Reckless Cyclist

[zechraffie]

I read the above post 3 times and I cannot see the objectivity of it.

 

No, highway code is not a law. You can't bracket it behind law because it is not. I also don't understand what is the power of the highway code, and the relevance of commonwealth countries to do with our RTA (bicycle).

 

Your arguments state drivers also break traffic rules, which I have no issues with. However, you cannot use that to justify why cyclists should be given the go-aheads to break the rules too. This line of thought does not fly with me. 2 wrongs do not make a right.

 

Also, you have touched on the law closing an eye on bicycles on pathway. My thoughts are that the enforcement could not be done effectively. The TP is not able ride their motorcycles on pathway and the foot soldiers could not catch up with errant cyclists. The cyclists are also not registered, hence there is no way to "enforce" these wrong-doings rather than "closing an eye".

 

Hope you are not Taipan49's clone.

I'm sorry you cannot see the objectivity of it.

 

You are certainly right that the highway code is not a law. It is a guideline to be provided by the minister which is empowered under the road traffic act to do so. 

 

I am not sure how you arrive at the conclusion that I use drivers breaking rules as a way to condone cyclists doing the same. Please do highlight it to me and i'd be happy to correct that misconception. You are certainly right that two wrongs do not make one right.

 

As for your response on effective enforcement, the vehicle available to the errant cyclists are just as easily available to the enforcement agencies, if they are serious on enforcement. Many of our neighbourhood policemen do patrols on bicycles. The inefficacies of bicycle registations (distinct from bicycle licensing) is well published. The reasons are many and not limited to these:

 

1. more than 1000 bicycle thefts a year

2. many low income (e.g. foreign labourers) buy their bicycles in in the black market for $50 and dispose of them in similar ways when their contract is up.

3. the onerous nature of such a system may discourage cycling, which goes against current policy of encouraging cycling for health reasons, as well as to strive towards a car-light nation. More cyclist will hopefully translate to less cars on the road, less passengers in the trains and buses and less jams around schools during the peak hours.

 

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "Hope you are not Taipan49's clone". This is my first post on this forum. I hope it is ok to post this here? Please let me know if this is offensive in any way. 

[Weez911]

I'm sorry you cannot see the objectivity of it.

 

You are certainly right that the highway code is not a law. It is a guideline to be provided by the minister which is empowered under the road traffic act to do so. 

 

I am not sure how you arrive at the conclusion that I use drivers breaking rules as a way to condone cyclists doing the same. Please do highlight it to me and i'd be happy to correct that misconception. You are certainly right that two wrongs do not make one right.

 

As for your response on effective enforcement, the vehicle available to the errant cyclists are just as easily available to the enforcement agencies, if they are serious on enforcement. Many of our neighbourhood policemen do patrols on bicycles. The inefficacies of bicycle registations (distinct from bicycle licensing) is well published. The reasons are many and not limited to these:

 

1. more than 1000 bicycle thefts a year

2. many low income (e.g. foreign labourers) buy their bicycles in in the black market for $50 and dispose of them in similar ways when their contract is up.

3. the onerous nature of such a system may discourage cycling, which goes against current policy of encouraging cycling for health reasons, as well as to strive towards a car-light nation. More cyclist will hopefully translate to less cars on the road, less passengers in the trains and buses and less jams around schools during the peak hours.

 

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "Hope you are not Taipan49's clone". This is my first post on this forum. I hope it is ok to post this here? Please let me know if this is offensive in any way. 

 

Highway code is only a code of conduct and not a digest of traffic laws. That is that.

 

Your 2a, 2b and 2c gave me that impressions that since drivers can break all the traffic rules, we should condone cyclists wrongdoings - I quote "I cannot bring myself to throw the book at errant cyclists on the roads" and "I cannot point a finger on errant cyclists on the roads because I use my handphone while driving on occasions when I think its urgent."

 

You quoted "the vehicle available to the errant cyclists are just as easily available to the enforcement agencies". My question to you is whether you are asking the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on the pavement on their own bicycles?

