Should Cyclists Be Required To Pass a Test?

[editor]

Here's some UK figures:

"Motorcycle accident rates are far too high. They have been for 10 years," the House of Commons' Transport Committee said in a report. "It is time to consider radical action to tackle this problem...
A total of 569 motorcyclists were killed and nearly 6,000 seriously injured in accidents on Britain's roads in 2005, according to Department for Transport figures.
http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSL2943157720070329?feedType=RSS

 

[Kanda]

Thats 2004/5. I meant since compulsory basic training came into force. (I'm looking around too)

 

[the button]

(edit: come to think of it, some people DO need bloody training on how to cross the roads!!)

I did have. At infants school, in fact. [Posters of a certain age, out yourselves here]

Tufty is a colossus of public information. Though just a small squirrel, he was a phenomenon who bestrode childhoods from the early 1960s onwards.

Through very simple films, books and stories, Tufty persuaded pre-school children that the road could be a dangerous place. This was done through the medium of burst footballs and dropped ice-creams, rather than something which young eyes might find too upsetting, such as squashed squirrels.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4690166.stm

Surely they must do something similar nowadays?

 

[myname]

Oh god.. we're gonna go back down that defensive road again are we?

Skateboarders, rollerbladers, pedestrians blah blah blah all having to pass a test...

How deflective.

Fact is, there is NO requirement for cyclists to have any kind of training. Most other road users do, not just for their own safety but for others safety too. Why is it such a bad thing? Can you not see any positive side to it? (I agree regulation and funding is an issue)

I wonder what the stats are re: decreased motorcylist deaths/accidents are since basic training became mandatory.

i bet there's loads of cyclists who have already passed a driving test, would they be exempt from your new crazy law?

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Heh heated thread and only 5 people have dared to vote!

 

[cybertect]

I did have. At infants school, in fact. [Posters of a certain age, out yourselves here]

I'm not quite old enough for Tufty, but ISTR we had some lessons featuring Darth Vader in an earlier incarnation

 

[Kanda]

i bet there's loads of cyclists who have already passed a driving test, would they be exempt from your new crazy law?

I'd say YES!

I think that everyone should have some sort of road training. Part of the driving licence is Highway Code, which EVERYONE should sit the test on.

 

[Kanda]

As questioned earlier, you used to be able to ride a motorbike up to 50cc based on a Car licence, they then introduce compulsory motorbike training for all motorbikes, that is why I questioned the stats.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

You haven't explained how this license would be regulated and funded. What age would it cut in?

I thought I had... If what you say is true, that most schools/councils already run cycling proficiency schemes, there is therefore a working method already in place and a test would/should be required before allowing any cyclist on any public road.

And how about kids living in the countryside? Would they have to own a licence to pedal down a quiet little lane too?

Of course they would, wouldn't you feel safer in the knowledge that your children had passed a test before letting them out on the roads?

And have you any statistics to back up this supposed increased need for cycle licensing?

There isn't an increased need, the need has always existed...
http://www.rospa.org.uk/roadsafety/advice/cycling/cycling_accidents.htm
Statistics can't be denied, cyclists are involved in accidents, If testing and licensing saves just one life, surely this is sufficient reason for its introduction?

 

[mauvais]

How would it be done? You'd need to practice on the road else there's no point, so how? Provisional cycling licence? Cycling instructors? Can only ride a bike with 15 gears until you pass?

 

[Kanda]

How would it be done? You'd need to practice on the road else there's no point, so how? Provisional cycling licence? Cycling instructors? Can only ride a bike with 15 gears until you pass?

Dunno, ask Biddly, she found a course easy enough

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

I would support the provision of free cycling training to all school children, paid for from an extra penny on the price of petrol initially. One would anticipate that as the health benefits of cycling as a means for getting around become more apparent to larger proportions of young people, they will become healthier and fitter, thus reducing demands on primary health care spending so savings may become available there.

I would also posit the need for motorists who are in collision with child cyclists to be fined very large sums of money, which would be allocated to a no-fault compensation scheme for children injured whilst cycling. Also, for prosecution to proceed on the basis of the motorist being required to demonstrate exactly how they were driving safely and with due care and attention when the collision occured.

If the training is provided free and across the board to all kids, why the need to incur extra expense on licensing? The long-term effect of free training would be that the vast majority of the population would have recieved appropriate tuition at school.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

.

 

[cybertect]

Err, that's LONDON. London isn't the whole of the UK you know.

[cough]

Er, yes. That's why I asked the question.

Maybe, like use of buses, it's one of those London/not London things and while cycle use is up in London, it's declining in the rest of the UK?

Then again, I guess if cycling is up by 83% in London, that's one of the primary areas of the country where cyclists are going to be at risk, compared with, say, the Highlands of Scotland.

I'm not in favour of compulsory testing for cyclists, BTW. More bureaucracy and discouragement to take up cycling and it would likely lead to compulsory registration of bicycles.

Making sure that kids receive proper roadcraft training at school, however, is entirely sensible and I'd also be in favour of (well publicised) free or very cheap adult cycle training schemes.

 

[souljacker]

Err, that's LONDON. London isn't the whole of the UK you know.

Why so eggy? Your hair will go grey with all that stress!

Seems to me that an increase in London will spread to other areas quite quickly. There certainly seems to be more cyclists on the streets of Reading in the last year (including me!). A voluntary free course from the council would be very useful for these new riders.

