Cycling Licence

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

Has anyone heard anything more about the introduction of the bike licence ? It's gone a bit quiet since the state election but now that the results are in I'm sure we can expect to hear about it pretty soon. They were talking $12 without insureance but I don't know if that figure is still accurate.
What does everyone think anyway. At first I thought it was a stupid idea, but now it's growing on me.

I reckon it would be a brilliant idea - make those nincompoop bike couriers accountable for their idiotic disregard of anything resembling a road rule and tame down their apalling arrogance to every other road and public space user.

At the same time it would be dreadful. We have enough trouble getting people out of their polluting tin cans that choke all the available road space without putting another hurdle in front of them.

And maybe that's the idea. :mad:

What do you think a bike licence would achieve? At what age would you need to be licenced, and does it mean if you are under that age, you cannot ride a bike? If the concern is people disregarding road rules, then there should be a blitz on that sort of behaviour - the current police powers are perfectly adequate in that regard.

With growing rates of obesity, we really need another barrier to people getting off their backsides and exercising. :rolleyes:

Also, $12 wouldn't cover the cost of administration and we need more bureaucracy like we need a hole in the head.

Apparently yer supposed to wear a helmet..like that's being enforced. How they going to enforce something they can't see (like whther you got a licence)? Crappy idea.

The same thoughts raced through my mind at first. Well not really raced....nothing really races anymore. But I then took a good look at the cocks out there who ride the wrong side of the road, ride the footpath, jump gutters, don't wear helmets etc,etc,etc. A licence would at least give the cops an address and a reason to confiscate bikes if the rider doesn't hold the licence or doesn't abide by the same road rules as everyone else. It would be a good thing for us. We haven't got a problem. The thoughts being debated are to introduce the licence at 12 years old with a test etc.
If you said 10 years ago that we would now need a fishing licence, I for one would have said it was a stupid idea.

Hang on a sec, that was a stupid idea !:mad:

Has anyone heard anything more about the introduction of the bike licence ? It's gone a bit quiet since the state election but now that the results are in I'm sure we can expect to hear about it pretty soon. They were talking $12 without insureance but I don't know if that figure is still accurate.
What does everyone think anyway. At first I thought it was a stupid idea, but now it's growing on me.Matagi is right on the money - the problem is that current laws are not being enforced.

The idea of a cycling license is about behavioural control. You can do that either with a system of points, or a system of fines. We already have an adequate system in place with driving licenses.

Police already have the powers to stop and detain you if you have broken the law on a bicycle, and you can be fined as such. If you hold a drivers license (and I would think that most adult cyclists do), then they can record the offence against your name. I was under the impression that you don't lose points, however, because you don't have to be licensed to ride a bicycle on the road (please correct me if I am wrong).

So it seems to me that the current powers already achieve everything that a proposed licensing system would do.

The only people that fall into a grey area under the current system are people who do not hold a current drivers license, and that could easily be rectified by allowing cyclists to use a NSW RTA Proof-of-Age cards, or whatever the equivalent is in your state, as proof of ID.

The only requirement on the bicycle rider would be to carry his/her drivers license or valid ID (which most should already do anyway).

Instead of tarnishing the reputations of a majority of responsible cyclists, law enforcers should be cracking down on the idiots who break the law.

n

Matagi is right on the money - the problem is that current laws are not being enforced.

The idea of a cycling license is about behavioural control. You can do that either with a system of points, or a system of fines. We already have an adequate system in place with driving licenses.

Police already have the powers to stop and detain you if you have broken the law on a bicycle, and you can be fined as such. If you hold a drivers license (and I would think that most adult cyclists do), then they can record the offence against your name. I was under the impression that you don't lose points, however, because you don't have to be licensed to ride a bicycle on the road (please correct me if I am wrong).

So it seems to me that the current powers already achieve everything that a proposed licensing system would do.

The only people that fall into a grey area under the current system are people who do not hold a current drivers license, and that could easily be rectified by allowing cyclists to use a NSW RTA Proof-of-Age cards, or whatever the equivalent is in your state, as proof of ID.

The only requirement on the bicycle rider would be to carry his/her drivers license or valid ID (which most should already do anyway).

Instead of tarnishing the reputations of a majority of responsible cyclists, law enforcers should be cracking down on the idiots who break the law.

n
Good call. Perhaps then that all riders should carry with them either a drivers licence or a Proof of Age card. Perhaps the Proof of Age card should have a bike riders tick box to prove that they have passed a road rules test. Then no money needs to change hands and the streets are clean of BMX ride'n, gutter jump'n, cap on back to front-ers.

