Why shouldn't you need a permit to own and ride a bike?

>>1007936
Hunting and fishing is resource gathering
A whole different subject

Besides, yall in a bait thread

>>1007937
It's about use of public land. Roads are public land and so use of the road should require permits in the same way... And they do. Bikes are woefully and shamefully not accounted for but requiring permits would be a step in ensuring cyclists their place on the road and better representation for it.

File: 1452201795760.gif (1MB, 200x183px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 200x183px

>mfw where I live I don't need no permit for anything up to 50cc or bikes and helmets are entirely optional
once again europe has more freedums :^)

>>1007938
Are you also an advocate for walking permits?

>>1007966
We already have those. It's called being white.

I think you should need a permit to ride on the road, to avoid casuals from swerving around wrecking havoc

>>1007936
do you guys ever talk to girls you see out cycling

>>1007988
no i usually pass those weak cunts while whisting dixieland or some mormon hymns like "if ye could hie to kolob"

>>1007936

Bikes with wheels at or over 26in are required to be registered in my state. We already do have permits.

>>1007988
Rarely. That's because most of the time they're going so much slower than me.

I have my doubts about that.


Here you're required to have a permit to ride on public roads as an underage issued by your school.

It's a written test (for knowledge of traffic regulations) and a practical test supervised by a volunteer police officer on a school field with drawn lines, roundabouts, crossing etc.

There were like 3 children in my grade who failed the practical test and they were all not-so-smart females. So it's not hard at all, majority of us passed it in flying colours.

But as soon as you turn 18, you no longer need it to ride on public roads and so retards with absolutely no knowledge of traffic regulations are allowed to use public roads.


I don't want to sound like a drooling leftie statist commie cuck, but I can't say i enjoy that system.

Adult should be obliged to have such permit as well, even if the whole procedure would look like it does in elementary school for children aged 10.

>>1007988
I saw a girl riding the other day who looked really cute. Smiled and waved, she did the same, but we were separated by a small canal and going the opposite direction. It was near where I live so I was hoping I'd see her again but no luck so far.

>>1007988
I wouldn't even acknowledge a girl with a dork disk, empty cages, bars higher than saddle, QR skewer pointing forward, grubby chain, wearing shorts instead of bibs, helmet strap over glasses arms, and no muscle tone in her legs. Like the girl in OP.

>>1007996
>retards with absolutely no knowledge of traffic regulations are allowed to use public roads.
This is exactly why I'm in favour of licencing cyclists.
Plus it would eliminate any arguments that motorists have about entitlement to use the roads.

I think it's only a matter of time before it happens in Australia.

>>1008000
nice trips
get over yourself

>>1008003
Thanx! I slaved over a hot stove all day to bake those delicious digits.

Also, relax. I was just meme'ing. If that's you in the pic then I'm sorry if I offended.

But probably RIDE MOAR, yea?

>>1007991
very underrated post

Stop pretending to be an advocate for cycling safety, if you actually cared you would know that the best way to improve cycling safety and infrastructure is increasing bike use, normalizing it. Restrictive laws like permits or mandatory helmets only scare people away from cycling and ruin things for everyone.

File: all for one and one for all.jpg (73KB, 715x239px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 715x239px

I remember starting a similar thread over a year ago when this law (must carry photo ID) was being proposed and the thread set a new /n/ record by reaching bump limit on the same day.

http://www.baka.com.au/nsw/cyclists-to-be-required-to-carry-photo-identification-under-nsw-government-proposal-20150714-gibwil.html

People were saying that law will never pass.

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/you-have-to-carry-id-to-ride-a-bike-in-nsw-from-today-2016-2
Haha!

t. mister accountable

>>1008020
>http://www.baka.com.au/...
topkek.

It's the Sydney Morning Herald website, so S'M'H instead of baka. Damn 4chan word filters, desu senpai.

Why not license bikes? and make bikers carry insurance too.

Probably a good idea desu. People around here bike on the sidewalk and the wrong side of the road all the time. This then causes cagers to not view bicycles as a legit form of transportation.

>>1007998
Now you know why you had no luck so far ahah.

