Some experts suggest that all cyclists should have to pass a test before being allowed to ride a bike on public roads. Agree or Disagree?
It is sometimes argued by experts that every cyclist has to pass a mandatory test before riding on public roads. While I acknowledge the logic behind this suggestion, I still firmly disagree with it for several reasons.
It is true that passing a cycling test can improve road safety. Passing a compulsory test means that cyclists have to learn traffic rules and proper road behavior. This necessary knowledge allows bike riders to avoid collisions with other vehicles and pedestrians. However, it is only accessible for well-off families and not for children of low-income household that are able to afford such formal tests.
Nevertheless, I would argue that other alternatives are available to keep the road safe such as improving road infrastructure and holding awareness campaigns. Regarding the former, it is true that many countries do not take cyclists into much consideration hence the lack of dedicated bike lanes and safe road intersections. Without these safety measures, bicycle users have to share roads with other bigger vehicles such as cars, buses, and trucks, making it extremely dangerous for cyclists and other drivers with or without passing a test. In addition to road improvements, campaigns about traffic laws that teach everyone how to share the road can have a broader impact than passing a cycling test. This is evident in Vietnam, a nation where there are annual traffic laws programs by local traffic police at elementary to high school to provide traffic knowledge and offer safe advice to students riding their bikes to school.
In conclusion, it is understandable why experts suggest that a mandatory test is essential for cyclists. However, I cannot support such a view, given improvements in road systems and campaigns raising awareness are equally important.
It is sometimes argued by experts that every cyclist has to pass a mandatory test before riding on public roads. While I acknowledge the logic behind this suggestion, I still firmly disagree with it for several reasons.
It is true that passing a cycling test can improve road safety. Passing a compulsory test means that cyclists have to learn traffic rules and proper road behavior. This necessary knowledge allows bike riders to avoid collisions with other vehicles and pedestrians. However, it is only accessible for well-off families and not for children of low-income household that are able to afford such formal tests.
Nevertheless, I would argue that other alternatives are available to keep the road safe such as improving road infrastructure and holding awareness campaigns. Regarding the former, it is true that many countries do not take cyclists into much consideration hence the lack of dedicated bike lanes and safe road intersections. Without these safety measures, bicycle users have to share roads with other bigger vehicles such as cars, buses, and trucks, making it extremely dangerous for cyclists and other drivers with or without passing a test. In addition to road improvements, campaigns about traffic laws that teach everyone how to share the road can have a broader impact than passing a cycling test. This is evident in Vietnam, a nation where there are annual traffic laws programs by local traffic police at elementary to high school to provide traffic knowledge and offer safe advice to students riding their bikes to school.
In conclusion, it is understandable why experts suggest that a mandatory test is essential for cyclists. However, I cannot support such a view, given improvements in road systems and campaigns raising awareness are equally important.