I was under the impression that you don't lose points, however, because you don't have to be licensed to ride a bicycle on the road (please correct me if I am wrong).

I was under the impression that cycling infringements did result in the deduction of driving license points. It's of particular relevance to anyone who feels like wobbling home on two wheels after a few pints. If you're naughty enough, you can lose your license without ever getting behind the wheel. Of course, you can still ride after that...

I was under the impression that cycling infringements did result in the deduction of driving license points. It's of particular relevance to anyone who feels like wobbling home on two wheels after a few pints. If you're naughty enough, you can lose your license without ever getting behind the wheel. Of course, you can still ride after that...Dunno. Sounds as though it may be the case. So if you hold a drivers licence and go through a red light on the bike you can loose points and cop a fine, but if you don't hold a drivers licence......what happens ? Does anyone know? I'd like to know when the last time a graffitti scrawl'n, steet light break'n, footpath spitt'n, 12 year old twat copped a $150 fine for ride'n up a one way street.

Being a kiwi I've never heard of it but it sounds like a bit of a knee jerk reaction to the pedestrian who was killed a while back. With all the barriers to cycling commuting this will be another hurdle.

Cycling should be free to anybody who wishes to participate and I think that a licence to ride would be a negative. When the wearing of helmets became compulsory many of our local elderly riders gave up riding to the local shops and to visit nearby friends. I agree that helmets are necessary, but they are another burdon on their income. (Though helmets have become less expensive than when first became compulsory. A licence would be a further negative in encouraging people to maintain an active lifestyle.

We are already required to follow the road rules and, if we don't (and get caught) there are adequate consequences. The idiots will still behave in the way they do currently, a licence will not stop that behaviour. There are many, many motorists on the road who are unlicenced (and getting away with it until pulled up for a check, or for doing something wrong). Licences will not necessarily create perfect cyclists, as we already know, they don't create perfect drivers.

A proactive approach would be the education of young children , focusing on the road rules for cyclists and practical riding sessions at a road safety centre. Get them young when they are ready to learn, and show them how to be responsible cyclists. They are the future road users. http://www.cycling.net.au/images/smilies/smile.gif

I was under the impression that cycling infringements did result in the deduction of driving license points. It's of particular relevance to anyone who feels like wobbling home on two wheels after a few pints. If you're naughty enough, you can lose your license without ever getting behind the wheel. Of course, you can still ride after that...
I thought that DUI (of a motor vehicle at least) is a criminal offence that results in immediate suspension of license and a court appearance, so no points are involved.

Don't know if it applies to bicycles, but according to this (http://aussielegal.aol.com.au/informationoutline.asp?nocache=1&SubTopicDetailsID=952), it may not. It might get into your definition of "motor vehicle", but to me it reads like the DUI laws were designed for cars.

My reasoning for not having demerit points struck on your driving license if you're on a bike is that you can't have them put against your name if you're not licensed to operate the vehicle.

If you don't need a license to use a bicycle, then you can't be disqualified from using one for offences that require a license. The fine should act as a major disincentive, particularly since they're fairly big now. Last time I checked, a red light fine is something like $200+, so that would get very close to, if not exceed the cost of the average bicycle being used by most people.

Case in point - the premier of NSW a few years ago was fined for not wearing a seat belt, but did not have demerit points applied because he did not hold a license - (in every other circumstance, it would have been the driver facing the music, but we all know the political uproar that would have caused).

Just like the reflectors thread - it seems that this is decidedly looking like a very grey legal area!

n

Cycling should be free to anybody who wishes to participate and I think that a licence to ride would be a negative. When the wearing of helmets became compulsory many of our local elderly riders gave up riding to the local shops and to visit nearby friends. I agree that helmets are necessary, but they are another burdon on their income. (Though helmets have become less expensive than when first became compulsory. A licence would be a further negative in encouraging people to maintain an active lifestyle.

We are already required to follow the road rules and, if we don't (and get caught) there are adequate consequences. The idiots will still behave in the way they do currently, a licence will not stop that behaviour. There are many, many motorists on the road who are unlicenced (and getting away with it until pulled up for a check, or for doing something wrong). Licences will not necessarily create perfect cyclists, as we already know, they don't create perfect drivers.

