that the idea of registration for cyclists is silly, unworkable and unenforceable

[KihoBebiluPute]

This idea was featured on Radio 4 on monday morning and is also in the telegraph - Nick Freeman (the motorists loophole lawyer) is trying to drum up support for a scheme to force cyclists to register and display a number plate type thing.

I get that there are plenty of selfish and sometimes dangerous cyclists out there, but the numbers of deaths and injuries caused by dangerous cycling is a minuscule fraction of the numbers caused by careless driving and the whole idea seems totally unrealistic to me.

(1) For number plates to work as a reasonably reliable registration method for cars, the manufacture of number plates has to be quite tightly controlled - criminals do clone plates but it's not easy for an ordinary member of the public to get a plate without proof of ownership, and plates are fixed to the correct car and generally stay put. Any kind of wearable registration plate for cyclists would necessarily be something portable and would therefore be so easy to lose or nick that it would be functionally useless as a means of identification because there couldn't be any means to verifiably ensure that each plate was only ever carried by the correctly registered individual associated with that number plate.

(2) cyclists don't come into the world as fully formed MAMILs - and the sight of a 6 year old wobbling along the pavement next to a parent is quite normal. There's no sharp divide between a kid just learning and a fully independent cyclist, no test to pass or license to grant. There's just a gradual build up of skills and road-sense and a gradual reduction in parental supervision. so there's no rational way to define when someone should start being registered (presumably no one thinks it should apply to kids who are just learning)

(3) its frankly stupid to put up any kind of additional barrier to make it more complicated to make a trip by bike rather than getting in the car. It's currently just about a reasonable balance for me for a lot of journeys - a tiny bit of extra hassle to find my helmet and D-lock, but the benefit of not having to find or pay for parking balances that enough that some fraction of the car-miles I might otherwise make, generating traffic congestion and pollution, gets turned into the green alternative of cycling. Upset this balance by making it a legal requirement to wear and carry this proposed registration plate and the net effect will be to drive up car traffic at a time when we should be doing everything we can to achieve the opposite.

Cyclists can cause severe accidents on the road, and they have enough presence on the road that they should definitely be registered and required to have insurance. It makes no sense that any untrained idiot can use the roads with all the risk it entails both for themselves and other people.

Although I agree with you I disagree with this part

its frankly stupid to put up any kind of additional barrier to make it more complicated to make a trip by bike rather than getting in the car.

In order to drive I had to

Take lessons
Pass a test
Buy a car
MOT the car
Insure the car
Tax the car

In order to ride a bike I have to buy and ride a bike. Where are the barriers there?

To reiterate though. I agree that it's impractical and likely unenforceable on a larger scale. Which can be evidenced by the number of cyclists that do skip skip lights, ride on the pavement and any other rules that are broken without being caught and punished.

In addition to the point @LolaSmiles makes, the reality is that the majority of cyclists also own a car and pay the related taxes related to driving

People need to stop seeing 'cyclists' as some sort of sub species. Sometimes I drive, sometimes I cycle, sometimes I walk or run.

I have lost count of the number of times as a cyclist, runner or pedestrian that my life has been put in danger my a motorist. I've also experienced some wanky cyclist behaviour but nothing which has left me feeling my life was in danger. Yes, cyclist can pose a risk to others but it is miniscule compared to the risk of harm from cars.

Then a teenager has a bike with a registration.

That is stupid as you are victimising a teenager, or in some of my family and friends' cases because they at 10 are the height of an adult.

Remember criminal responsibility goes on age not on height

No name change. Been using it for years

That makes it worse. 😂

DrinkFeckArseBrick
You're right. There are greener options that don't pay tax, including vehicles that have more emissions than human-powered pedal bikes.
Unfortunately it's apparently unreasonable to point this out and it doesn't help the imaginary cause.

It’s not just about deaths though is it? We once had one knock off our wing mirror and just drive off! No consequence to them but a nice bill for us and all we were doing is sat by the side of the road with the indicators on waiting to pull out after being parked up. Had they been registered we may have had some comeback, who knows?

People need to stop seeing 'cyclists' as some sort of sub species. Sometimes I drive, sometimes I cycle, sometimes I walk or run.
This.

Many a time I've slowed down for a commuter cyclist making a turn into their house. On their drive is parked one or two cars.

Would other motorists prefer cyclists, who also own cars, to drive them all the time to add to the congestion in cities and towns?

I can’t believe the number of people who think bikes should pay “road tax”. How can you be paying emissions tax for years and not even know what it is? It’s not splitting hairs to point out it’s not the same because the emissions tax is based on emissions- how do people not know this??

@Iluvfriends

Something needs to be done in order to identify cyclists as they can run someone over, cause an accident, damage a car, assault someone etc then refuse to give their details and just take off. I dont know what the answer is but they need to be identifiable.