 

Yes, LTA stated the impracticality of registering bicycles in Singapore. I have acknowledged this in my previous post. However, my view is that registering and licensing can still be done. It has been done in cities with more population and bicycles than us. I like the idea of accountability for cyclists. I quite like the idea of car-lite city with all cyclists registered and licensed.

 

Finally, some arguments you put forward agree with the law, although the code is not a law; while some arguments spoke about leeway by the Authorities (like cycling on pavement). This sounds like cherry-picking the laws to your own advantage.

 

That's all. I still do not think your post is objective. It is heavily pro-cyclist from the way I read it.

 

Taipan49 is a troll in this thread. He got a warning yesterday and you were registered today, that's how I linked up.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Weez911

[Beregond]

Highway code is only a code of conduct and not a digest of traffic laws. That is that.

 

Your 2a, 2b and 2c gave me that impressions that since drivers can break all the traffic rules, we should condone cyclists wrongdoings - I quote "I cannot bring myself to throw the book at errant cyclists on the roads" and "I cannot point a finger on errant cyclists on the roads because I use my handphone while driving on occasions when I think its urgent."

 

You quoted "the vehicle available to the errant cyclists are just as easily available to the enforcement agencies". My question to you is whether you are asking the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on the pavement on their own bicycles?

 

Yes, LTA stated the impracticality of registering bicycles in Singapore. I have acknowledged this in my previous post. However, my view is that registering and licensing can still be done. It has been done in cities with more population and bicycles than us. I like the idea of accountability for cyclists. I quite like the idea of car-lite city with all cyclists registered and licensed.

 

Finally, some arguments you put forward agree with the law, although the code is not a law; while some arguments spoke about leeway by the Authorities (like cycling on pavement). This sounds like cherry-picking the laws to your own advantage.

 

That's all. I still do not think your post is objective. It is heavily pro-cyclist from the way I read it.

 

Taipan49 is a troll in this thread. He got a warning yesterday and you were registered today, that's how I linked up.

I like the word ' accountability '

[zechraffie]

Highway code is only a code of conduct and not a digest of traffic laws. That is that.

 

Your 2a, 2b and 2c gave me that impressions that since drivers can break all the traffic rules, we should condone cyclists wrongdoings - I quote "I cannot bring myself to throw the book at errant cyclists on the roads" and "I cannot point a finger on errant cyclists on the roads because I use my handphone while driving on occasions when I think its urgent."

 

You quoted "the vehicle available to the errant cyclists are just as easily available to the enforcement agencies". My question to you is whether you are asking the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on the pavement on their own bicycles?

 

Yes, LTA stated the impracticality of registering bicycles in Singapore. I have acknowledged this in my previous post. However, my view is that registering and licensing can still be done. It has been done in cities with more population and bicycles than us. I like the idea of accountability for cyclists. I quite like the idea of car-lite city with all cyclists registered and licensed.

 

Finally, some arguments you put forward agree with the law, although the code is not a law; while some arguments spoke about leeway by the Authorities (like cycling on pavement). This sounds like cherry-picking the laws to your own advantage.

 

That's all. I still do not think your post is objective. It is heavily pro-cyclist from the way I read it.

 

Taipan49 is a troll in this thread. He got a warning yesterday and you were registered today, that's how I linked up.

 

 

1. Highway code is only a code of conduct and not a digest of traffic laws. That is that.

- http://www.supremecourt.gov.sg/docs/default-source/module-document/judgement/lyu-yongqiang-v-yu-mau-hing-and-another.pdf

 

- the highway code while is not law is frequently referred to in court cases involving traffic accidents because motorists are required to know them and not the entire road traffic act. This is also considered and referred to in the passing of judgments. That is that.

 

2. Your 2a, 2b and 2c gave me that impressions that since drivers can break all the traffic rules, we should condone cyclists wrongdoings - I quote "I cannot bring myself to throw the book at errant cyclists on the roads" and "I cannot point a finger on errant cyclists on the roads because I use my handphone while driving on occasions when I think its urgent."

 

- i'm sorry you have such an impression

 

3. You quoted "the vehicle available to the errant cyclists are just as easily available to the enforcement agencies". My question to you is whether you are asking the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on the pavement on their own bicycles?

