Cyclists need licenses
Vail, CO, Colorado
After reading the article on giving cyclists three feet of space while passing them sort of gets to me.
If they want to get these kinds of laws passed on their behalf, then they should have to get a license.
I have had these discussions with friends of mine who are cyclists, and they always come up with the excuse that they are not motorized.
I have three trailers and they don’t have motors, either. But I have to get a license for them. I also I have to have lights, turn signals, back-up lights etc., before legally getting on the highway.
Every other vehicle that is used on the highway system has to be licensed that I know of. Why should the cyclists be different.
If they don’t have to get a license, then I shouldn’t have to get a license for my trailers. There are a lot more cyclists on the road than trailers.
Good example: Coming home from Pagosa Springs last Saturday, I got to Buena Vista, and from there to Leadville was a bike ride going on.
There had to be over 200 cyclists. I had to go about 35 miles an hour or so for that distance, which took me over an hour longer than should have.
If you had 200 cars going 15 to 20 mph on the highway, you would get a ticket for impeding traffic.
Living up in Bond, I experience cyclists almost every day on Route 131 or on Route 6. Why should I have to give up my space on the highway for a vehicle that isn’t licensed to be there in the first place?