>>1008056
That hurt me inside, anon.

>>1007966
Walking occurs on the sidewalk. Bikes are suppose to ride on the road. Are you dense or just retarded?

>>1008019
>Restrictive laws like permits
Same way how restrictive laws to get driving licenses or fishing or hunting permits have scared and ruined things for those people. Cyclists are literally the worst.

The fact of the matter is that the best long term improvement would.come from teaching cycle safety at school and improve infrastructure tat the same time. If they worked to make the worst areas better first then play whackamole with each worst that emerges then we could have walkable and cycle friendly cities with knowledgeable adults in only 1 generation.

>>1008084
>It's about use of public land. Roads are public land and so use of the road should require permits in the same way.
Sidewalks are public land, right? If so their use should require a permit.

Among other reasons - because biking is basically a continuation a walking. A bike can't work without human power, whereas a motor vehicle can (just put a brick on the pedal)

>>1007936
Bike use doesn't cause any significant wear and and tear on public roads.

>>1007991
>whisting dixieland
>not The Year of Jubilo

You can seriously injure yourself or even die just riding a bike alone, not even taking into account the risks of riding on public paths and roads. I think it's about time we start looking out for the safety of our neighbors and friends.

>>1008087
everyone can ride a bike with minimal risk of serous injury, meanwhile with a car you need to prove you can operate a 2 tonne machine so you don't end up killing people. Is that so difficult to grasp? Bikes become exponentially dangerous the moment you involve cars

>>1008186
cyclists have killed pedestrians
cars have killed people when avoiding a collision with a cyclist
squashed cyclists cause road closures which hurts local economies

i can go on but that should be enough.
bikes can kill. dee doubleyou eye.

>>1007936
If it doesn't cost money or require waiting hours at the DMV, sure. It would be reasonable to have elementary or middle schoolers learn it and be tested on it, and one could make the argument that it helps prep them to learn the rules of the road before they cage.

>>1008251
A lot schools when I was growing up got people in to run cycling safety lessons. Didn't go on them myself because I wasn't in to cycling until later in life but I remember them being a thing. Probably not a terrible idea to encourage more of it.

>>1008249
How many people do cyclists kill yearly in your city/state/country? What about drivers?

>>1008251
>>1008288
I remember we had mandatory traffic classes in school when I was kid. Taught us how to act as a pedestrian and as a cyclists. No need for licensing imo. Just teach kids the rules and go through them again after few years.

considering how often I see bikes breaking traffic laws people probably should get permits. Nearly t-boned two bikers yesterday because they ran a stop sign.

Honestly fuck me, are we gonna license skateboards and roller blades? If it doesn't have an engine FUCK OFF /o/

>>1008304
And for those two cyclists there are dozens that ride by the rules. People just pay more attention to the ones that break rules without even noticing the ones that follow the rules.

Mind you I'm not saying it's OK to break the rules.

>>1008304
Pedestrians can't run a stop sign.

>>1008095
>Sidewalks are public land, right? If so their use should require a permit.
Sidewalks aren't made for road vehicles.
Cars, trucks, motorcycles, mopeds etc etc all have to be licensed because they use the road... Except bikes. You're example is false equivalence.

>>1008186
Exactly. Bikes become exponentially dangerous the moment you involve cars and they must share the road with said cars so they should be licensed. If they didn't have to share the road with cars and other licensed vehicles then fine, but they do.

>>1008307
Skateboards and roller blades aren't classified as road vehicles that must share the road. You're example is another false equivalence.

File: 1474045597954.jpg (38KB, 320x420px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 320x420px

>mfw i once hit an old hag standing and talking on the phone on my CLEARLY MARKED bicycle path running parallel to the sidewalk on purpose
>mfw she called the police and the police gave her a ticket for standing on the bicycle path and causing danger to cyclists.

>>1007938
No it isn't. You are allowed to walk around on public hunting lands without a permit. You can go to your local lake or river without a permit. You can even take a boat out without a permit of you want to.

Hunting and fishing permits are used to pay for natural resource management.

>>1008343
Are roads not a resource? Fucking hippy.