Pedestrians can assault people, or be intimidating & rude, or steal things. Everyone could be forced to wear high viz at all times together with a number plate. Then all criminals could be easily identified.

@RedMarauder

Then a teenager has a bike with a registration.

That is stupid as you are victimising a teenager, or in some of my family and friends' cases because they at 10 are the height of an adult.

Remember criminal responsibility goes on age not on height

How is it ‘victimising’ anyone?

Cyclists wouldn’t become victims of anything just because they’d be require to have some knowledge of the rules of the road. If anything it would make them safer as well as everyone else.

Most children seem to do their cycling proficiency at around 10 or 11, and if they’re going to start cycling without adult supervision, it’s much better that they are trained and registered.

@NailsNeedDoing

Cyclists can cause severe accidents on the road, and they have enough presence on the road that they should definitely be registered and required to have insurance. It makes no sense that any untrained idiot can use the roads with all the risk it entails both for themselves and other people.

So pedestrians and horse riders should be insured?

They all use the roads.

Everyone could be forced to wear high viz at all times together with a number plate. Then all criminals could be easily identified.

Cheap sarcasm seems to come easy to some.

Before we start on cyclists we should be regulating mobility scooters. (My DD has one.)
Cyclists are a nightmare on country roads, but I don't think compulsory registration would make any difference to that.

Compulsory registration would just increase the number of cars on road because the occasional cyclist wouldn’t bother.

Most children seem to do their cycling proficiency at around 10 or 11, and if they’re going to start cycling without adult supervision, it’s much better that they are trained and registered.

There are places that don't have cycling proficiency believe it or not. The council area where I grew up still doesn't have it.

Is everyone not in support of more cycling on roads? It reduces emissions and improves fitness of the population. And is not comparable to driving a big metal box that takes up so much road and that can kill quickly (I say this as a car driver). I’m not sure where all the cycling negativity comes from? Everyone will have witnessed some bad cycling sure, but many more will have witnessed bad driving. Imagine if that traffic you queue in everyday was made up with individual people on bikes … the roads would be much safer and less crowded, and the atmosphere much less polluted. I’ve also been a cyclist and i should say it’s difficult to always make the right Highway Code choices because drivers are programmed to be so unaware of you that it feels really unsafe a lot of the time. For this reason I’ve cycled on pavements at roundabouts and difficult junctions before, but the issue isn’t my knowledge of the Highway Code, but car users awareness of cyclists. More “how to respect cyclists on the road” training for car users would be my preference.

There is an argument for horse riders to be registered, but as the number of horse riders is so small compared to cyclists, and they don’t tend to rush though red lights or cause damage to people’s cars as they go past without stopping, there is much less need for them to be registered and have insurance.

Pedestrians are already catered for with crossings, and they don’t have anywhere near as much power to cause other people problems as cyclists do.

@RedMarauder

Most children seem to do their cycling proficiency at around 10 or 11, and if they’re going to start cycling without adult supervision, it’s much better that they are trained and registered.

There are places that don't have cycling proficiency believe it or not. The council area where I grew up still doesn't have it.

Maybe if registration came in councils would be required to provide it and kid would ultimately end up safer.

Pedestrians, skateboarders, scooterists and roller-bladerers are also involved in accidents. Should they all have to wear large tabbards with their registration number printed on so that they can be identified on CCTV and issued with a fine if they cross the road without waiting for the green man? And stopped and fined if they have the temerity to exist in public without being visually identifiable by a CCTV camera?

So Nick Freeman is trying to do something which he reckons would improve safety on the roads......while simultaneously getting rich twats who speed, etc off a driving ban!? How does he square that?

Oh it’s just the radio show booking a story that will get people riled up /talking. It’s just unnecessary admin to no gain, I can’t see it getting adopted any time soon.

Maybe if registration came in councils would be required to provide it and kid would ultimately end up safer.

Tory council with a Tory government. Unlikely.

Also registration doesn't make kids safer.

What makes users of non-motorised vehicles safer on the roads is reduced speed limits - which has already happened in loads of built up area.

And repairing pot holes in the road.

And utility suppliers not digging up the roads all the time.

My bikes are actually "registered" with the national bike registration scheme. They have a permanent, non removeable number painted on the frame. Now I did this as an anti-theft measure but I guess it could be rolled out and used as an identification measure. But still wouldn't be big enough to be used by cctv. But I guess if a police officer thought a cyclist was giving false details it could be used to check???

There is an argument for horse riders to be registered, but as the number of horse riders is so small compared to cyclists, and they don’t tend to rush though red lights or cause damage to people’s cars as they go past without stopping, there is much less need for them to be registered and have insurance.

Doesn't that depend where you live?