 

- yes, i do expect the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on their own bicycles. I do not expect the enforcement officers to use their personal bicycles for this purpose. 

 

4. Yes, LTA stated the impracticality of registering bicycles in Singapore. I have acknowledged this in my previous post. However, my view is that registering and licensing can still be done. It has been done in cities with more population and bicycles than us. I like the idea of accountability for cyclists. I quite like the idea of car-lite city with all cyclists registered and licensed.

 

- i am not aware of major cities who have done so and have not made it obsolete subsequently. Would you be able to tell me what these cities are?

 

5. Finally, some arguments you put forward agree with the law, although the code is not a law; while some arguments spoke about leeway by the Authorities (like cycling on pavement). This sounds like cherry-picking the laws to your own advantage.

 

- I respect your conclusions even if that's not my intention.

 

6. Taipan49 is a troll in this thread. He got a warning yesterday and you were registered today, that's how I linked up.

 

- Thank you for letting me know. I’m sure the forum administrators would be able to discern the truth with technology available to them.

[inlinesix]

The post is 37 pages long. 

 

Whatever we agree, disagree or agree to disagree, has no impact on whatever LTA or any other relevant authority want to do.

 

LTA said NO to licensing.  Anybody who disagree with LTA should write to LTA or Straits Times, like just the Lawrence guy.

 

With enough feedback, LTA might change their mind.

 

For those who are inconvenience by bicycle on the road, share your problem here.  There are a lot of smart ppl here.  They might be able to help u.

 

For those who are afraid of being run over by bicycle on pavement, maybe you should walk with both hand up.  It will make cyclist more aware of you rights.

 

For those who are annoyed by cyclist who ring on pavement, wear headphone & ignore them.

 

 

[Weez911]

 

 

1. Highway code is only a code of conduct and not a digest of traffic laws. That is that.

- http://www.supremecourt.gov.sg/docs/default-source/module-document/judgement/lyu-yongqiang-v-yu-mau-hing-and-another.pdf

 

- the highway code while is not law is frequently referred to in court cases involving traffic accidents because motorists are required to know them and not the entire road traffic act. This is also considered and referred to in the passing of judgments. That is that.

--that's a very poor example you used. Our context is the space of 1.5m, and where in the judgment did you see 1.5m? Besides, the judge cannot sentence someone as a result of the Code of Conduct. There must be an infringement on an actual Act for this case to proceed. In this case the cyclist was knocked by the bus, that to me is something that triggered the suit by the plaintiff.

 

2. Your 2a, 2b and 2c gave me that impressions that since drivers can break all the traffic rules, we should condone cyclists wrongdoings - I quote "I cannot bring myself to throw the book at errant cyclists on the roads" and "I cannot point a finger on errant cyclists on the roads because I use my handphone while driving on occasions when I think its urgent."

 

- i'm sorry you have such an impression

-- No problem at all

 

3. You quoted "the vehicle available to the errant cyclists are just as easily available to the enforcement agencies". My question to you is whether you are asking the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on the pavement on their own bicycles?

 

- yes, i do expect the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on their own bicycles. I do not expect the enforcement officers to use their personal bicycles for this purpose. 

-- So, I presume you are fine with 2 fast bicycles zooming on the pavement with old people, pregnant ladies and children on the same pavement? Jesus.

 

4. Yes, LTA stated the impracticality of registering bicycles in Singapore. I have acknowledged this in my previous post. However, my view is that registering and licensing can still be done. It has been done in cities with more population and bicycles than us. I like the idea of accountability for cyclists. I quite like the idea of car-lite city with all cyclists registered and licensed.

 

- i am not aware of major cities who have done so and have not made it obsolete subsequently. Would you be able to tell me what these cities are?

-- I see that you have changed the goalpost. But in the spirit of your question, cities in the US such as Salt Lake and Santa Cruz (from first page of Google, I did not continue the search)

 

5. Finally, some arguments you put forward agree with the law, although the code is not a law; while some arguments spoke about leeway by the Authorities (like cycling on pavement). This sounds like cherry-picking the laws to your own advantage.