>>1008334
I hit a skater/stoner because he was on the wrong side of the path and being oblivious and instead of getting angry he apologized.... I rally hasn't expected that

>>1008329
>Sidewalks aren't made for road vehicles.
Irrelevant. He said hunting and fishing requires a permit because it's use of public land, same with driving, and that cycling should also. Walking is also use of public land.

That was his point, if it doesn't apply to all methods of use then he can't cherry pick cycling and he'll have to find a new justification for a cycling permit.

>>1008361
Eh? What are you talking about, the roads are made for vehicles not walking like sidewalks. Sidewalks are just for pedestrians not road vehicles. Every road vehicle besides the bike has to be licensed. The bike should be too.

Where do you make this jump to licensing pedestrians walking on sidewalks? Hunters need to be licensed to go hunting on pubic land. Fishermen have to be licensed to fish on public land. Bikes should be licensed to drive on public land. Of course you could just ferry a bike by walking with it on the sidewalk no problem.

You just sound retarded trying to make a vague connection that is ultimately asinine.

>>1008369
You're misunderstanding. The other guy said (I'm assuming it wasn't you) that hunting and fishing require permits because they are using public land, just as cars use roads which are also public land (I don't think that is completely true as they're only intended for use by vehicles but we'll just say they are for the sake of the argument). Now if cycling is also going to require a permit because it's using public land (the roads) then walking should also require a permit for using the sidewalk, also public land.

If your argument doesn't apply to all methods of use of all forms of public land then it is invalid and you need to find a new one. Note that I'm not agreeing or disagreeing that permits for cycling would be right, simply pointing out the flaw in the argument.

>>1008371
The fuck are you getting at? Public space is free up until you choose to utilize it in a way where a permit is required. The act of hunting on public land requires a permit. The act of fishing on public land requires a permit. Walking does not.

Roads are also public and their use is for vehicles unless crossing on. If all vehicles require permits besides bikes, it only makes sense to require bikes to do so as well if they are road vehicles like cars and motorcycles. Crossing the road does not require a permit.

You're fucking retarded.

>>1008373
His point (your point?) was that the use of public land required a permit, such as hunting, fishing, or driving, and so riding a bike on public land should also require a permit. That was his only point that I was countering.

Hunting and fishing do not require permits just because they're using public land, they require permits as it is taking resources. Cars do not require permits because they are using public land, they require permits because they're incredibly dangerous machines (among other reasons). Bicycles should not require permits for using public land, they should require permits because... (fill in the blank).

>>1008328

Bikes are not pedestrians, they are wheeled vehicles on a public road. If you are drunk and on a bike on the road, its a DUI.

Hell, when I was fighting a ticket a few months ago, they actually had a guy in traffic court with me who got pulled over for running a red light on his bike. He tried to argue that since he was not in a motorized vehicle it did not apply to him. Judge read him the applicable law, found him guilty and ordered him to pay the fine.

>>1008369
Bikes are not road vehicles. Roads are for powered vehicles, sidewalks are for unpowered ones.

>>1008386

Depends on where you are. In many States and Cities bikes are not allowed on Sidewalks.

>>1008386
Bikes are classified as road vehicles and thus are permitted to ride on the roads.

>>1008381
Dude you're retarded.
>Bikes become exponentially dangerous the moment you involve cars and they must share the road with said cars so they should be licensed.
It's a safety issue as well. If you are going to drive among road vehicles, you should have a license that shows you understand what is safe to do when sharing the roads and how to obey traffic laws because everyone using the road has to abide by them for safety.

I already know you have a cagers heart because you're working off the assumption that a drivers license is the base standard.
Do you need a walking license? No. You only need permits and licenses when you have 'specialized' knowledge, and not only the ability to cause massive damage, but flee the scene.
Bikes don't do this so they don't need the extra bullshit.

>>1008346
I already pay for the roads with my taxes

>>1008472
Are sidewalks roads? Road vehicles all have licenses but bikes. So this whole

HURRRRRRRRRRR Y-Y-YOU D-D-DON'T NEED A W-WALKING LICENSE!!!

is fucking stupid. Walking is not recognized as a road vehicle.

