Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw someone cycling at night on a e-bike without lights in dark clothes on the Whitehurst a few weeks ago. I am not sure what goes through peoples heads sometimes.

Are bikes even allowed on the Whitehurst? Isn’t it a freeway with no bike lane?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reflective gear is super important, but it gets dark at 5 PM now and some of us actually use bikes for transportation. "Stop doing your daily commute/errands" is not a reasonable ask any more than telling you not to drive after dark if you don't feel confident that you can see cyclists. We should wear brighter gear and more lights, and you should drive carefully and expect to share the road.

You can blame other people all you want (and we know cyclists love to blame everyone else for everything). But you'll be the person who's dead if a driver doesn't see you.

And you are the person with the $50 ticket and lifelong guilt.

Anonymous wrote:Seriously? Don't bike after dark?

Drive more carefully.

Anonymous wrote:I saw someone cycling at night on a e-bike without lights in dark clothes on the Whitehurst a few weeks ago. I am not sure what goes through peoples heads sometimes.

Anonymous wrote:Reflective vests cost $10 on Amazon. They'll deliver one to you tomorrow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to figure out how to get my 5 year old niece a license when she comes here over Christmas break. And register her bike.

Also, no one has answered what bicycle registration would do. You just keep repeating it like some kind of mantra.

You know how people have to get their cars registered, right? It would be like that.

I honestly can't tell if you're serious or if you're trolling the anti-bike people.

What is the problem with having bikes registered?

Every other vehicle that uses the road is required to be registered and have tags and get an annual safety inspection. Why are bikes THE ONLY vehicles that use the roads not required to be registered and tagged?

I’d really like to hear cyclists explain why they feel they should be exempt from the registration/tags/inspections that every other vehicle on the road they insist they have a right to use has to comply with.

Please explain.

You're assuming that the purpose of registration is "because they use the road", which is just something you made up.

What has happened in places that did require people to register bicycles? Why did DC stop?

I have no idea. Why don’t you enlighten us?

Because of the potential for people driving cars to injure people and damage property. It's the same reason that liability insurance is required.

It's a similar argument for registering guns, although that brings out a much more emotional response.

So…. you’re saying bike registration was eliminated in DC because of….car crashes.

And most people here are fully in favor of registration of guns. That seems like a perfect reason for bikes to be registered as well.

Wow, swing and a miss. Congratulations, you understood nothing and opened your mouth anyway.

That whooshing sound was my point soaring high over your head.

Gun registration is said to be a tool for ensuring that gun owners comply with gun laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

Registration of bikes is a way to ensure that cyclists comply with traffic and safety laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

I’m really sorry simple analogies are lost on you, but that’s your fault, no one else’s.

That's why we have registration for everything we own including lawnmowers as a way to ensure we comply with lawn mowing laws. Oh, right. We only have registration for things that can cause significant harm.

Sorry that I mistook your poor logic for ignorance.

People have been killed after being hit by a cyclist. Cyclists are killed every year through the negligence of drivers, or the negligence of the cyclists themselves.

I’d call getting killed a “significant harm”, wouldn’t you?

Stop grasping for reasons why bikes shouldn’t be registered. Because there aren’t any.

The last time a pedestrian was killed by a cyclist in DC was in 2017. The pedestrian was Jane Bennett Clark. The cyclist was Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff. Mr. Kauffman-Rogoff stayed on the scene after the accident and cooperated with the investigation, which found that he had failed to obey a traffic control device (i.e., ran a red light). What happened after that is unclear from the public records, although it seems that he was sued by Ms. Clark's estate for wrongful death in 2019 and then filed for bankruptcy (https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28581341/Salmon_v_KauffmanRogoff).

Interestingly, if we go all the way back to the first recorded death of a pedestrian hit by a cyclist in 1905, that cyclist - Joseph Meyers - was also charged with "careless cycling". The full listing of pedestrians killed by cyclists in DC is here: https://www.thewashcycle.com/2017/03/pedestrian-struck-by-cyclist-in-downtown-dc-dies-from-injuriess-.html.

The notion that registration is needed to hold cyclists to account in these rare but tragic cases doesn't seem to be borne out by what has actually happened.

There are several existing insurance products that exist such that there is no reason for a cyclists to be allowed to ride without insurance in the event that the injure, maim or godforbid kill someone. It should be mandated.

This includes either personal liability insurance and specific bicycle liability insurance from a company like PedalSure.
https://www.pedalsure.com/

The idea that you can kill someone and get away with it without even providing the victims family financial compensation is contrary to public policy in this country, particularly as it pertains to use of public right of ways. All cyclists should be insured, especially as bicycles are getting electrified and getting more dangerous.

