So why aren't bicycles treated like cars and motorcycles?

[Jrboulder]

They use public roads. They have their own special and expensive infrastructure. They cause motor vehicle accidents. They get themselves and others killed. They don't have to demonstrate that they understand traffic laws, potential hazards or even the safe operation of their equipment. The only way they pay into the infrastructure they use is sales tax on their stuff.

Why aren't you required to have a specific license, registration and insurance to operate a bicycle on a major public road?

[intakexhaust]

All types of vehicles, including farm tractors cause or are involved in road accidents.

There are rules of the road for cyclist and can be ticketed. They can also be fined for violations, liable for an accident or damage. This goes for non-licensed and youth. How or whether its enforced is the problem.

The infrastructure is not their own, is shared by all and paid for by taxpayers, INCLUDING taxpaying cyclist. Depending on how and where (State, county, local) road tax revenues are collected, the cyclist share is not just from sales tax on their stuff.

[arominus]

Have you really thought this out?

Think it through. The guys you hate on the roadway don't give 2 ****s about your licensing requirements, they own Porsches and other nice, expensive toys just like you, it wouldn't stop them, they are riding $1000-10,000 bikes. Any licensing scheme would likely allow anyone with a license to ride a bicycle anyways and the insurance would basically be mandated health insurance because if you hit something or get hit you lose. Big time lose.

Now think about the after effects. Do you want to go through the hassle of licensing your kids to ride their bikes/skateboards/razor scooters/big wheels around and are you willing to pay for the fines involved when they fail to follow the law to t? Do you want to pay insurance on their bikes? Do you basically want to ban them from riding anything?If kids are allowed, Are you willing to sit at the DMV for 4 hours with your kids so they can ride over to the BMX jump line , trailhead or to school?

[Dantilla]

Originally Posted by Jrboulder

They have their own special and expensive infrastructure.

Not around here. No bike lanes. Ride on the pavement, or ride on the dirt.
Bikes cause zero wear on the roads. If a road saw only bike traffic, it would last nearly forever.

[Brando]

Originally Posted by intakexhaust

There are rules of the road for cyclist and can be ticketed. They can also be fined for violations, liable for an accident or damage...

Emphasis added by me. You should read my thread on my most-recent interaction with a cyclist. They most certainly are not liable for damages they cause. There are no ramifications in the CVC for this, no licensing requirements, no insurance requirements (liability, uninsured, etc). As stated above, some of these bikes are worth as much or more than cars. Direct purchases related to bicycles do not go towards maintenance of the infrastructure they use. If someone owns a car and a bike then maybe, but thats inderect.

Any relief you seek against a cyclist has to be through criminal courts (if DUI, theft, negligence leading to GBI), or Civil court for damages. I can speak to this from first-hand knowledge as I am living it right now.

So nobody should say they have the same requirements or responsibilities as motorists. They are extra-privileged.

Oh, and no-one has a RIGHT to drive or cycle. Licenses to drive are a PRIVILEGE, not a right.

[Jrboulder]

Originally Posted by arominus

Have you really thought this out?

Think it through. The guys you hate on the roadway don't give 2 ****s about your licensing requirements, they own Porsches and other nice, expensive toys just like you, it wouldn't stop them, they are riding $1000-10,000 bikes. Any licensing scheme would likely allow anyone with a license to ride a bicycle anyways and the insurance would basically be mandated health insurance because if you hit something or get hit you lose. Big time lose.

Now think about the after effects. Do you want to go through the hassle of licensing your kids to ride their bikes/skateboards/razor scooters/big wheels around and are you willing to pay for the fines involved when they fail to follow the law to t? Do you want to pay insurance on their bikes? Do you basically want to ban them from riding anything?If kids are allowed, Are you willing to sit at the DMV for 4 hours with your kids so they can ride over to the BMX jump line , trailhead or to school?

Do you really want your kids to

Originally Posted by Jrboulder

operate a bicycle on a major public road

[dad911]

Forced to follow a 'wolfpack' of cyclists today. Riding in groups, three abreast, don't move over or single file.

Typical saturday or sunday blocking country roads, happens almost every weekend around here.

Funny thing, never see them using the roads with bike lanes.

[Jrboulder]

Originally Posted by Brando

Oh, and no-one has a RIGHT to drive or cycle. Licenses to drive are a PRIVILEGE, not a right.

Exactly. Every other occupation of the roadway requires specific authority. Even people on foot are only allowed to be on the road at certain points with the only reason being to get to the other side. Even with railroads, a non-common carrier is completely unregulated until they cross a public road then they need to come up with an engineer certification program and get it approved by the FRA.

Bicycles are given irrevocable authority to basically do whatever the hell they want. Maybe they'll be given a ticket for running a stop sign (not likely) but it's not like their authority to be on a road can be revoked as it would be for any other user of the road.

[Nostril Cheese]

Bicyclists tend to have a clue in Portland. They don't act like they own the roads here.

[crustychief]

They know they own the road here. Almost every weekend I get stuck behind some sort of "tour de stretchy pants" sometimes 5 abreast.

[VaSteve]

Usually we have to wait until summer for a good old "bike hate" thread. I'm never sure if it is based on real hate for the fact that those are out getting exercise

Almost every weekend I get stuck behind some sort of "tour de stretchy pants" sometimes 5 abreast.

or they are just in your way or what....

