Jeremy Parker wrote:
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...
Apparently, the Mayor is now in favour of bike user/vehicle
registration, and wants a private bill put through Parliament to
achieve this.

I see from the Times of Friday 28th July that Ken Livingstone is
proposing that bikes, and their owners, be required to be registered.
I can live with that. I used to live in Washington DC, which had at
least thirteen registration schemes in various parts of the
metropolitan area.

(snip fascinating reading on US experiences of bike registration)

The complicated nature of the schemes you describe seems to demonstrate
the futility of such a scheme here. One of the key problems seems to be
that registration of bikes doesn't in itself actually achieve anything
(other than some statistics about bike owners).

The goal here is to reduce traffic offences by cyclists. The preferred
method is to catch offending cyclists and punish them. There are two
ways to achieve this - manually (by having police or traffic wardens out
and about catching them) or automatically (using cameras). Ken seems to
want bike registration plates so that cameras can catch bikes
automatically, but the question is, how large does a plate have to be to
be visible for this, and where are we going to put it?

I really don't think the expense of the scheme would be worth the
benefit in reduced offences, especially when it is likely to put people
off cycling. A similar argument has been waged in Australia where
helmets are mandatory in some places - such a law may put people off
cycling, which in turn may lead to higher accident rates as fewer cycles
on the road leads to a lower awareness by other road users. The
long-term health benefits of cycling are also an important
consideration, especially when more and more people are likely to suffer
from illnesses such as heart disease.

Another point mentioned in the US scenarios is that some people just
won't bother to register. The "worst" offenders are those least likely
to register and therefore stand just as little chance of being caught as
they do now.

My opinion is that a "soft" publicity-based campaign against antisocial
cycling would be far more effective. It wouldn't put people off cycling
(and could even be designed to encourage it by highlighting how you have
a lot of control over your own safety, a factor which puts many people
off cycling) and would be far more cost-effective.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London