RSS
Home
Bicycle licensing short-sighted and discriminatory: Part I
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
Increased numbers of cyclists in major cities have prompted several individuals to question whether or not bikers ought to be licensed in order to be permitted to share the road. One in particular, Bryan Myrick of Seattle, has put forth a five-point proposal, in hopes that bicyclists will be held more accountable for their actions when sharing the road. However, in demanding “equal treatment under the law,” he fails to truly acknowledge the inherently unequal conditions—and consequences--to which he is applying said law.
In New York City and elsewhere, licensing bicycles is an act that will not increase cycling but decrease it, and will once again give drivers an undeserved upper hand in what should be equal access to the road.
Accoring to Myrick's article:
“#1 – Bicyclists and motorists should operate on shared roads with rules of the road that are equal but for common sense exceptions.”
Yes. It is called traffic law. In New York and Missouri (where I was born and have also ridden), as well as Seattle, and I'm guessing a majority of the other states, bicycles are vehicles under the law and subjected to the same penalties and privileges as cars.
Common sense exceptions ought to be based on the inequality that bicycles face under the current car-dominated system. First of all, the network of traffic lights was designed for cars, not bikes, though New York roads were first paved to accommodate bikes, not cars. We are all considered vehicles under the law, but bikers have to deal with a structure that is not conducive to bicycle transportation. Cycles go slower and can stop quicker since they're moving less mass. Since they're moving less mass, the damaged caused by them in a collision is less. Their visibility is also greater; they're more likely to see something that a car's blind spot would conceal. They even have a greater capacity to hear the traffic approaching around them. As Myrick mentioned, reaction time is a major factor in accidents, but so are Newtonian physics.
Secondly, for reasons involving laws of motion, motor vehicles are more dangerous. A driver's license, in its bare-bones state, is the manual for operating a two-ton hunk of steel. It's a big deal. One needs the skill and the practice in order to do it safely. Bicycles, too, but to a lesser degree, which is why we allow individuals who are younger than sixteen to ride them. NY Cycling Examiner Grace Lichtenstien pointed out that motorists kill cyclists but bikers don't kill motorists. I'd amend it and say that idiots not paying attention, not recognizing the enormous responsibility of a motor vehicle, kill cyclists. Those inattentive idiots, in some cases, can also be bikers. However, Myrick mentions that infliction of damage and cause are two different issues. Show stats that prove that bicycles “cause” accidents, not driver inattentiveness or excess of speed, and make them overpowering enough to overshadow every single other statistic that puts the driver at fault, and maybe then it will be time to regulate bikers.
Myrick countered in a second article that though bicycles were on roads before cars, horses preceded bikes. However, he ignores how the bicycle has not been rendered obsolete as a vehicle of transportation and leisure. First of all, horses are living creatures and bicycles are hunks of metal and rubber. Bikes do not breathe in harmful fumes, get spooked by horn noise, or hurt their hooves on the pavement. A bicycle does not have to be fed or cleaned up after since it doesn't leave large, steaming brown piles on the road. Horses also weigh over a thousand pounds. One at full gallop—which means the animal itself is difficult to control by its rider—can only sustain it for about a mile and a half. A horse may reach anywhere from 25-30 MPH, whereas a good messenger (and many regular commuters, I'm sure) can usually sustain that pace for a much longer distance. The speed limit in Manhattan is 30; the outer boroughs are similar. We took the horses off the road because they are incredibly inefficient compared to the bicycle.
I think it also stands to mention that Amish carriages regularly travel along the paved Highway 63, as well as other main and side roads, in northeast Missouri. The horses are well cared for; it is legal and they have been doing so for decades, and the cars that pass them are incredibly respectful.
“#2 – All on-road bicycles should be required to maintain a valid vehicle license and pay annual tab fees.”
Yes, roads cost money. That's why I pay taxes. And I should be able to ride on the roads I pay for. Not just the three-foot wide strips on a few streets in the city—the whole road.
As much as I would love to see cycling numbers grow as numbers of cars decline, I can't see how license fees on the relatively small number of cyclists would generate as much income as the writer thinks it will. Cyclists also cause less wear and tear on the road than constant vehicular traffic, anyway. We'd be paying for damages that we wouldn't be committing. And if he expects Washington bikers to go dutch on road costs when there's Seattle's 440 bike-laned miles to the 4,200 of (shared) road, it'll be a quick honeymoon.
As a resident of a community, any revenue that goes towards the common good is fine by me, but as a New York rider, I'm against it for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that it'll give cops the means to pick on bikers to meet their ticket quota when there are much more pressing needs to attend to.
He also states “it is unrealistic to assume that all motorists must be ready and alert at all time to yield the right of way to cyclists.” Why not? You're operating a fast, heavy machine. You should be as attentive as if you were taking the driver's test with the DMV agent in the passenger's seat. That driving test is what qualified motor vehicle operators as “knowing the rules of the road,” right? If cyclists indeed have the right of way, yield. Be as aware of them as they are of you, because I guarantee, as a cyclist myself, that they are. Slow down and be alert, or else give up your own license because it will assuredly be taken away. With more power comes more responsibility, and that involves horsepower as well.
“#3 – On-road riders should be required to obtain and hold a valid operator’s license.”
If you're on the road you should know the rules of the road. However, I'm fairly certain that every cyclist you see on the road has a pretty good idea of what the rules are. But just because someone knows the law doesn't mean they won't break it, intentionally or accidentally, and as proof I will cite every single speeding ticket and moving violation that licensed drivers have received since the DMV began licensing drivers.
And “physically able”? Of course they would be. Never even mind the fact that the bicycle is a vehicle that improves your physical strength the more you ride it, as opposed to the cars, which keep you stiff and still in one position. No adult is going to try to ride a bike if he can't stay upright and ride a straight line, especially not on public roads. If it's a child who is not able to “physically” ride but is on the road, I would recommend contacting Social Services, not the DOT.
Most importantly, cycling takes balls. Especially commuter cycling, being car-free, and most especially in New York City. There is no other way around it. Given the choice, would any American would rather relax in a climate-controlled environment in their transportation, allowing them to eat and drink simultaneously, and not have to work more than applying pressure with your right foot in order to accelerate? In New York, a city that has had all types of professional and amateur bicyclists since its inception, 120,000 city residents bicycle on any given day. That's still only 1.4% of the city's population. (Incidentally, 54% use mass transit, which saved 1.8 billion gallons of oil in 2006 and $4.6 billion in gasoline costs. You're welcome.) Though bicycling is not for the faint of heart, it only makes one stronger. If you ride, it means you know how to do it and you enjoy it over the alternatives.
Part II can be found here.
For more info: Bike Portland: BTA issues formal opposition to bike registration bill
Related Articles:
Comments