>>1008477
And?

>>1008479
Friend, it's not about sidewalks or not, it's about operating a deadly machine in the wrong hands.
1)Car licenses are a joke and much as cagers like to bitch, I see unenforced traffic violations all day 2) Education can be done without a license.

Why are you so upset over being asked to be responsible for yourself? If I manage to cause, on my bike, SUCH a traffic accident I'll be fucking dead or crumpled somewhere near by. I don't need a plate, I AM the plate. You in the same scenario can be across state lines. That's why you need a plate.

>>1008481
So there's no reason to pay more.
In the 'resouce' argument, I've paid to cover my wear and tear on the roads

>>1008410
>It's a safety issue as well. If you are going to drive among road vehicles, you should have a license that shows you understand what is safe to do when sharing the roads and how to obey traffic laws because everyone using the road has to abide by them for safety.
I never said anything to the contrary, stop trying to strawman.

I will however address that point, whilst I agree with most of it bikes are not comparable to cars (in terms of safety risk) and trying to licence them would be practically impossible probably do more harm than good if it could be implemented.

Imagine a world where you couldn't purchase a bike without showing a valid licence (because if anyone could buy a bike without a licence it would be no different to how it is now) that would cost you money and time to get and said bike would require a licence plate large enough to be read by traffic cameras (goodbye aero), any bike you build from parts would need to be registered (probably costing more money), and there'd no doubt be a minimum age requirement applied so very few young kids would learn how to ride.

>>1008510
You're confusing a licence with registration. But carry on..

>>1008686
It's still a barrier for people for whom cycling may be their only option for transportation.
I know you laugh about dindus not being able to get IDs, but that's a reality for some people and there's no reason to put up that road block.

I already argue for mandatory, practical, drivers ed in this country, wouldn't hurt to have 'traffic talk' all through schooling.

>>1008304

As if licensing would stop any of that. I see tons of motorists breaking the law and they're far more dangerous.

I would probably be all for it if it meant bicycle-only road infrastructure would be implemented.
Like show me a draft and a timeline.

>>1008686
You would still need registration for the bikes or else a licence would be pointless, anyone could still buy a bike and ride it without a licence (and they would) and cops would need to stop each and every cyclist to check.

>>1008809
>and cops would need to stop each and every cyclist to check
No but if you're caught in an altercation surgeon's have a license then you should have the book thrown at you.

>>1008814
But that won't change the current situation, you'll still have people riding around that don't obey traffic laws or don't know how to properly handle a bike. The vast majority never get caught.

File: 20160915_211418-1.jpg (1022KB, 2917x1714px) Image search: [Google]

1022KB, 2917x1714px

I don't need a licence or insurance to drive this and it can hit 50mph. Why the fuck should I need one for a bike?

File: 20160918_121039-1.jpg (963KB, 1936x2582px) Image search: [Google]

963KB, 1936x2582px

>>1007940
Same here in Colorado. Except I can get a 12ga shotgun as easily as I could buy a bicycle. Or a flare gun I guess

>>1008825
In any place that isn't an inbred degenerate hick central, that most certainly requires a license and registration.

>>1008357
Never underestimate someone just because they look burned out. My friend is the stoniest mother fucker I've ever met but he has barspins and 360s on lock and he's one of the best dhillers I've ever seen

File: 20160816_092319-1.jpg (2MB, 3014x1659px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3014x1659px

>>1008829
>one of the most reputable engineering schools in the country

>cheapest housing is 1k a month

>inbred hick central

You sound like one of those people who never leave their home town.
Get out more faggot, the only hicks we have are Mexican and in pueblo

>>1008828
good for you
>>1008829
registration - of course
license - nah m8

>>1008839
Looks like a tiny ass hick town where everyone is just one step away from being related to each other.

Keep dreaming faglord. Even if the engineering school is real, it's because of people who enroll from other places, not the hicks who actually live in that town.

Next time you see Abdul or Hiroto you should thank them for elevating your shit town.