 

- I respect your conclusions even if that's not my intention.

-- No comments

 

6. Taipan49 is a troll in this thread. He got a warning yesterday and you were registered today, that's how I linked up.

 

- Thank you for letting me know. I’m sure the forum administrators would be able to discern the truth with technology available to them.

-- I may be wrong because this is guess work. But time will tell

I like the word ' accountability '

 

Only perpetuators don't like accountability lor

The post is 37 pages long. 

 

 

Sorry I have not been replying to your posts. But this post I totally agree and like.

 

We agree to disagree and let the scholars make the decision

Edited February 18, 2016 by Weez911

[L_club23]

I say,

 

Hold sting operations to catch errant cyclists.

Fine them heavily.

 

Rinse and repeat...

 

[zechraffie]

 

1. Highway code is only a code of conduct and not a digest of traffic laws. That is that.

- http://www.supremecourt.gov.sg/docs/default-source/module-document/judgement/lyu-yongqiang-v-yu-mau-hing-and-another.pdf

 

- the highway code while is not law is frequently referred to in court cases involving traffic accidents because motorists are required to know them and not the entire road traffic act. This is also considered and referred to in the passing of judgments. That is that.

--that's a very poor example you used. Our context is the space of 1.5m, and where in the judgment did you see 1.5m? Besides, the judge cannot sentence someone as a result of the Code of Conduct. There must be an infringement on an actual Act for this case to proceed. In this case the cyclist was knocked by the bus, that to me is something that triggered the suit by the plaintiff.

 

2. Your 2a, 2b and 2c gave me that impressions that since drivers can break all the traffic rules, we should condone cyclists wrongdoings - I quote "I cannot bring myself to throw the book at errant cyclists on the roads" and "I cannot point a finger on errant cyclists on the roads because I use my handphone while driving on occasions when I think its urgent."

 

- i'm sorry you have such an impression

-- No problem at all

 

3. You quoted "the vehicle available to the errant cyclists are just as easily available to the enforcement agencies". My question to you is whether you are asking the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on the pavement on their own bicycles?

 

- yes, i do expect the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on their own bicycles. I do not expect the enforcement officers to use their personal bicycles for this purpose. 

-- So, I presume you are fine with 2 fast bicycles zooming on the pavement with old people, pregnant ladies and children on the same pavement? Jesus.

 

4. Yes, LTA stated the impracticality of registering bicycles in Singapore. I have acknowledged this in my previous post. However, my view is that registering and licensing can still be done. It has been done in cities with more population and bicycles than us. I like the idea of accountability for cyclists. I quite like the idea of car-lite city with all cyclists registered and licensed.

 

- i am not aware of major cities who have done so and have not made it obsolete subsequently. Would you be able to tell me what these cities are?

-- I see that you have changed the goalpost. But in the spirit of your question, cities in the US such as Salt Lake and Santa Cruz (from first page of Google, I did not continue the search)

 

5. Finally, some arguments you put forward agree with the law, although the code is not a law; while some arguments spoke about leeway by the Authorities (like cycling on pavement). This sounds like cherry-picking the laws to your own advantage.

 

- I respect your conclusions even if that's not my intention.

-- No comments

 

6. Taipan49 is a troll in this thread. He got a warning yesterday and you were registered today, that's how I linked up.

 

- Thank you for letting me know. I’m sure the forum administrators would be able to discern the truth with technology available to them.

-- I may be wrong because this is guess work. But time will tell

 

Only perpetuators don't like accountability lor

 

Sorry I have not been replying to your posts. But this post I totally agree and like.

 

We agree to disagree and let the scholars make the decision

 

 

 

 

 

1. Highway code is only a code of conduct and not a digest of traffic laws. That is that.

- http://www.supremecourt.gov.sg/docs/default-source/module-document/judgement/lyu-yongqiang-v-yu-mau-hing-and-another.pdf

 

- the highway code while is not law is frequently referred to in court cases involving traffic accidents because motorists are required to know them and not the entire road traffic act. This is also considered and referred to in the passing of judgments. That is that.