Did Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff "get away with it"? No, he was charged, sued, and had to declare bankruptcy. Whereas the driver (whose name we do not know) who killed Rhonda Whittaker apparently has gotten away with it as the USPP won't even give their name to the family so that they can pursue a civil suit.

Lots of activities that human beings engage in other than cycling create a far greater statistical risk of harm for others. I could spend all day recounting them to you if I so desired. Are you calling for those who engage in these activities to have liability insurance as well? Maybe we should just mandate that everyone obtain an umbrella policy from the time they are born or do the sensible thing and overhaul the whole damn tort system.

If you are really worried about people being able to "kill someone and get away with it", I'd encourage you to focus your ire on the prevalence of fake temporary tags among Maryland drivers. If you spend any time on the streets of DC, you will know that these present the most clear and present danger to the welfare of the city's residents.

Why don’t you go and ask the victims family whether they have received justice. You make cyclists look bad.

That's an incredibly weak response. Even you can do better.

So says the person who thinks they can speak on behalf of a victim to defend a murderer.

You have severe reading comprehension issues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to figure out how to get my 5 year old niece a license when she comes here over Christmas break. And register her bike.

Also, no one has answered what bicycle registration would do. You just keep repeating it like some kind of mantra.

You know how people have to get their cars registered, right? It would be like that.

I honestly can't tell if you're serious or if you're trolling the anti-bike people.

What is the problem with having bikes registered?

Every other vehicle that uses the road is required to be registered and have tags and get an annual safety inspection. Why are bikes THE ONLY vehicles that use the roads not required to be registered and tagged?

I’d really like to hear cyclists explain why they feel they should be exempt from the registration/tags/inspections that every other vehicle on the road they insist they have a right to use has to comply with.

Please explain.

You're assuming that the purpose of registration is "because they use the road", which is just something you made up.

What has happened in places that did require people to register bicycles? Why did DC stop?

I have no idea. Why don’t you enlighten us?

Because of the potential for people driving cars to injure people and damage property. It's the same reason that liability insurance is required.

It's a similar argument for registering guns, although that brings out a much more emotional response.

So…. you’re saying bike registration was eliminated in DC because of….car crashes.

And most people here are fully in favor of registration of guns. That seems like a perfect reason for bikes to be registered as well.

Wow, swing and a miss. Congratulations, you understood nothing and opened your mouth anyway.

That whooshing sound was my point soaring high over your head.

Gun registration is said to be a tool for ensuring that gun owners comply with gun laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

Registration of bikes is a way to ensure that cyclists comply with traffic and safety laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

I’m really sorry simple analogies are lost on you, but that’s your fault, no one else’s.

That's why we have registration for everything we own including lawnmowers as a way to ensure we comply with lawn mowing laws. Oh, right. We only have registration for things that can cause significant harm.

Sorry that I mistook your poor logic for ignorance.

People have been killed after being hit by a cyclist. Cyclists are killed every year through the negligence of drivers, or the negligence of the cyclists themselves.

I’d call getting killed a “significant harm”, wouldn’t you?

Stop grasping for reasons why bikes shouldn’t be registered. Because there aren’t any.

The last time a pedestrian was killed by a cyclist in DC was in 2017. The pedestrian was Jane Bennett Clark. The cyclist was Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff. Mr. Kauffman-Rogoff stayed on the scene after the accident and cooperated with the investigation, which found that he had failed to obey a traffic control device (i.e., ran a red light). What happened after that is unclear from the public records, although it seems that he was sued by Ms. Clark's estate for wrongful death in 2019 and then filed for bankruptcy (https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28581341/Salmon_v_KauffmanRogoff).

Interestingly, if we go all the way back to the first recorded death of a pedestrian hit by a cyclist in 1905, that cyclist - Joseph Meyers - was also charged with "careless cycling". The full listing of pedestrians killed by cyclists in DC is here: https://www.thewashcycle.com/2017/03/pedestrian-struck-by-cyclist-in-downtown-dc-dies-from-injuriess-.html.

The notion that registration is needed to hold cyclists to account in these rare but tragic cases doesn't seem to be borne out by what has actually happened.

There are several existing insurance products that exist such that there is no reason for a cyclists to be allowed to ride without insurance in the event that the injure, maim or godforbid kill someone. It should be mandated.

This includes either personal liability insurance and specific bicycle liability insurance from a company like PedalSure.
https://www.pedalsure.com/

The idea that you can kill someone and get away with it without even providing the victims family financial compensation is contrary to public policy in this country, particularly as it pertains to use of public right of ways. All cyclists should be insured, especially as bicycles are getting electrified and getting more dangerous.