>>1008084
No, but you might be

>driving to work today
>coming downhill on bend
>see cyclist on other side
>immediately slow down and got a honk from behind in return
>as I'm nearing cyclist some old bloke i's driving up behind him
>is so focused on overtaking the cyclist he ignores my being there
>nearly hits me then nearly takes out the cyclist

I just needed to vent that. Pissed me off.

>>1008829
Hell, even in Virginia, which goes from major city centers to dueling_banjos.wav you need licenses and registration for those things!

You don't need a license to have children and that's an arguably more dramatic event with greater consequences if you fuck up

File: 1474493843395.jpg (200KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1920x1080px

>>1007936
REEEEEE FUCK OFF STATIST

On an unrelated note, what's the best affordable fatbike on the market and why is it still the Surly Krampus?

>>1007988
no, I hate everyone who isn't my gf to be honest famalam

>>1007992
What state?

>>1008854
This towns property is some of the most expensive in Colorado outside of the mountains. Hicks can't afford to live here, and the homeless either freeze to death or move and never return during the winter so that problem takes care of itself.
Have fun being poor

>>1007936
Th reason "lesser" vehicles do not need permit and are available at lower age than driver's license is because they are fucking slow.

You take a driver's test because you are about to operate 800-3500kg machine full of combustible fuel that is often capable of reaching 200+ km/h.

There is no need to expand bureaucratic apparatus and limit people's freedoms just because you can't deal. We would not see an increase in safety standards, we would see decline of cyclists.

As of today, cyclists are a subject to traffic laws when using the road and can get fines, even go to jail if they cause severe accident with casualties so what gives?

You should need a permit to breed and live past the age of 19.

Then all other permits will be redundant.

>>1008249

>cars have killed people when avoiding a collision with a cyclist
>squashed cyclists cause road closures which hurts local economies

proof that existing motor vehicle education and licensing is inadequate to avoid pedestrian and cyclists injuries, all drivers should be re-tested bi-annually

>>1008477
>I already pay for the roads with my taxes
Everyone pays for public roads, even non-drivers. Because of low fuel prices and vehicles increased fuel economy, fuel taxes and licensing fees contribute less than 40% of the cost of highways.

All roads should have some sort of cost recovery, like EZ-Pass, which charge drivers for miles driven and have cost adjustments for time of day and vehicle weight.

It's only fair that drivers pay their fair share. And yeah, bicyclists should pay something too, in proportion to how much they use. If it costs $2/hour to park a car downtown, then it should cost $0.10/hour to park in a theft-protected bicycle parking spot.

I take nine thousand selfies a day and the last thing I need is another picture of me in my wallet!!

>>1007936
OP, you need a permit to post here

>>1011034
Roads are already paid for, any maintenance and repair is down to wear and damage caused by motor vehicles. Any new construction is almost always for the benefit of motor vehicles too.

>If it costs $2/hour to park a car downtown, then it should cost $0.10/hour to park in a theft-protected bicycle parking spot.
I think a lot of people would pay even the $2 an hour if they could have that, but something like that would entail CCTV and possibly some sort of restricted access.

If you're just referring to ordinary bike racks then no, they're no more protected than locking your bike up to any other stationary object. One of the advantages of bikes is you can lock them up pretty much anywhere, the reason it costs to park a car or there are time limits is because parking space can be rather limited in some places.

>>1011058
Yeah I'd happily pay for stuff like the robo-garages they have for bikes in Japan, but I doubt that we'll ever see those in the US.

The thing is with urban car parks is that they take up tons of prime real estate that would be much more valuable if turned into offices or condos, so they're a sort of subsidy for downtown businesses.

File: bike_locker_downtown_santa_cruz.jpg (306KB, 1066x1600px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 1066x1600px

>>1011095
>Yeah I'd happily pay for stuff like the robo-garages they have for bikes in Japan, but I doubt that we'll ever see those in the US.

Here is one example of bike parking:

The City of Santa Cruz has 100 bicycle lockers in Downtown Santa Cruz to rent to the public. These bicycle lockers provide enclosed, secure storage and can be rented for just pennies per hour with the use of a smart card. Only a bicycle and its accessories may be stored in the locker. The maximum rental time for any one rental period is 9 days.

