Licenses for Bicycles? Seriously?

[Hasselhoss]

It wont get any riders off the road... It will only add paperwork and a tax to their activity.

Also, most people that are riding bikes for exercise also own and drive cars like everyone else and more than pay for their road use. It's not an either/or thing.

They write tickets to bike riders now, for helmet laws, traffic laws etc....adding a tax and registration wont change that.

No helmet law for adult bike riders in GA

if they're breaking laws...the cops can handle it, just like drivers, no need for license plates to do that....wont help the cops stop them.

Cops are generally pro-car, anti-bike in situations where the two meet violently.

wait, so you're for Government Databases of Bikes, how about guns?
and...criminals will simply take a philips head and remove the plates...so... what is the benefit?

This is about money, plain and simple.

It wont get any riders off the road... It will only add paperwork and a tax to their activity.

This is about money, plain and simple.

You guys would be up in ARMS literally if they wanted to add a Tax and Licensing to "going to the range". but its ok, because its not an activity you like?

What's funny about this is the crappy way the guys on the cycling forums generally treat gun owners. Start a thread on MTBR or RCR about "best way to carry while riding" and you'll get "Why do you need a gun?.... Are you paranoid?.... How 'bout this, DON'T CARRY A GUN!!!... etc... etc..."

 

[Aegis]

Again, I'm not sure I follow. We pay taxes to maintain roadways. You are correct about having a right to travel, but the means by which you do it is what matters. You don't have a right to drive a car, but you do to walk/run. If you choose to drive a car you must get licensed and tagged to do so. The roadways aren't a naturally occurring thing and thus require some form of tax to be supported.

bikes don't kill people. thats why cars get licensing, to make sure people at least maybe know how to drive safely.

bad cyclists get themselves killed , not others.

 

[Hasselhoss]

Again, I'm not sure I follow. We pay taxes to maintain roadways. You are correct about having a right to travel, but the means by which you do it is what matters. You don't have a right to drive a car, but you do to walk/run. If you choose to drive a car you must get licensed and tagged to do so. The roadways aren't a naturally occurring thing and thus require some form of tax to be supported.

just to play devil's advocate for a minute, should people that jog on sidewalks pay a tax for sidewalks? Should people that jog on the roads, pay for licenses and tags to do so?

 

[GeauxLSU]

It also states that bikes are to ride no more than two abreast, as far to the right as safely possible. yea, that happens

And this bill changes that... to....

Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall ride no more than four riders per single file line, and at least four feet shall separate each​

bicycle. At least 50 feet shall be maintained between each line of four riders at all times.

Doing the math, a group of 20 bikes riding legally, would stretch out the length of a football field, including endzones.

 

[Proximal]

bikes don't kill people. thats why cars get licensing, to make sure people at least maybe know how to drive safely.

bad cyclists get themselves killed , not others.

So, a cyclist has never caused a wreck?

 

[Aegis]

So, a cyclist has never caused a wreck?

sure, so do pedestrians Far Far more than bikes. we should license and tax walking too?


OR. we could react ONLY to the person and action that caused the wreck rather than everyone.

 

[Proximal]

just to play devil's advocate for a minute, should people that jog on sidewalks pay a tax for sidewalks? Should people that jog on the roads, pay for licenses and tags to do so?

I think you missed the point and I think you read it wrong or I didn't specify. I wasn't insinuating that if you walk/run as your right means you can use the roads to do so. Run in the grass. I personally couldn't care less. My point is, if cars had never been invented, and we had no need for paved roads, then there probably wouldn't be a tax for your mode of transportation.

 

[Hasselhoss]

So, a cyclist has never caused a wreck?

Taxes would have prevented this

 

[GeauxLSU]

just to play devil's advocate for a minute, should people that jog on sidewalks pay a tax for sidewalks? Should people that jog on the roads, pay for licenses and tags to do so?

Sidewalks are already paid for by property owners. But in theory you could do that. We'd simply not have any sidewalks and be 'disinfranchising the people with feet'.
The bicycling commuting has long been pushing for better access, bike lanes, "bike friendly" roadways and laws promoting "share the road" and all that good stuff. They should be ECSTATIC to be willing to contribute to THEIR RECREATION rather than continuing to have the general public at large subsidize it. I realize paying your way in today's society is quickly becoming a quaint concept but I'm good with it.

 

[Hasselhoss]

I think you missed the point and I think you read it wrong or I didn't specify. I wasn't insinuating that if you walk/run as your right means you can use the roads to do so. Run in the grass. I personally couldn't care less. My point is, if cars had never been invented, and we had no need for paved roads, then there probably wouldn't be a tax for your mode of transportation.

I'm pretty sure they will find a way to tax runners for "Oxygen Use" and "CO2 emissions" in the future.