--that's a very poor example you used. Our context is the space of 1.5m, and where in the judgment did you see 1.5m? Besides, the judge cannot sentence someone as a result of the Code of Conduct. There must be an infringement on an actual Act for this case to proceed. In this case the cyclist was knocked by the bus, that to me is something that triggered the suit by the plaintiff.

--- I was responding to your earlier post that “Highway code is only a code of conduct and not a digest of traffic laws.” the 1.5m advisory is not different from other advisories in the highway code.

--- The highway code is a not merely a code of conduct but a set of rules for all who are licensed to abide by. One may in fact see them as the road traffic act simplified for license holders to abide by. Else, how do the authorities prosecute those who infringe on these codes when we can claim that they have effect in law and are serve merely as a code of conduct?

---While I cannot find an equivalent of this in Singapore, this is lifted off the UK government’s official webpage for highway code: “Many of the rules in the Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’. In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence. “

 

--- in the court case referred to, a more detailed look will tell you that many of the points referred to take reference from the highway code: such as:

 

(b) should have then increased the distance between the Bus and the bicycle; and/or © should have then continued driving the Bus in the centre lane until he was nearer to the bus stop ahead of Bugis Junction before switching back to the bus lane.

 

3. You quoted "the vehicle available to the errant cyclists are just as easily available to the enforcement agencies". My question to you is whether you are asking the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on the pavement on their own bicycles?

 

- yes, i do expect the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on their own bicycles. I do not expect the enforcement officers to use their personal bicycles for this purpose. 

-- So, I presume you are fine with 2 fast bicycles zooming on the pavement with old people, pregnant ladies and children on the same pavement? Jesus.

– I am sure the law enforcement agencies will train the officers to do the necessary in the best way possible. Certainly not for me to tell them how to enforce the law. You have asked if expect the enforcement agencies to use their own bicycles didn’t you?

 

4. Yes, LTA stated the impracticality of registering bicycles in Singapore. I have acknowledged this in my previous post. However, my view is that registering and licensing can still be done. It has been done in cities with more population and bicycles than us. I like the idea of accountability for cyclists. I quite like the idea of car-lite city with all cyclists registered and licensed.

 

- i am not aware of major cities who have done so and have not made it obsolete subsequently. Would you be able to tell me what these cities are?

-- I see that you have changed the goalpost. But in the spirit of your question, cities in the US such as Salt Lake and Santa Cruz (from first page of Google, I did not continue the search)

--- Thank you for the information. You are of course aware that both cities also have extensive protected cycling lanes and cycling paths? Perhaps this goes in part towards answering the question as to why local authorities are not licensing / registering bicycles here.

[Hibeam2]

https://www.facebook.com/Roads.sg/videos/1128286787203723/

 

Very nice video on safety rules and laws relating to cycling in Singapore.

 

Didn't know that pillion riding is not allowed unless the bicycle is designed to carry 2.

Helmets are encouraged but not mandatory unless you are riding on electric bike.

 

Issue of E-scooters are still not addressed.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Hibeam2

[Weez911]

 

 

1. Highway code is only a code of conduct and not a digest of traffic laws. That is that.

- http://www.supremecourt.gov.sg/docs/default-source/module-document/judgement/lyu-yongqiang-v-yu-mau-hing-and-another.pdf

 

- the highway code while is not law is frequently referred to in court cases involving traffic accidents because motorists are required to know them and not the entire road traffic act. This is also considered and referred to in the passing of judgments. That is that.

--that's a very poor example you used. Our context is the space of 1.5m, and where in the judgment did you see 1.5m? Besides, the judge cannot sentence someone as a result of the Code of Conduct. There must be an infringement on an actual Act for this case to proceed. In this case the cyclist was knocked by the bus, that to me is something that triggered the suit by the plaintiff.

--- I was responding to your earlier post that “Highway code is only a code of conduct and not a digest of traffic laws.” the 1.5m advisory is not different from other advisories in the highway code.

