Registration plates for bicycles and other nonsense ideas

[glasgowcyclist]

Given the very low level of danger presented by cycling, it is a nonsense for anyone to suggest measures which would restrict the number of people choosing to cycle when we need to drastically reduce car use.

As far as I can remember, every time this has been suggested in parliament it’s been immediately rejected so this would seem to be just some opportunistic clickbait by a minister seeking to raise his profile.

Cost alone would rule it out, never mind the stupidity of it.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-for-cyclists-on-table-in-review-of-road-laws

(And before a mod comes along to close this and/or direct it to NACA, please note the words of Shaun on such topics:

Politics, as it directly relates to cycling, will still be allowed in the Advocacy and Safety and General Cycling forums, but otherwise I would politely ask that you don’t turn threads elsewhere on CC into personal or party political debates.

(my bold)

 

[mustang1]

My worry is as more politicians jump onto the anti-cycling bandwagon to make themselves more popular among the DM-types, one day some law will be passed requiring additional fees and some type of identification system.

And in the beginning they might only want £10 (the headline figures will be £20 but they will "settle" for 10). And then in future the fee will rise and additional terms and conditions will be added. Once the fee is in place, it will be much easier to add things to it.

Thats why it must be shut down at every opportunity that these peanut populist politicians bring it up along with the force of the DM.

 

[Milkfloat]

Thats why it must be shut down at every opportunity that these peanut populist politicians bring it up along with the force of the DM.

Should be shut down almost as fast as the duplicate threads.

 

[classic33]

Given the very low level of danger presented by cycling, it is a nonsense for anyone to suggest measures which would restrict the number of people choosing to cycle when we need to drastically reduce car use.

As far as I can remember, every time this has been suggested in parliament it’s been immediately rejected so this would seem to be just some opportunistic clickbait by a minister seeking to raise his profile.

Cost alone would rule it out, never mind the stupidity of it.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-for-cyclists-on-table-in-review-of-road-laws

(And before a mod comes along to close this and/or direct it to NACA, please note the words of Shaun on such topics:
(my bold)

If, as some of the arguments I've heard in favour of it, it works for every other vehicle on the road. Why then does the MIB exist, and why do they have Untraceable Driver & Uninsured Driver forms for use after accidents?

The call seems to be for plates for bicycles, to aid identification of the rider. Not for identifying the rider. For this something else would be required. Maybe that'll be the next step, who knows. But it will add to the cost of any such scheme. Both in the implementation and the running.
Fairfuel and the AA have already had a number of drivers surveyed who say the scheme wouldn't work.

Maybe they could start on those e-scooters that fall outside of the current trials, and those e-bikes that don't meet EPAC regulations. Both are illegal to use in public places. And certainly shouldn't be used on a pavement.

 

[matticus]

Should be shut down almost as fast as the duplicate threads.

This.

(do these people not read other people's threads??)

 

[glasgowcyclist]

If, as some of the arguments I've heard in favour of it, it works for every other vehicle on the road.

I think people who offer that argument have to consider why 3rd party insurance was made compulsory for motor vehicles: it’s because the damage they can cause can easily outstrip the driver’s ability to repay.

This is highly unlikely for a bicycle, which is why many household policies give, say, £2M of personal liability cover at no extra premium.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Ooh, I thought the thread was an invitation to posit equally risible regulations.

"Parachutes for cats! They deserve more than just the nine lives!!"

"Compulsory lights for midges! Why should they be free to endanger us at night!!"

"Insurance for toddlers! Make them pay for the damage to my bumper!!"

etc etc ad nauseum

 

[Beebo]

Dogs kill far more than bikes do.
They get threatened with licences every so often but it never happens.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Dogs kill far more than bikes do.
They get threatened with licences every so often but it never happens.

AIRBAGS FOR DOGS!!!

 

[grldtnr]

Dogs kill far more than bikes do.
They get threatened with licences every so often but it never happens.

Dogs were previously required to have a license, the fee if I remember correctly was 37 and half pence ( new pence) , before it was abolished!
Possible it cost far more to collect than it raised?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I think if bicycles could do this there’d be grounds for compulsory insurance…

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-62604406

A 26-year-old man has been arrested and charged with road traffic offences after a car crashed into a block of flats in Paisley.
Residents of the Hamilton Court tower block in the Calside area said it "shook" after the car smashed into it on Thursday night.
The impact left a large hole in the wall, with the car coming to a halt in the building's laundrette.
Two men were taken to the nearby Royal Alexandra Hospital for treatment.
No-one else was injured in the crash, which happened at about 22:45.