It only take an extra second to pass.


Then again bad actors are why I ride solo. I don't wear my earbuds and I have a mirror, I will look over the crests and wave cars around me. 90% are cool, 10% are clueless and buzz me as if I'm another car or something.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by Jrboulder

They use public roads. They have their own special and expensive infrastructure. They cause motor vehicle accidents.

1. yes
2. in most places, they do not have any "special and expensive infrastructure."
3. they cause probably a minority of the accidents that involve them (usually inattentive or distracted drivers) and pay a much higher price when they are in an accident.

Other than Brando being out cash money due to a bike accident, seems like most of the other complaints are being delayed while stuck behind bicyclists. Are those couple of seconds or minutes really going to make a difference in your life?

There certainly are plenty of people here on the westside of LA who think they are incredibly important. Had a guy in a Mercedes pass on the right and then blow a red light. Of course he had to stop at the next light as he couldn't do a doucebag maneuver due to parked cars. Didn't appear to have an emergency - just an impatient prick.

No doubt there are prick bicyclists. If you put the percentage of them equal to those who drive cars, then that probably explains why you see them often.

[Ferraripete]

as a long time roadie and racer...I can assure you that cyclists can be ticketed just as an auto or a scoot.

[Baz]

Sometimes they just don't realize you are there......

[intakexhaust]

Originally Posted by Brando

Emphasis added by me. You should read my thread on my most-recent interaction with a cyclist. They most certainly are not liable for damages they cause. There are no ramifications in the CVC for this, no licensing requirements, no insurance requirements (liability, uninsured, etc). As stated above, some of these bikes are worth as much or more than cars. Direct purchases related to bicycles do not go towards maintenance of the infrastructure they use. If someone owns a car and a bike then maybe, but thats inderect.

Any relief you seek against a cyclist has to be through criminal courts (if DUI, theft, negligence leading to GBI), or Civil court for damages. I can speak to this from first-hand knowledge as I am living it right now.

So nobody should say they have the same requirements or responsibilities as motorists. They are extra-privileged.

Oh, and no-one has a RIGHT to drive or cycle. Licenses to drive are a PRIVILEGE, not a right.

Brando- I did read your thread. Surely sucked but glad you survived the whole ordeal.

Anyhow, I think one needs to review laws and regulations in each state.

I know for a fact and of someone who while riding a bike, hit a car. The police arrived and a report was made. No ticket was issued. Car driver was innocent of any wrong doing. The bike rider was required to exchange info with the driver of the car. He didn't bother with submitting to his insurance company but indeed was liable. The car owner later sued him in small claims court for damages. That police report and pictures was all that was needed. I don't know of the details and wasn't there and for all I know, bad cyclist could have simply lied and played the game, but that's beside the point. Regardless, jerk head bike rider didn't and was court ordered to pay up. What I understood later, bike rider told me that the claimant had the damages inflated. Had he just provided his car insurance, he probably would have been better off. (BTW: I'm glad this guy doesn't hang around anymore or join the group for bike rides.)

Next- The cost of bike lanes, trails and paths. As I mentioned above, it depends on the state, county or local tax revenues. Sales tax on goods, income tax could very well be part of the means in funneled funds for public bike lanes. Even little 10 yo Johnny saving money on his paper route and then spending for a new bike + tax collected, may be a small amount but it counts.

[VaSteve]

I live and ride in a semi rural area. People occasionally honk though I can hear them approach since I don't wear headphones. Anyone using train horns as either a joke or thinking they are helping will be getting a visit from the popo later that day.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by Jrboulder

They use public roads. They have their own special and expensive infrastructure. They cause motor vehicle accidents. They get themselves and others killed. They don't have to demonstrate that they understand traffic laws, potential hazards or even the safe operation of their equipment. The only way they pay into the infrastructure they use is sales tax on their stuff.

Why aren't you required to have a specific license, registration and insurance to operate a bicycle on a major public road?

I'm unclear on what you getting at. Are you saying we need more government administration, regulation and taxation targeting cyclists?

What special and expensive infrastructure are you referring to?

[911SauCy]

To answer the thread title:

Because they're bikes

[David]

It sounds like most cyclist haters out there don't realize how fast the bikes are actually going. The groups I ride in always go over 20 mph and usually cruise at 25 mph or faster. You simply can't do that safely in a bike lane or side walk.

I would venture to say that most experienced cyclists know the cycling laws better than the police who attempt to enforce them.

If a lane is not wide enough for a car to safely pass a cyclist in the lane it is the cyclists lawful right to take the entire lane. That usually means riding two abreast.

[Nickshu]

As a cyclist and former road racer I think unfortunately many cyclists point out that they are subject to the same rights as cars only when it's convenient for them.

For example when riding three abreast they cite that they have the same road rights as a car. But then they often run stop signs, stop lights, ride around cars at stop light lines, etc and see this as OK because they are on a bicycle... Double standard.

I've logged thousands of miles on the road and try to follow the laws. I guess the answer would be licensing cyclists and enforcing a points system similar to motor vehicle licensing. But cost prohibitive....

Sadly much bad behavior is self limiting as the resulting car vs bike interactions don't end well for the cyclist. However the legal burden of proof and bias is against the car...