--- The highway code is a not merely a code of conduct but a set of rules for all who are licensed to abide by. One may in fact see them as the road traffic act simplified for license holders to abide by. Else, how do the authorities prosecute those who infringe on these codes when we can claim that they have effect in law and are serve merely as a code of conduct?

---While I cannot find an equivalent of this in Singapore, this is lifted off the UK government’s official webpage for highway code: “Many of the rules in the Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’. In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence. “

 

--- in the court case referred to, a more detailed look will tell you that many of the points referred to take reference from the highway code: such as:

 

(b) should have then increased the distance between the Bus and the bicycle; and/or © should have then continued driving the Bus in the centre lane until he was nearer to the bus stop ahead of Bugis Junction before switching back to the bus lane.

 

----I think you are confused. This is a civil suit, ie, the state did not prosecute the bus driver. I noted that the bus driver was fined $200 for inconsiderate driving (for knocking onto the cyclist I supposed? But this is not prosecution), that's all. The Code was quoted by both counsels during the civil case, but that is purely between the defendant and plaintiff in fighting this liability apportionment case. I am not sure of the relevance of the UK website, are we still a colony of the Brits? Haven't we took away the Privy Court?

---- Can we please keep the arguments to Singapore context and stop changing angles?

---- Question to you: If the Code is that important as you said, why isn't it enacted in laws? I do need help on this question.

 

3. You quoted "the vehicle available to the errant cyclists are just as easily available to the enforcement agencies". My question to you is whether you are asking the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on the pavement on their own bicycles?

 

- yes, i do expect the enforcement agencies to go after errant cyclists on their own bicycles. I do not expect the enforcement officers to use their personal bicycles for this purpose. 

-- So, I presume you are fine with 2 fast bicycles zooming on the pavement with old people, pregnant ladies and children on the same pavement? Jesus.

– I am sure the law enforcement agencies will train the officers to do the necessary in the best way possible. Certainly not for me to tell them how to enforce the law. You have asked if expect the enforcement agencies to use their own bicycles didn’t you?

----Ok, you are playing with words here. You did mention that the enforcer should give chase on the bicycle didn't you?

---- How do you reckon the enforcers chase any perpetuators on bicycles then? Rappel from heli (this is the best method I can dream of, but I imagine this would be very costly and potentially dangerous to the enforcers)? Without license, how do we ever catch these errant cyclists?

---- I still maintain the lack of enforcement method is not "turning a blind eye"

 

4. Yes, LTA stated the impracticality of registering bicycles in Singapore. I have acknowledged this in my previous post. However, my view is that registering and licensing can still be done. It has been done in cities with more population and bicycles than us. I like the idea of accountability for cyclists. I quite like the idea of car-lite city with all cyclists registered and licensed.

 

- i am not aware of major cities who have done so and have not made it obsolete subsequently. Would you be able to tell me what these cities are?

-- I see that you have changed the goalpost. But in the spirit of your question, cities in the US such as Salt Lake and Santa Cruz (from first page of Google, I did not continue the search)

--- Thank you for the information. You are of course aware that both cities also have extensive protected cycling lanes and cycling paths? Perhaps this goes in part towards answering the question as to why local authorities are not licensing / registering bicycles here.

---- Without cycling lane here, shouldn't there be a greater need for licensing? Sorry I really don't get your point. Don't you like accountability like everyone else?

 

 

---- I'm not going to reply your posts any further because we do not see eye-to-eye in various areas. You can continue to treat the Code as law, there is no harm at all, but I will not because it is not a law at all. Let the police catch me. 

[Nzy]

 

- i am not aware of major cities who have done so and have not made it obsolete subsequently. Would you be able to tell me what these cities are?

-- I see that you have changed the goalpost. But in the spirit of your question, cities in the US such as Salt Lake and Santa Cruz (from first page of Google, I did not continue the search)

--- Thank you for the information. You are of course aware that both cities also have extensive protected cycling lanes and cycling paths? Perhaps this goes in part towards answering the question as to why local authorities are not licensing / registering bicycles here.

---- Without cycling lane here, shouldn't there be a greater need for licensing? Sorry I really don't get your point. Don't you like accountability like everyone else?