Did Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff "get away with it"? No, he was charged, sued, and had to declare bankruptcy. Whereas the driver (whose name we do not know) who killed Rhonda Whittaker apparently has gotten away with it as the USPP won't even give their name to the family so that they can pursue a civil suit.

Lots of activities that human beings engage in other than cycling create a far greater statistical risk of harm for others. I could spend all day recounting them to you if I so desired. Are you calling for those who engage in these activities to have liability insurance as well? Maybe we should just mandate that everyone obtain an umbrella policy from the time they are born or do the sensible thing and overhaul the whole damn tort system.

If you are really worried about people being able to "kill someone and get away with it", I'd encourage you to focus your ire on the prevalence of fake temporary tags among Maryland drivers. If you spend any time on the streets of DC, you will know that these present the most clear and present danger to the welfare of the city's residents.

Why don’t you go and ask the victims family whether they have received justice. You make cyclists look bad.

That's an incredibly weak response. Even you can do better.

So says the person who thinks they can speak on behalf of a victim to defend a murderer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to figure out how to get my 5 year old niece a license when she comes here over Christmas break. And register her bike.

Also, no one has answered what bicycle registration would do. You just keep repeating it like some kind of mantra.

You know how people have to get their cars registered, right? It would be like that.

I honestly can't tell if you're serious or if you're trolling the anti-bike people.

What is the problem with having bikes registered?

Every other vehicle that uses the road is required to be registered and have tags and get an annual safety inspection. Why are bikes THE ONLY vehicles that use the roads not required to be registered and tagged?

I’d really like to hear cyclists explain why they feel they should be exempt from the registration/tags/inspections that every other vehicle on the road they insist they have a right to use has to comply with.

Please explain.

You're assuming that the purpose of registration is "because they use the road", which is just something you made up.

What has happened in places that did require people to register bicycles? Why did DC stop?

I have no idea. Why don’t you enlighten us?

Because of the potential for people driving cars to injure people and damage property. It's the same reason that liability insurance is required.

It's a similar argument for registering guns, although that brings out a much more emotional response.

So…. you’re saying bike registration was eliminated in DC because of….car crashes.

And most people here are fully in favor of registration of guns. That seems like a perfect reason for bikes to be registered as well.

Wow, swing and a miss. Congratulations, you understood nothing and opened your mouth anyway.

That whooshing sound was my point soaring high over your head.

Gun registration is said to be a tool for ensuring that gun owners comply with gun laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

Registration of bikes is a way to ensure that cyclists comply with traffic and safety laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

I’m really sorry simple analogies are lost on you, but that’s your fault, no one else’s.

That's why we have registration for everything we own including lawnmowers as a way to ensure we comply with lawn mowing laws. Oh, right. We only have registration for things that can cause significant harm.

Sorry that I mistook your poor logic for ignorance.

People have been killed after being hit by a cyclist. Cyclists are killed every year through the negligence of drivers, or the negligence of the cyclists themselves.

I’d call getting killed a “significant harm”, wouldn’t you?

Stop grasping for reasons why bikes shouldn’t be registered. Because there aren’t any.

The last time a pedestrian was killed by a cyclist in DC was in 2017. The pedestrian was Jane Bennett Clark. The cyclist was Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff. Mr. Kauffman-Rogoff stayed on the scene after the accident and cooperated with the investigation, which found that he had failed to obey a traffic control device (i.e., ran a red light). What happened after that is unclear from the public records, although it seems that he was sued by Ms. Clark's estate for wrongful death in 2019 and then filed for bankruptcy (https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28581341/Salmon_v_KauffmanRogoff).

Interestingly, if we go all the way back to the first recorded death of a pedestrian hit by a cyclist in 1905, that cyclist - Joseph Meyers - was also charged with "careless cycling". The full listing of pedestrians killed by cyclists in DC is here: https://www.thewashcycle.com/2017/03/pedestrian-struck-by-cyclist-in-downtown-dc-dies-from-injuriess-.html.

The notion that registration is needed to hold cyclists to account in these rare but tragic cases doesn't seem to be borne out by what has actually happened.

There are several existing insurance products that exist such that there is no reason for a cyclists to be allowed to ride without insurance in the event that the injure, maim or godforbid kill someone. It should be mandated.

This includes either personal liability insurance and specific bicycle liability insurance from a company like PedalSure.
https://www.pedalsure.com/

The idea that you can kill someone and get away with it without even providing the victims family financial compensation is contrary to public policy in this country, particularly as it pertains to use of public right of ways. All cyclists should be insured, especially as bicycles are getting electrified and getting more dangerous.

Did Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff "get away with it"? No, he was charged, sued, and had to declare bankruptcy. Whereas the driver (whose name we do not know) who killed Rhonda Whittaker apparently has gotten away with it as the USPP won't even give their name to the family so that they can pursue a civil suit.

