Oh yeah.............................

[iDon]

Yes I have. Kids is obviously different, but if you are using your bike as a form of transportation to get from home to work or what ever you should pay rego to use the roads. Why is it any different to me having to pay rego on my motorbike? I have to pay to use the roads no matter what vehicle I chose to use, so should they.

With Australia's ever widening waistline, emposing some form of registration would only heighten the problem.

But this thread is about complaining that police are money hungry so lets get back on task

 

[BALKAN]

I'll care about cyclists when they obey traffic laws and pay rego.

Cyclists have to pay for you to have basic compassion and decency. Good to know.

 

[Quivorir]

kids who ride bikes to school?

Again, kids are different. Plus I'm pretty sure its illegal to ride on a footpath over the age of 12, kids aren't riding on the road. Road users should have to pay rego.

 

[vealesy]

They should also have to be licensed and carry ID, just like the rest of us.

 

[peternorth]

Again, kids are different. Plus I'm pretty sure its illegal to ride on a footpath over the age of 12, kids aren't riding on the road. Road users should have to pay rego.

sometimes you have to ride on a footpath to access bike paths, houses or garages.

do you have kids (or teenage kids)? if you do, would you want to pay rego for them to ride?

 

[peternorth]

They should also have to be licensed and carry ID, just like the rest of us.

that's just revenue raising as a stealth tax

 

[Illinois Nazi]

They should be fined for wearing Lycra. And forced to do psych counselling until they understand they are not Cadel Evans.

 

[Quivorir]

sometimes you have to ride on a footpath to access bike paths, houses or garages.

do you have kids (or teenage kids)? if you do, would you want to pay rego for them to ride?

I have one on the way. And as I've said twice now. Kids are totally different. They aren't on our city streets breaking the law (like a lot of cyclists seem to do.)

 

[peternorth]

I have one on the way. And as I've said twice now. Kids are totally different. They aren't on our city streets breaking the law (like a lot of cyclists seem to do.)

ah ok, so kids dont need to be registered unless they ride on city streets.

im not against identification. i myself carry my license when when riding (yes i drive too). i mean if you are hit by a driver and require ambulance assistance then your id is there.

 

[vealesy]

that's just revenue raising as a stealth tax

Call it what you want.

If other public users must do it, why not cyclists?

How are all the road modifications for their benefit paid for?

 

[peternorth]

Call it what you want.

If other public users must do it, why not cyclists?

How are all the road modifications for their benefit paid for?

many cyclists i know are also licensed drivers of cars or motorbikes.

cars at times also use bike lanes.

i think everything is ok as it is

 

[nicky]

I'm not getting involved in the argument that "cyclists should pay a registration". I've had that argument with prior incarnations of narrow minded conservatives.

For those bothering, trust me, it goes nowhere.

 

[Kram]

Riding bikes on footpath can be dangerous in some areas, often hard to see bike reversing a car out.

 

[vealesy]

I'm not getting involved in the argument that "cyclists should pay a registration". I've had that argument with prior incarnations of narrow minded conservatives.

For those bothering, trust me, it goes nowhere.

Im not a conservative. At all.

But cyclists get a free ride, which is not fair.

 

[Dont be a lemon]

Bicycle registration sounds like a great way to increase the number of cars on the road.

I'm not getting involved in the argument that "cyclists should pay a registration". I've had that argument with prior incarnations of narrow minded conservatives.

For those bothering, trust me, it goes nowhere.

Please confirm if you ride through red lights.

 

[BALKAN]

But cyclists get a free ride, which is not fair.

As they should, we need every encouragement to get people out of their cars.

 

[vealesy]

As they should, we need every encouragement to get people out of their cars.

So why do i pay $600 a year rego for a motorbike?

 

[Mofra]

But cyclists get a free ride, which is not fair.

What about cyclists that also have a car, like the majority?

I could search for that article a while back that showed bikes should be subsidised because of the net benefits they provide (lower congestion, less overcrowding on public transport, less stress on the health system due to health benefits of exercise, etc etc) but I doubt a single opinion would be swayed - after all, this is Bigfooty.

 

[vealesy]

Im all for more cyclists. But if i must carry identification on the road, so should they.

Its not an additional license.

 

[BALKAN]

So why do i pay $600 a year rego for a motorbike?

A motorbike is just a smaller car.

 

[Quivorir]

A motorbike is just a smaller car.

What?

 

[BALKAN]

What?

A MOTORBIKE IS JUST A SMALLER CAR!!!

 

[vealesy]

How so?

 

[BALKAN]

How so?

The reason we want less people to drive is to ease congestion, minimise pollution and minimise fatal accidents/accidents that cause serious injury. In this regard motorbikes and cars are the same difference.

 

[vealesy]

No they are not.