good evidence that decent levels of traffic enforcement nips misbehaviour in the bud before it results in collisions that bring injury and death.

 

[Garyh09]

Perhaps if we all had cycle license or some sort of tax maybe it would stop a lot of people moaning we shouldn't be using the roads

 

[Kookas]

Perhaps if we all had cycle license or some sort of tax maybe it would stop a lot of people moaning we shouldn't be using the roads

And if we got in the bloody cycle lane. Honestly, who do we think we are!? ;o