Lots of activities that human beings engage in other than cycling create a far greater statistical risk of harm for others. I could spend all day recounting them to you if I so desired. Are you calling for those who engage in these activities to have liability insurance as well? Maybe we should just mandate that everyone obtain an umbrella policy from the time they are born or do the sensible thing and overhaul the whole damn tort system.

If you are really worried about people being able to "kill someone and get away with it", I'd encourage you to focus your ire on the prevalence of fake temporary tags among Maryland drivers. If you spend any time on the streets of DC, you will know that these present the most clear and present danger to the welfare of the city's residents.

Why don’t you go and ask the victims family whether they have received justice. You make cyclists look bad.

That's an incredibly weak response. Even you can do better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to figure out how to get my 5 year old niece a license when she comes here over Christmas break. And register her bike.

Also, no one has answered what bicycle registration would do. You just keep repeating it like some kind of mantra.

You know how people have to get their cars registered, right? It would be like that.

I honestly can't tell if you're serious or if you're trolling the anti-bike people.

What is the problem with having bikes registered?

Every other vehicle that uses the road is required to be registered and have tags and get an annual safety inspection. Why are bikes THE ONLY vehicles that use the roads not required to be registered and tagged?

I’d really like to hear cyclists explain why they feel they should be exempt from the registration/tags/inspections that every other vehicle on the road they insist they have a right to use has to comply with.

Please explain.

You're assuming that the purpose of registration is "because they use the road", which is just something you made up.

What has happened in places that did require people to register bicycles? Why did DC stop?

I have no idea. Why don’t you enlighten us?

Because of the potential for people driving cars to injure people and damage property. It's the same reason that liability insurance is required.

It's a similar argument for registering guns, although that brings out a much more emotional response.

So…. you’re saying bike registration was eliminated in DC because of….car crashes.

And most people here are fully in favor of registration of guns. That seems like a perfect reason for bikes to be registered as well.

Wow, swing and a miss. Congratulations, you understood nothing and opened your mouth anyway.

That whooshing sound was my point soaring high over your head.

Gun registration is said to be a tool for ensuring that gun owners comply with gun laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

Registration of bikes is a way to ensure that cyclists comply with traffic and safety laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

I’m really sorry simple analogies are lost on you, but that’s your fault, no one else’s.

That's why we have registration for everything we own including lawnmowers as a way to ensure we comply with lawn mowing laws. Oh, right. We only have registration for things that can cause significant harm.

Sorry that I mistook your poor logic for ignorance.

People have been killed after being hit by a cyclist. Cyclists are killed every year through the negligence of drivers, or the negligence of the cyclists themselves.

I’d call getting killed a “significant harm”, wouldn’t you?

Stop grasping for reasons why bikes shouldn’t be registered. Because there aren’t any.

The last time a pedestrian was killed by a cyclist in DC was in 2017. The pedestrian was Jane Bennett Clark. The cyclist was Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff. Mr. Kauffman-Rogoff stayed on the scene after the accident and cooperated with the investigation, which found that he had failed to obey a traffic control device (i.e., ran a red light). What happened after that is unclear from the public records, although it seems that he was sued by Ms. Clark's estate for wrongful death in 2019 and then filed for bankruptcy (https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28581341/Salmon_v_KauffmanRogoff).

Interestingly, if we go all the way back to the first recorded death of a pedestrian hit by a cyclist in 1905, that cyclist - Joseph Meyers - was also charged with "careless cycling". The full listing of pedestrians killed by cyclists in DC is here: https://www.thewashcycle.com/2017/03/pedestrian-struck-by-cyclist-in-downtown-dc-dies-from-injuriess-.html.

The notion that registration is needed to hold cyclists to account in these rare but tragic cases doesn't seem to be borne out by what has actually happened.

There are several existing insurance products that exist such that there is no reason for a cyclists to be allowed to ride without insurance in the event that the injure, maim or godforbid kill someone. It should be mandated.

This includes either personal liability insurance and specific bicycle liability insurance from a company like PedalSure.
https://www.pedalsure.com/

The idea that you can kill someone and get away with it without even providing the victims family financial compensation is contrary to public policy in this country, particularly as it pertains to use of public right of ways. All cyclists should be insured, especially as bicycles are getting electrified and getting more dangerous.

Did Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff "get away with it"? No, he was charged, sued, and had to declare bankruptcy. Whereas the driver (whose name we do not know) who killed Rhonda Whittaker apparently has gotten away with it as the USPP won't even give their name to the family so that they can pursue a civil suit.