 

IN both of those cities, bicycle registration is used to combat bicycle theft. It is just like ours, where there is a small sticker stuck onto the bicycle so that it is easy to determine who the bicycle belongs to. There is no punishment for not registering the bicycles though.

[Weez911]

IN both of those cities, bicycle registration is used to combat bicycle theft. It is just like ours, where there is a small sticker stuck onto the bicycle so that it is easy to determine who the bicycle belongs to. There is no punishment for not registering the bicycles though.

 

It can be used to ID crime also I guess. Not just petty bicycle infringement, but robbing and molest come to my mind too.

 

I do agree with Darryn if it is justifiable to do the registration. Well I don't have an answer, because I don't know how much "losses" people incurred due to bicycle mischiefs. Might not be much after all. But if this country is going car-lite, we should get ready for it as more and more people will start cycling. It certainly helps with law enforcement going forward.

 

My view.

[zechraffie]

 

----I think you are confused. This is a civil suit, ie, the state did not prosecute the bus driver. I noted that the bus driver was fined $200 for inconsiderate driving (for knocking onto the cyclist I supposed? But this is not prosecution), that's all. The Code was quoted by both counsels during the civil case, but that is purely between the defendant and plaintiff in fighting this liability apportionment case. I am not sure of the relevance of the UK website, are we still a colony of the Brits? Haven't we took away the Privy Court?

 

- I did not make mention that the state prosecuted the bus driver. I referred to the relevance of the Highway Code in the passing of judgment.

– While we have “took away” (sic) the privy council, the relevance of the UK laws are obvious to most. Why would we still refer to UK cases in our law schools and court cases if it is irrelevant?

 

---- Question to you: If the Code is that important as you said, why isn't it enacted in laws? I do need help on this question.

 

- This has been answered. Please see earlier post. The Highway Code “summarises” the portion of the laws relevant for road users.They are rules derived from the laws but worded for public consumption and licensing purposes. And because they are worded for consumption for the common man and not in “legal-speak”, it is thus not the version passed in parliament as a law or statute.

 

 

---- Without cycling lane here, shouldn't there be a greater need for licensing? Sorry I really don't get your point. Don't you like accountability like everyone else?

 

- You have made mention of 2 cities where bicycle licensing exist to substantiate that they are good examples why licensing can work. I have made mention that in those two examples you raised, they are cities with protected bicycle lanes. The intent for licensing in those two cities, as you can read from their municipalities’ website, is for cyclists’ safety and to be used in the event of theft. The intent you have raised here and many others have raised elsewhere, is for a licensing for the purpose of identifying errant cyclists. As different as the intent is, so is the cost, mechanics and efficacy of the program. It is precisely because we do not have protected bicycle lanes here, thus we should not begin to license bicycles for the purpose of identifying and prosecuting errant cyclists. It is obvious to the majority that the law is applied sparingly in this context, otherwise we will not continue to see that much cyclists on our footways.

 

 

- I like accountability but certainly not for the sake of accountability without  equity. Errant cyclists should certainly be dealt with, harshly if possible. But a bicycle licensing to be used as a tool to drive cyclists off the pavements at a time when we do not have an alternative cycling infrastructure would not serve to achieve a positive outcome for the country.

[AnimalLover]

When they hit the elderly and children, often the elder and kids will suffer very bad cuts and bruises.

The cyclist will just continue their journey, showing their middle finger.

When the cyclist are ran over by vehicles, not only can they claim insurance, they don't normally get the middle fingers as well.

 

That's why whenever I see cyclist coming fast towards my family along HDB corridors and void decks, first thing I'll alert everyone, then I get ready to deliver a flying kick if the cyclist were to hit any of us.

 

There were many times they almost hit my kid and wife when they were together. There is once the cyclist came from behind so fast and had hit my wife hand swollen.

I saw some cyclist even scold the car drivers when they in the middle of the junction cycling like a nuisance.

Too many crazy unforseen cyclist behaviours from teenagers until old age folks endanger other pedestrians and road users.