 

[Crispy]

Eggy haven't heard that in ages

 

[editor]

Making sure that kids receive proper roadcraft training at school, however, is entirely sensible and I'd also be in favour of (well publicised) free or very cheap adult cycle training schemes.

Me too. The idea of enforced licensing for children on bikes is ridiculous and unenforceable.

 

[cybertect]

Statistics can't be denied, cyclists are involved in accidents, If testing and licensing saves just one life, surely this is sufficient reason for its introduction?

if one were to apply that same logic to everything, you would find yourself in favour of compulsory testing and licensing of ladders for domestic use.

N.B. Homes are more dangerous than cars

To "save just one life" is rarely sufficient basis for the formulation of public policy. Fatal accidents on railways, while regrettable and rare would be prohibitively expensive and impractical to eliminate entirely.

 

[editor]

I thought I had... If what you say is true, that most schools/councils already run cycling proficiency schemes, there is therefore a working method already in place and a test would/should be required before allowing any cyclist on any public road.

You haven't explained how your hare-brained licensing scheme would be funded and enforced.

Could you do so now please?

 

[editor]

if one were to apply that same logic to everything, you would find yourself in favour of compulsory testing and licensing of ladders for domestic use.

*Awaits Dr_Herbz's demands for rigorous tests for ladder users backed by impromptu house visits to check the license is up to date.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

You haven't explained how your hare-brained licensing scheme would be funded and enforced.

Could you do so now please?

OK, just for those who for one reason or another, failed to understand my previous attempt to explain...

Most - if not all - schools or local councils run cycling proficiency tests, anyway.

Make this a mandatory test and instead of issuing a cycling proficiency certificate, issue a license... pretty simple really, no?

As for enforcing it... simple, any cyclist involved in an RTA or caught commiting an offense would be required to produce his/her license, just as motorists are and failure to produce said license would result in prosecution... simple eh?

 

[Dr_Herbz]

*Awaits Dr_Herbz's demands for rigorous tests for ladder users backed by impromptu house visits to check the license is up to date.

Last I knew, ladders weren't designed to be used as a means of transport on public roads, do you have proof to the contrary?

 

[editor]

As for enforcing it... simple, any cyclist involved in an RTA would be required to produce his/her license, just as motorists are and failure to produce said license would result in prosecution... simple eh?

So how do you check who has taken this test or not? Police stopchecks?
Who'd pay for the licenses to be printed and distributed?
Would they be expensive photo licenses - and how often would they have to be renewed?

And what about young children? Would they need a license to pedal down a quiet road and be banned off the streets until they can produce one?
And who's going to pay for all this pointless bureaucracy?

 

[Crispy]

Funded out of general taxation, I presume?

 

[rutabowa]

Make this a mandatory test and instead of issuing a cycling proficiency certificate, issue a license... pretty simple really, no?

it really isn't very simple. The DVLA is devoted to doing it for cars, it would take a similar sized organization just to maintain it. to put it in place all over the country, properly regulated, would be a total nightmare.

i am in favour of cyclists being properly trained. a license for every cyclist is just impractical though. and there is the "advantage" of being a cyclist taht if you do ride around like a dick, then chances are you won't last too long with out getting hurt, and are much, much less likely to hurt anyone else than any other road-going vehicle would be.

 

[Crispy]

ed, are you dismissing all licensing ideas for cyclists? If so, why?

eta: DON'T WORRY YOU JUST ANSWERED THAT q
fucking caps. again!

 

[editor]

Funded out of general taxation, I presume?

But how on earth could you justify such a massive expenditure? I mean, it's not like the roads are full of crazed cyclists causing accidents every minute - and training won't necessarily stop some cyclists acting like anti-social twats either.

Surely we'd be better off increasing the provision for free school/adult training rather than forcing people to carry around yet more official documentation (and give the police even more excuses to hassle people.)

 

[mauvais]

I think you're focusing on making life more difficult for a certain set of people, when really you should be doing it to EVERYONE. How can you claim you've achieved anything when it didn't involve jumping through hoops of fire on the edge of a windy cliff whilst being savaged by a tiger? If cyclists, drivers, milkmen, vagrants, kids, dogs and the Pope were united in this together then it would simply put an end to strife right there and then.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

So how do you check who has taken this test or not? Police stopchecks?
Who'd pay for the licenses to be printed and distributed?
Would they be expensive photo licenses - and how often would they have to be renewed?

And what about young children? Would they need a license to pedal down a quiet road and be banned off the streets until they can produce one?
And who's going to pay for all this pointless bureaucracy?

Police don't stop every motorist to check if they have a license... do they?

Cycling proficiency certificates are printed, people could simply supply a photograph which would be laminated onto their 'certificate'

As for the children issue... let me ask you... would you rather send children out on a bike in the knowledge that they had passed a test or would you rather they just leaned by their mistakes, possibly at the cost of their lives?

 

[Dr_Herbz]

And who's going to pay for all this pointless bureaucracy?

Firstly, your opinion that this would be "pointless bureaucracy" is noted and duly dismissed.

How much would it cost for the DVLA to add another HDD to their server in order to maintain a record of all registered cyclists?
When a cyclist passes the test, the license could be issued on the spot and the information could be immediately uploaded to the server which would be automatically accessible by the relevent authorities.
Would the cost of administration be outweighed by the cost of hospital treatment, lost man hours etc for cyclists who, as a result of their lack of road knowledge, are involved in accidents?

Instead of putting the cost onto motorists, why not add a fiver to the price of a bike, this would surely cover the administrative costs?