kiko wrote:
If as Huge says being treated like a "proper road user" means being
"registered, licensed, tested, carry a registration plate" then Huge is
wrong if he thinks cyclists want that.

Actually, it might help to ask people, have polls ever been taken or are
you making assumptions? Personally, I don't mind the idea.

It really does bug me when I see cyclists riding on pavements and going
through red lights and flagrantly disregarding the rules of the road. I
might not be of international standard, but I am certainly what I would
consider a 'proper' cyclist. I can drive, I hold a full driving licence
(and have done for many, many years), I just choose not to exercise that
ability. That also makes me a 'driver'.

The rules of the road aren't there to restrict road users from having
fun they are there to make everyone's behaviour predictable under what
are potentially dangerous and life-threatening conditions.

I really don't mind the idea of being registered, tested or licensed. I
can't imagine that it should come to it, but I do wonder sometimes at
the inconsistency of using the road as a cyclist with no required
instruction, but to have to be qualified to use a motor vehicle. Just
what right is it that we should expect unfettered access to a resource
that requires expense to maintain? The fact that the average cyclist
causes virtually no damage to that resource should be reflected in the
charge to use it, but that doesn't remove entirely the inequity.

Yes, it might discourage cycle use.
Yes, this might fly in the face of government obesity targets and
congestion reduction.
But it would make life more comfortable for the remaining cyclists.