Lots of activities that human beings engage in other than cycling create a far greater statistical risk of harm for others. I could spend all day recounting them to you if I so desired. Are you calling for those who engage in these activities to have liability insurance as well? Maybe we should just mandate that everyone obtain an umbrella policy from the time they are born or do the sensible thing and overhaul the whole damn tort system.

If you are really worried about people being able to "kill someone and get away with it", I'd encourage you to focus your ire on the prevalence of fake temporary tags among Maryland drivers. If you spend any time on the streets of DC, you will know that these present the most clear and present danger to the welfare of the city's residents.

Why don’t you go and ask the victims family whether they have received justice. You make cyclists look bad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to figure out how to get my 5 year old niece a license when she comes here over Christmas break. And register her bike.

Also, no one has answered what bicycle registration would do. You just keep repeating it like some kind of mantra.

You know how people have to get their cars registered, right? It would be like that.

I honestly can't tell if you're serious or if you're trolling the anti-bike people.

What is the problem with having bikes registered?

Every other vehicle that uses the road is required to be registered and have tags and get an annual safety inspection. Why are bikes THE ONLY vehicles that use the roads not required to be registered and tagged?

I’d really like to hear cyclists explain why they feel they should be exempt from the registration/tags/inspections that every other vehicle on the road they insist they have a right to use has to comply with.

Please explain.

You're assuming that the purpose of registration is "because they use the road", which is just something you made up.

What has happened in places that did require people to register bicycles? Why did DC stop?

I have no idea. Why don’t you enlighten us?

Because of the potential for people driving cars to injure people and damage property. It's the same reason that liability insurance is required.

It's a similar argument for registering guns, although that brings out a much more emotional response.

So…. you’re saying bike registration was eliminated in DC because of….car crashes.

And most people here are fully in favor of registration of guns. That seems like a perfect reason for bikes to be registered as well.

Wow, swing and a miss. Congratulations, you understood nothing and opened your mouth anyway.

That whooshing sound was my point soaring high over your head.

Gun registration is said to be a tool for ensuring that gun owners comply with gun laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

Registration of bikes is a way to ensure that cyclists comply with traffic and safety laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

I’m really sorry simple analogies are lost on you, but that’s your fault, no one else’s.

That's why we have registration for everything we own including lawnmowers as a way to ensure we comply with lawn mowing laws. Oh, right. We only have registration for things that can cause significant harm.

Sorry that I mistook your poor logic for ignorance.

People have been killed after being hit by a cyclist. Cyclists are killed every year through the negligence of drivers, or the negligence of the cyclists themselves.

I’d call getting killed a “significant harm”, wouldn’t you?

Stop grasping for reasons why bikes shouldn’t be registered. Because there aren’t any.

The last time a pedestrian was killed by a cyclist in DC was in 2017. The pedestrian was Jane Bennett Clark. The cyclist was Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff. Mr. Kauffman-Rogoff stayed on the scene after the accident and cooperated with the investigation, which found that he had failed to obey a traffic control device (i.e., ran a red light). What happened after that is unclear from the public records, although it seems that he was sued by Ms. Clark's estate for wrongful death in 2019 and then filed for bankruptcy (https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28581341/Salmon_v_KauffmanRogoff).

Interestingly, if we go all the way back to the first recorded death of a pedestrian hit by a cyclist in 1905, that cyclist - Joseph Meyers - was also charged with "careless cycling". The full listing of pedestrians killed by cyclists in DC is here: https://www.thewashcycle.com/2017/03/pedestrian-struck-by-cyclist-in-downtown-dc-dies-from-injuriess-.html.

The notion that registration is needed to hold cyclists to account in these rare but tragic cases doesn't seem to be borne out by what has actually happened.

There are several existing insurance products that exist such that there is no reason for a cyclists to be allowed to ride without insurance in the event that the injure, maim or godforbid kill someone. It should be mandated.

This includes either personal liability insurance and specific bicycle liability insurance from a company like PedalSure.
https://www.pedalsure.com/

The idea that you can kill someone and get away with it without even providing the victims family financial compensation is contrary to public policy in this country, particularly as it pertains to use of public right of ways. All cyclists should be insured, especially as bicycles are getting electrified and getting more dangerous.

Since 2012 there have been 40 cases of minor pedestrian injuries in crashes that involved a bicycle: 1 incident so far this year, 10 last year, 13 in 2017, and 5 in 2016. That’s an average of 6.5 minor pedestrian injuries per year from crashes with a bike involved between 2012 and 2018, or 1 every 56 days. Since 2012 there have been 7 cases of major pedestrian injuries from crashes that involved a bicycle. The data set includes 1 pedestrian fatality involving a bicycle: the 2017 death of Jane Bennett Clark.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to figure out how to get my 5 year old niece a license when she comes here over Christmas break. And register her bike.

