and made the following comments:
I can understand that bicycle is very eco-friendly. But SG main roads are always very heavy around the clock. Even though there are special roads dedicated to bicycle riders but many riders still prefer to use the main roads and compete with the fast moving motor vehicles.My response:
All the vehicle holders on the road must pay the road tax, why should there be an exception to the bicycle riders?
All motor-vehicle drivers who hug on the road will be summoned, but why should there be an exception given to the bicycle riders?
All the vehicle holders on the road have to go through high-way code and training before using the road, why should there be an exception given to the bicycle riders?
Do bicycle riders care about they are obstructing the traffic most of the time? Do they know that it is not only dangerous to the themselves but also to other motor vehicles trying to avoid them on the roads which are already very heavy?
Firstly, the question is not good. How about asking: Is driving a vehicle on the roads dangerous to themselves and other pedestrians? Yes or No?
They are different type of riders riding for different purposes. Those dedicated roads are not enough, in quantity/quality and for serving the purpose of commuting. Actually, main roads are the last choice to most riders, though many have not discovered alternatives and some trade higher risk for better convenient as alternatives may mean longer distance and time. Also, in many roads, when traffic can be fast, the left lane has low traffic, while when the left lane has more cars, it is usually when traffic is slow. So, the speed reduction caused by cyclists are quite negligible.
About road tax, first of all, it is not for the "permission" to use the road. Rather, it is for the purpose of maintaining the roads and the amount is related to the level of damage one's car would do the the roads. Thus, strictly speaking, the road tax for bicycle would be very very little. I have written more on road tax and bicycle.
I am not sure the exact definition of hogging. If hogging means a vehicle purposely travel at much lower than its normal speed, then we can't really consider cyclists hogging as their slower speed is their normal speed.
I think there is a line drawn between manual powered and auto-mobil, whether motorised or battery powered. For manual powered bicycle to required license, it sort of suggest that all pedestrians should need license. Actually, that is good, for their own safety. However, most licenses such as those held by doctor/lawyer/driver/etc. are there because these professions need to be monitored as otherwise they could easily cause serious damages to others. Comparatively, cyclists don't easily cause serious damages to others, while usually they are more like the victims.
If each of these "obstructing" traffic cyclists drive a car on the road, wouldn't the traffic become worse? OK, may be not all, but even 30%, or 10%, traffic should be better replacing a car with a bicycle.
As mentioned above, if the roads are already heavy, then how much more lag can cyclists cause?