A proactive approach would be the education of young children , focusing on the road rules for cyclists and practical riding sessions at a road safety centre. Get them young when they are ready to learn, and show them how to be responsible cyclists. They are the future road users. http://www.cycling.net.au/images/smilies/smile.gif

I've got a betta idea. Let's just shoot the pimple faced, tossers.

I've got a betta idea. Let's just shoot the pimple faced, tossers.
Oh dear! You're starting to sound like a grumpy old man. Are you old enough to qualify? ;)

Oh dear! You're starting to sound like a grumpy old man. Are you old enough to qualify? ;)Not really, but one day I may be. It did sound a bit harsh I must admit. But infact I did tone it down. My original draft was to arrest them all, and sit them down and play the Blombers Theme Song to them.
But I thought that was a bit over the top. :rolleyes:
Also, because it only gets played after a win, nobody can remember how it goes.:D :D :D :D

I'm not sure that $12.00 would actually cover the admin costs involved in issuing a license especially if there's a picture on it. I'm only saying this as my six year old son rides a bike and is he expected to have a license as well? Remember that 99.9% of us first rode a bike when we weren't able to see over the counter to buy lollies.

I don't believe more regulations are needed but better education. Who is better to teach a rider more than another rider.

The point has been made that most cyclists are also drivers. Do we drive our cars the same way we ride our bikes? I think not because if we did the road toll would be ten times higher. Then why is that when some one jumps on a push bike the part of the brain that reminds us of the road rules seems to go into hibernation? I'm not just talking about running red lights and riding down the middle of tram tracks in the city, I was thinking of all the riders that ride on foot paths, that keep cycling through areas that have signs up saying no bike riding because there's no room for riders and pedestrians.

I was wondering why people would consider bringing in a bike license. It's just our behaviour in general. Most non-cyclists I know think that we are scum and are weird. That we hog the road, run red lights and don't give way.

We all support the rights of cyclists ( I would scream all night about it if someone asked me too) but isn't it about time ALL cyclists also took on the responsibilites as well? If this license comes to pass we only have ourselves to blame.

As a footnote about the old gentlemen being killed by a cyclist. Next time that when that comes up in conversation point out that over the last ten years only 1 pedestriation has been killed by a cyclist but over 15 push bikers have been killed by cars in Victoria.
Info gleaned from Vic Police.

The point has been made that most cyclists are also drivers. Do we drive our cars the same way we ride our bikes? I think not because if we did the road toll would be ten times higher. Then why is that when some one jumps on a push bike the part of the brain that reminds us of the road rules seems to go into hibernation?People's morals generally go out the window when they think they won't get caught. In the case of bikes, it's because we're anonymous and not identifiable. No registration plates or any other markings that would allow us to be traced and held to account.

I'll admit to riding the footpath when the traffic's been thick. However, it's as much from a sense of self-preservation for my body and respiratory system as frustration, and I've even seen the cops down at The Rocks in Sydney's Circular Quay do the same. :rolleyes: I always yield to those dumb and unpredictable sheep we call pedestrians, whom I regard as an even greater safety hazard than cars. I ride too fast to mix with them safely anyhoo.

Two interesting snippets from NSW and Australian Road Rules:

we are allowed to overtake down the left hand side of a line of stationary traffic and go to the head of the queue, so long as noone is indicating to go left
we can go through a red light, so long as we've waited for a period equivalent to one full cycle before proceeding with caution.
I'm assuming the reason for the latter is that the magnetic sensors (those tar-filled rectangles cut into the road in front of the solid white line) don't pick up aluminium bikes.

Not really, but one day I may be. It did sound a bit harsh I must admit. But infact I did tone it down. My original draft was to arrest them all, and sit them down and play the Blombers Theme Song to them.
But I thought that was a bit over the top. :rolleyes:
Also, because it only gets played after a win, nobody can remember how it goes.:D :D :D :D
Hmm, someone clearly has a death wish. :rolleyes:

I'm assuming the reason for the latter is that the magnetic sensors (those tar-filled rectangles cut into the road in front of the solid white line) don't pick up aluminium bikes.
FWIW, 90% of the time, the sensors will detect me on my bike, even when I am the only "vehicle" on the road.

FWIW, 90% of the time, the sensors will detect me on my bike, even when I am the only "vehicle" on the road.
I'm not so lucky. About one in 5 or 6 for me.