Also, no one has answered what bicycle registration would do. You just keep repeating it like some kind of mantra.

You know how people have to get their cars registered, right? It would be like that.

I honestly can't tell if you're serious or if you're trolling the anti-bike people.

What is the problem with having bikes registered?

Every other vehicle that uses the road is required to be registered and have tags and get an annual safety inspection. Why are bikes THE ONLY vehicles that use the roads not required to be registered and tagged?

I’d really like to hear cyclists explain why they feel they should be exempt from the registration/tags/inspections that every other vehicle on the road they insist they have a right to use has to comply with.

Please explain.

You're assuming that the purpose of registration is "because they use the road", which is just something you made up.

What has happened in places that did require people to register bicycles? Why did DC stop?

I have no idea. Why don’t you enlighten us?

Because of the potential for people driving cars to injure people and damage property. It's the same reason that liability insurance is required.

It's a similar argument for registering guns, although that brings out a much more emotional response.

So…. you’re saying bike registration was eliminated in DC because of….car crashes.

And most people here are fully in favor of registration of guns. That seems like a perfect reason for bikes to be registered as well.

Wow, swing and a miss. Congratulations, you understood nothing and opened your mouth anyway.

That whooshing sound was my point soaring high over your head.

Gun registration is said to be a tool for ensuring that gun owners comply with gun laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

Registration of bikes is a way to ensure that cyclists comply with traffic and safety laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

I’m really sorry simple analogies are lost on you, but that’s your fault, no one else’s.

That's why we have registration for everything we own including lawnmowers as a way to ensure we comply with lawn mowing laws. Oh, right. We only have registration for things that can cause significant harm.

Sorry that I mistook your poor logic for ignorance.

People have been killed after being hit by a cyclist. Cyclists are killed every year through the negligence of drivers, or the negligence of the cyclists themselves.

I’d call getting killed a “significant harm”, wouldn’t you?

Stop grasping for reasons why bikes shouldn’t be registered. Because there aren’t any.

The last time a pedestrian was killed by a cyclist in DC was in 2017. The pedestrian was Jane Bennett Clark. The cyclist was Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff. Mr. Kauffman-Rogoff stayed on the scene after the accident and cooperated with the investigation, which found that he had failed to obey a traffic control device (i.e., ran a red light). What happened after that is unclear from the public records, although it seems that he was sued by Ms. Clark's estate for wrongful death in 2019 and then filed for bankruptcy (https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28581341/Salmon_v_KauffmanRogoff).

Interestingly, if we go all the way back to the first recorded death of a pedestrian hit by a cyclist in 1905, that cyclist - Joseph Meyers - was also charged with "careless cycling". The full listing of pedestrians killed by cyclists in DC is here: https://www.thewashcycle.com/2017/03/pedestrian-struck-by-cyclist-in-downtown-dc-dies-from-injuriess-.html.

The notion that registration is needed to hold cyclists to account in these rare but tragic cases doesn't seem to be borne out by what has actually happened.

There are several existing insurance products that exist such that there is no reason for a cyclists to be allowed to ride without insurance in the event that the injure, maim or godforbid kill someone. It should be mandated.

This includes either personal liability insurance and specific bicycle liability insurance from a company like PedalSure.
https://www.pedalsure.com/

The idea that you can kill someone and get away with it without even providing the victims family financial compensation is contrary to public policy in this country, particularly as it pertains to use of public right of ways. All cyclists should be insured, especially as bicycles are getting electrified and getting more dangerous.

Did Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff "get away with it"? No, he was charged, sued, and had to declare bankruptcy. Whereas the driver (whose name we do not know) who killed Rhonda Whittaker apparently has gotten away with it as the USPP won't even give their name to the family so that they can pursue a civil suit.

Lots of activities that human beings engage in other than cycling create a far greater statistical risk of harm for others. I could spend all day recounting them to you if I so desired. Are you calling for those who engage in these activities to have liability insurance as well? Maybe we should just mandate that everyone obtain an umbrella policy from the time they are born or do the sensible thing and overhaul the whole damn tort system.

If you are really worried about people being able to "kill someone and get away with it", I'd encourage you to focus your ire on the prevalence of fake temporary tags among Maryland drivers. If you spend any time on the streets of DC, you will know that these present the most clear and present danger to the welfare of the city's residents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to figure out how to get my 5 year old niece a license when she comes here over Christmas break. And register her bike.

Also, no one has answered what bicycle registration would do. You just keep repeating it like some kind of mantra.

You know how people have to get their cars registered, right? It would be like that.

I honestly can't tell if you're serious or if you're trolling the anti-bike people.

What is the problem with having bikes registered?

