[crazyjarhead]

I've heard a lot of bicyclists express the desire to be treated just like any other vehicle. I share that sentiment. I recently read about an accident in which the bicyclist was at fault (crossed intersection against light). No license, no proof of insurance, left scene before police arrived. Car owner, with now damaged vehicle, was understandably upset.

So here's my question: why aren't bicycles licensed and we required to carry insurance?

[crazyjarhead]

I forgot to add that if this were to take place, I would want to see stricter testing of drivers. I see too many vehicle drivers that don't have a clue about what they are really doing. Driver's education is an oxymoron down here in Texas.

Oh yeah and for god's sake start enforcing the insurance requirement. Don't have insurance? Hand over your keys moron.

[Industry_Hack]

How would you price liability insurance for cyclists? And how often is a cyclist at fault for the damages?

[crazyjarhead]

Good question. Unfortunately, I'm not an acturial accountant (my parents were married ).

I'm sure there are some smart risk managers out there that could come up with the approapriate numbers. Certainly, there are accident statistics and police reports to start with.

[HandsomeRyan]

Originally Posted by crazyjarhead

why aren't bicycles licensed and we required to carry insurance?

This is a very slippery slope. If you require cyclists to have insurance to ride, why not make pedestrians carry ID and liability insurance too?

[crazyjarhead]

very good point - my inner idealist libertarian is screaming why have insurance/licensing at all - regardless of which mode of transport you use

[Industry_Hack]

Originally Posted by HandsomeRyan

This is a very slippery slope. If you require cyclists to have insurance to ride, why not make pedestrians carry ID and liability insurance too?

Actually, pedestrians are required to carry ID.

[crazyjarhead]

Originally Posted by Industry_Hack

Actually, pedestrians are required to carry ID.

and thus the reason our founding fathers are spinning in their graves....but I think he meant to say that pedestrians could be licensed....wouldn't that be interesting

a whole host of rules about cell phones, texting, smoking, eating, talking........while walking

[London]

Originally Posted by crazyjarhead

I've heard a lot of bicyclists express the desire to be treated just like any other vehicle. I share that sentiment. I recently read about an accident in which the bicyclist was at fault (crossed intersection against light). No license, no proof of insurance, left scene before police arrived. Car owner, with now damaged vehicle, was understandably upset.

So here's my question: why aren't bicycles licensed and we required to carry insurance?

License and registration would not have made the cyclist stay at the scene. They acted in a criminal manner. This is inbred.

No to any kind of action that would take more money from cyclists and gain them no profit. Why a person would think this a good idea is baffling to me.

[London]

Originally Posted by Industry_Hack

Actually, pedestrians are required to carry ID.

Not in Massachusetts they are not. Not yet, anyway.

I have lived here all my life and have asked this question of policemen I personally know. It's only required in this state while operating a motor vehicle on a public way. You can walk or cycle with no ID. Even do it in thong. No ID required.