TOinTO
Active Member
Couldn't a written test and licensing of all cyclists over 18 create jobs and income for the City? Think bicycle licensing centres located in the east, west, north and central areas of the City which administer similar procedures as motor vehicle centres with a cycling license similar to a drivers license. Add that to a prominently displayed license plate on the rear of the bicycle and enforcement by law officials and this could be not only a cash cow for the City, but drastically cut down the anarchy which currently exists on the roads (and sidewalks) today.
Of course, if you only license cyclists over 18, you're licensing a population that, overwhelmingly, already have driver's licenses. You can expect that they know the rules of the road as well as they ever will. Where is the benefit? I guess you'll get the 905'ers and tourists off our streets.
Enforcement is already an option. That we don't have police on every corner ticketing cyclists suggests that there are more important public safety issues to be dealt with.
That's all good in an ideal world but there needs to be regulation as bicycle ridership increases dramatically each year. Over 1000 reported cycling accidents in 2008 says to me that there's a problem in paradise.
My post was pretty explicit that we are in no transportation paradise. We have laws that govern how you should ride a bicycle on the road. We have more laws that apply to cars and we license drivers. Yet we still have a lot of bad driving and many automobile deaths every year.
You're calling for increased regulation without a shred of evidence that it is necessary to reduce the number of car vs bike accidents. I think the only contribution it would make to reducing the number of accidents is by reducing the number of cyclists.
On the other hand, there is a lot of evidence that improving bicycle infrastructure will reduce the number of those accidents.