Every other vehicle that uses the road is required to be registered and have tags and get an annual safety inspection. Why are bikes THE ONLY vehicles that use the roads not required to be registered and tagged?

I’d really like to hear cyclists explain why they feel they should be exempt from the registration/tags/inspections that every other vehicle on the road they insist they have a right to use has to comply with.

Please explain.

You're assuming that the purpose of registration is "because they use the road", which is just something you made up.

What has happened in places that did require people to register bicycles? Why did DC stop?

I have no idea. Why don’t you enlighten us?

Because of the potential for people driving cars to injure people and damage property. It's the same reason that liability insurance is required.

It's a similar argument for registering guns, although that brings out a much more emotional response.

So…. you’re saying bike registration was eliminated in DC because of….car crashes.

And most people here are fully in favor of registration of guns. That seems like a perfect reason for bikes to be registered as well.

Wow, swing and a miss. Congratulations, you understood nothing and opened your mouth anyway.

That whooshing sound was my point soaring high over your head.

Gun registration is said to be a tool for ensuring that gun owners comply with gun laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

Registration of bikes is a way to ensure that cyclists comply with traffic and safety laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

I’m really sorry simple analogies are lost on you, but that’s your fault, no one else’s.

That's why we have registration for everything we own including lawnmowers as a way to ensure we comply with lawn mowing laws. Oh, right. We only have registration for things that can cause significant harm.

Sorry that I mistook your poor logic for ignorance.

People have been killed after being hit by a cyclist. Cyclists are killed every year through the negligence of drivers, or the negligence of the cyclists themselves.

I’d call getting killed a “significant harm”, wouldn’t you?

Stop grasping for reasons why bikes shouldn’t be registered. Because there aren’t any.

The last time a pedestrian was killed by a cyclist in DC was in 2017. The pedestrian was Jane Bennett Clark. The cyclist was Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff. Mr. Kauffman-Rogoff stayed on the scene after the accident and cooperated with the investigation, which found that he had failed to obey a traffic control device (i.e., ran a red light). What happened after that is unclear from the public records, although it seems that he was sued by Ms. Clark's estate for wrongful death in 2019 and then filed for bankruptcy (https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28581341/Salmon_v_KauffmanRogoff).

Interestingly, if we go all the way back to the first recorded death of a pedestrian hit by a cyclist in 1905, that cyclist - Joseph Meyers - was also charged with "careless cycling". The full listing of pedestrians killed by cyclists in DC is here: https://www.thewashcycle.com/2017/03/pedestrian-struck-by-cyclist-in-downtown-dc-dies-from-injuriess-.html.

The notion that registration is needed to hold cyclists to account in these rare but tragic cases doesn't seem to be borne out by what has actually happened.

There are several existing insurance products that exist such that there is no reason for a cyclists to be allowed to ride without insurance in the event that the injure, maim or godforbid kill someone. It should be mandated.

This includes either personal liability insurance and specific bicycle liability insurance from a company like PedalSure.
https://www.pedalsure.com/

The idea that you can kill someone and get away with it without even providing the victims family financial compensation is contrary to public policy in this country, particularly as it pertains to use of public right of ways. All cyclists should be insured, especially as bicycles are getting electrified and getting more dangerous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to figure out how to get my 5 year old niece a license when she comes here over Christmas break. And register her bike.

Also, no one has answered what bicycle registration would do. You just keep repeating it like some kind of mantra.

You know how people have to get their cars registered, right? It would be like that.

I honestly can't tell if you're serious or if you're trolling the anti-bike people.

What is the problem with having bikes registered?

Every other vehicle that uses the road is required to be registered and have tags and get an annual safety inspection. Why are bikes THE ONLY vehicles that use the roads not required to be registered and tagged?

I’d really like to hear cyclists explain why they feel they should be exempt from the registration/tags/inspections that every other vehicle on the road they insist they have a right to use has to comply with.

Please explain.

You're assuming that the purpose of registration is "because they use the road", which is just something you made up.

What has happened in places that did require people to register bicycles? Why did DC stop?

I have no idea. Why don’t you enlighten us?

Because of the potential for people driving cars to injure people and damage property. It's the same reason that liability insurance is required.

It's a similar argument for registering guns, although that brings out a much more emotional response.

So…. you’re saying bike registration was eliminated in DC because of….car crashes.

And most people here are fully in favor of registration of guns. That seems like a perfect reason for bikes to be registered as well.

Wow, swing and a miss. Congratulations, you understood nothing and opened your mouth anyway.

That whooshing sound was my point soaring high over your head.

Gun registration is said to be a tool for ensuring that gun owners comply with gun laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

Registration of bikes is a way to ensure that cyclists comply with traffic and safety laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

I’m really sorry simple analogies are lost on you, but that’s your fault, no one else’s.

