What Do You See?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
D

Deleted member 1258

Guest
Who do you think will feel they are paying for it?

Change attitudes first, then once that's done, consider other means. Not before.

That hits the nail on the head, its the attitude that needs changing first, if we do that then we can change other things if they need changing. My question has allways been what percentage of drivers have this attitude? given that most of the time I don't have problems with drivers and some of it is simple human error I can't see it being all drivers.
 

bozmandb9

Insert witty title here
This is, frankly, absurd.

You're suggesting the introduction of a whole new tier of bureaucracy, along with creation of a huge database of all bicycles and their owners. This system will be expensive and, being zero-rated, who do you suggest pays for this?

Not really bothered who pays for it. It's a database yes, not a big deal. Cyclists lives and security matter a lot more than who pays for a little data to be logged.
 

classic33

Leg End Member
Not really bothered who pays for it. It's a database yes, not a big deal. Cyclists lives and security matter a lot more than who pays for a little data to be logged.
True, but consider this much. I've handed in, and then claimed back bikes from the police. The bikes were cleaned, made roadworthy and passed on. How would you keep track of them, and who owned them?

The cost of putting in place a scheme where all cycles are registered would be greater than that required for motor vehicles, with a return on that less than the car side/part of the motor vehicle part. I'd rather see that money spent on the roads.

Attitudes first, then try something else after we've changed those. It'll have a bigger impact, but requires a lot more work.
 
D

Deleted member 1258

Guest
Not really bothered who pays for it. It's a database yes, not a big deal. Cyclists lives and security matter a lot more than who pays for a little data to be logged.

Its unlikely that it would be considered, it'd cost too much and bring in too little in income. They've recently changed the VED on cars because they weren't making enough money on it.
 

glasgowcyclist

Charming but somewhat feckless
Location
Scotland
Not really bothered who pays for it. It's a database yes, not a big deal.
It's a big deal in terms of taking on additional staff to design it, build it, administer it, staff to process the registration of all the bikes currently in ownership (around 25 million), record and verify frame numbers, a secure environment for printing registration certificates, issue certificates, record transfers of ownership, record destruction of bikes, record acquisition of new bikes (10s of 000 a year?), exports of bikes, imports of bikes, update changes of address, etc.

How much do you reckon to just set that lot up, never mind run it annually?

You'd have to charge a fortune to make it viable and all that would do is kill cycling

Cyclists lives and security matter a lot more than who pays for a little data to be logged.

Bicycle registration protects cyclists' lives? How does that work?
 

Milzy

Guru
Don't see why. We've an equal right to the roads. Get cars off normal roads and onto motorways. They were built for motorised traffic only.
Yes but there's millions of idiots out there and some who do have intelligence are just cruel bad people. I've lost faith in humanity. If you attack somebody with a hammer you're locked up for a long time. Kill Someone with a ton of car you get a slap on the wrist. That doesn't help matters.
 

bozmandb9

Insert witty title here
It's a big deal in terms of taking on additional staff to design it, build it, administer it, staff to process the registration of all the bikes currently in ownership (around 25 million), record and verify frame numbers, a secure environment for printing registration certificates, issue certificates, record transfers of ownership, record destruction of bikes, record acquisition of new bikes (10s of 000 a year?), exports of bikes, imports of bikes, update changes of address, etc.

How much do you reckon to just set that lot up, never mind run it annually?

You'd have to charge a fortune to make it viable and all that would do is kill cycling



Bicycle registration protects cyclists' lives? How does that work?

Interesting, some people only see problems, (or invent them), where others see solutions. Never mind. I'll leave you to it GC. Let's agree to differ.
 

classic33

Leg End Member
Interesting, some people only see problems, (or invent them), where others see solutions. Never mind. I'll leave you to it GC. Let's agree to differ.
Being fair to @glasgowcyclist, what he's saying about the costs is the same as those who'd have to set such a scheme in motion. That is the costs involved prevent it from being brought in.

Myself, I'd rather see that money spent on the roads
 

glasgowcyclist

Charming but somewhat feckless
Location
Scotland
http://www.parliament.uk/business/p...ts/written-question/Commons/2016-06-07/39576/

hansard_bicycleregistration.jpg
 
We had this conversation
Part of me thinks almost that we should pay 'Road tax' or rather Vehicle Excise Duty. Although it would obviously be at zero rate, it might perhaps be useful in helping to confirm and keep track of ownership of bikes. As for insurance, it would also be good in a way if there was a mandatory scheme, apart from anything just to ensure that cyclists have access to proper representation when there is an incident.

Obviously there would need to be exemptions for children, and ideally some sort of cut off point for very occasional cyclists.


The assumption would be that there is a benefit to all this.

Some would have us believe that it would stop dangerous cycling, cyclists on pavements and a hundred other things...............all of which it fails to do with motor vehicles
 
Top Bottom