Only pay for the time you use!
A smart card allows you to get a refund of unused time – back onto your card. A $20 ParkCard for Santa Cruz smart bike lockers and smart parking meters can be purchased at the City of Santa Cruz Parking Office in the Locust Garage, 124 Locust Street, Santa Cruz.

A BikeLink smart card can be purchased on-line at http://www.bikelink.org for smart bike lockers throughout the Bay Area and beyond.

In addition, a bicycle cage in the Soquel/Front parking garage is available for downtown employees and residents on a month-to-month basis. Inquire at the garage booth for more information.

>>1011120
>A $20 ParkCard for Santa Cruz smart bike lockers and smart parking meters can be purchased at the City of Santa Cruz Parking Office in the Locust Garage, 124 Locust Street, Santa Cruz.

>tfw literally a plague organization

>>1011139
I live in a town where people slash seats and piss on bikes for fun. I don't care, this looks awesome.

>>1011120
Not as cool as the robogarages but I'd love to have shit like that here in bortland because I'd lose my shit completely if anyone fucked with any of my bikes.

>>1007936
You should need a permit to walk outside of your house.

Also a permit for free speech.

You know for everyone protection :)

>>1011327
Dear internet user #1011327,
3 points have been deducted from your Internet User Licence for commiting the following offence:
>Use of incorrect grammar
Please note that when you lose 12 points in any 12 month period then all internet user licences are suspended for a period of 3 months.
t. Internet Policebot

>This is an automated message, etc...

On one hand, I kinda agree. I see way too many retards riding while looking at their phone swerving like a mofo, turning without checking or signaling, running red lights blindly, going in one way streets the wrong way and all kind of retarded shit.
On the other hand, I wouldn't be able to keep my job if I had to actually follow the driving laws, so yeah...

>>1007938
>Okay Jimmy, time to learn how to ride a bike
>But first we have to go to the DNMV and get you licensed, insured, ect.

Can we not do this? why the fuck would anyone want more things to require a license to own? If you don't like the way a certain company makes a bike or does business, then don't buy from them. Is that so hard?

10/10 bait OP

>>1007936
no because cycling should be encouraged
and the risks are really fucking low

permits wont change anything about safety. there's still bike laws. people can still get pulled over for them.

also the money from permits would be negligible. and many low income families, or even straight up homeless people, use bikes because they can't afford a car. I'm one of those people even.

So you're saying we should raise funds by charging a fee that strongly targets people who are poor? you fucking for real?

>>1007938
Do you need a permit to swing on the swings at a park? That's public land, and it's dangerous too.

It's going to happen eventually, and I'm all for it.
We can't expect people to follow rules if we don't ensure that they know what those rules are.

There should also be permits for walking. Too many people throw trash and cross the road were you are not allowed.

>>1014427
>walking
>road user
think it through

File: bike.jpg (198KB, 682x1024px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 682x1024px

>>1007936
>Why shouldn't you need a permit to own and ride a bike?

because we don't love bureaucracy, taxes, politics and so on.

and also because we're used to uphold the law.

pic slightly related.

so many triggered cyclecucks ITT, good job OP

>> biking should be free but everything else should require a permit because im a faggot nu-male who likes to cause problems for other people.

>>1014445
>he thinks all of America has sidewalks

>>1015541
You think I care about America? lel. Enjoy the next nine years of feminist oppression, bucko. You're gonna need a licence to even look at a girl.

>>1014700
biking can still be free even if you need a licence to do it.

you could even get a free helmet when you pass the test.

File: MAD.jpg (23KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 300x300px

>>1015687
...paid for by fuel taxes

>>1014700
Biking is free you silly nigger, so the only triggered faggot itt is you.

Stay caged. And don't forget to pay for your insurance :).

>>1014445
Maybe not in metropolitan areas but elsewhere yes.

>>1015687
Pretty much every other licence costs money, what makes you think one for riding a bike would be any different? There are costs behind testing people and issuing the licences and keeping records, and having licences would mean bike registration which likewise would end up costing money. It would also mean restricting bike sales to only those that are licensed, and less sales would likely drive up the cost of bikes as well.