That's why we have registration for everything we own including lawnmowers as a way to ensure we comply with lawn mowing laws. Oh, right. We only have registration for things that can cause significant harm.

Sorry that I mistook your poor logic for ignorance.

People have been killed after being hit by a cyclist. Cyclists are killed every year through the negligence of drivers, or the negligence of the cyclists themselves.

I’d call getting killed a “significant harm”, wouldn’t you?

Stop grasping for reasons why bikes shouldn’t be registered. Because there aren’t any.

The last time a pedestrian was killed by a cyclist in DC was in 2017. The pedestrian was Jane Bennett Clark. The cyclist was Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff. Mr. Kauffman-Rogoff stayed on the scene after the accident and cooperated with the investigation, which found that he had failed to obey a traffic control device (i.e., ran a red light). What happened after that is unclear from the public records, although it seems that he was sued by Ms. Clark's estate for wrongful death in 2019 and then filed for bankruptcy (https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28581341/Salmon_v_KauffmanRogoff).

Interestingly, if we go all the way back to the first recorded death of a pedestrian hit by a cyclist in 1905, that cyclist - Joseph Meyers - was also charged with "careless cycling". The full listing of pedestrians killed by cyclists in DC is here: https://www.thewashcycle.com/2017/03/pedestrian-struck-by-cyclist-in-downtown-dc-dies-from-injuriess-.html.

The notion that registration is needed to hold cyclists to account in these rare but tragic cases doesn't seem to be borne out by what has actually happened.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to figure out how to get my 5 year old niece a license when she comes here over Christmas break. And register her bike.

Also, no one has answered what bicycle registration would do. You just keep repeating it like some kind of mantra.

You know how people have to get their cars registered, right? It would be like that.

I honestly can't tell if you're serious or if you're trolling the anti-bike people.

What is the problem with having bikes registered?

Every other vehicle that uses the road is required to be registered and have tags and get an annual safety inspection. Why are bikes THE ONLY vehicles that use the roads not required to be registered and tagged?

I’d really like to hear cyclists explain why they feel they should be exempt from the registration/tags/inspections that every other vehicle on the road they insist they have a right to use has to comply with.

Please explain.

You're assuming that the purpose of registration is "because they use the road", which is just something you made up.

What has happened in places that did require people to register bicycles? Why did DC stop?

I have no idea. Why don’t you enlighten us?

Because of the potential for people driving cars to injure people and damage property. It's the same reason that liability insurance is required.

It's a similar argument for registering guns, although that brings out a much more emotional response.

So…. you’re saying bike registration was eliminated in DC because of….car crashes.

And most people here are fully in favor of registration of guns. That seems like a perfect reason for bikes to be registered as well.

Wow, swing and a miss. Congratulations, you understood nothing and opened your mouth anyway.

That whooshing sound was my point soaring high over your head.

Gun registration is said to be a tool for ensuring that gun owners comply with gun laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

Registration of bikes is a way to ensure that cyclists comply with traffic and safety laws, and those who don’t comply can be charged.

I’m really sorry simple analogies are lost on you, but that’s your fault, no one else’s.

That's why we have registration for everything we own including lawnmowers as a way to ensure we comply with lawn mowing laws. Oh, right. We only have registration for things that can cause significant harm.

Sorry that I mistook your poor logic for ignorance.

People have been killed after being hit by a cyclist. Cyclists are killed every year through the negligence of drivers, or the negligence of the cyclists themselves.

I’d call getting killed a “significant harm”, wouldn’t you?

Stop grasping for reasons why bikes shouldn’t be registered. Because there aren’t any.

The last time a pedestrian was killed by a cyclist in DC was in 2017. The pedestrian was Jane Bennett Clark. The cyclist was Zakkai Stanley Kauffman-Rogoff. Mr. Kauffman-Rogoff stayed on the scene after the accident and cooperated with the investigation, which found that he had failed to obey a traffic control device (i.e., ran a red light). What happened after that is unclear from the public records, although it seems that he was sued by Ms. Clark's estate for wrongful death in 2019 and then filed for bankruptcy (https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28581341/Salmon_v_KauffmanRogoff).

Interestingly, if we go all the way back to the first recorded death of a pedestrian hit by a cyclist in 1905, that cyclist - Joseph Meyers - was also charged with "careless cycling". The full listing of pedestrians killed by cyclists in DC is here: https://www.thewashcycle.com/2017/03/pedestrian-struck-by-cyclist-in-downtown-dc-dies-from-injuriess-.html.

The notion that registration is needed to hold cyclists to account in these rare but tragic cases doesn't seem to be borne out by what has actually happened.