They can come out from nowhere suddenly at 20-40 km/hr in front of you, whether you are a car, truck, bus or walking.

 

The police will usually say that you are driving too fast, neglect or many other reasons when you hit the cyclist. This is also the fastest way to solve the case.

Edited February 20, 2016 by AnimalLover

[AnimalLover]

The post is 37 pages long. 

 

Whatever we agree, disagree or agree to disagree, has no impact on whatever LTA or any other relevant authority want to do.

 

LTA said NO to licensing.  Anybody who disagree with LTA should write to LTA or Straits Times, like just the Lawrence guy.

 

With enough feedback, LTA might change their mind.

 

For those who are inconvenience by bicycle on the road, share your problem here.  There are a lot of smart ppl here.  They might be able to help u.

 

For those who are afraid of being run over by bicycle on pavement, maybe you should walk with both hand up.  It will make cyclist more aware of you rights.

 

For those who are annoyed by cyclist who ring on pavement, wear headphone & ignore them.

 

No matter how much people write to LTA, there will be still no licensing on bicycle.

LTA had tried this in the past which is a laughing stock to other countries and the public. It had failed miserably.

LTA is not so foolish to try again the same mistake.

 

Licensing cyclist will not work and will never work.

There is no such law as licensing cyclist in the whole world.

If you want to license cyclist, you may consider licensing pedestrian too.

Edited February 20, 2016 by AnimalLover

[Fcw75]

No matter how much people write to LTA, there will be still no licensing on bicycle.

LTA had tried this in the past which is a laughing stock to other countries and the public. It had failed miserably.

LTA is not so foolish to try again the same mistake.

 

Licensing cyclist will not work and will never work.

There is no such law as licensing cyclist in the whole world.

If you want to license cyclist, you may consider licensing pedestrian too.

 

Licensing pesdestrian is the IC.

[zechraffie]

There were many times they almost hit my kid and wife when they were together. There is once the cyclist came from behind so fast and had hit my wife hand swollen.

I saw some cyclist even scold the car drivers when they in the middle of the junction cycling like a nuisance.

Too many crazy unforseen cyclist behaviours from teenagers until old age folks endanger other pedestrians and road users.

They can come out from nowhere suddenly at 20-40 km/hr in front of you, whether you are a car, truck, bus or walking.

 

The police will usually say that you are driving too fast, neglect or many other reasons when you hit the cyclist. This is also the fastest way to solve the case.

 

I agree with you that there are certainly reckless cyclists around us. They should be dealt with and severely too. 

 

As drivers, i'm sure we have all come across crazy drivers and pedestrians who behave in irresponsible, illogical, unexpected ways. I'm not sure how many of us consider hitting one of them as the fastest way to solve the problem.

 

I'm sure you're joking of course as i don't think you will risk going to jail just to solve this problem.

[zechraffie]

Licensing pesdestrian is the IC.

 

I agree with you and i would support any motion that says cyclists should carry some form of identification card with them too. 

 

However, bicycle licensing is quite a different animal altogether. And then there is a difference again between bicycle licensing and bicycle registration. Bicycle registration in places such as Japan, city of Santa Cruz, Salt Lake City, Hawaii, almost without fail, are measure adopted for the safety and security of the cyclists.

 

The bicycle licensing as suggested here and in other forums, seem to be as a measure to identify and prosecute errant cyclists on footways.

 

The reasons why licensing should not be used and would not work has been cited many cites. Some of these reasons are:

 

1. A 100 bicycle thefts a month?

2. Many low income, as well as migrant workers buy/sell bikes in the "black market"

3. Licensing for the sake of prosecution will drive cyclists of all sorts to the roads. Our roads are not ready for them. Accidents and Fatalities will escalate.

4. Licensing implies a legal relationship between the Licensor and Licensee. The Licensor (government) is not ready for such a relationship.

5. Licensing makes it onerous to be a cyclists and discourages the take up rate at a time when the government is trying to encourage cycling so that we can be less dependent on cars (car-light).

 

And the list goes on.

 

Perhaps the time will come when Singapore may choose to license bicycles or cyclists. But the same is clearly not now.