Bike insurance should cover cyclist crashes

If motorists have to have insurance to cover accidents, property damage, and pedestrian injury, why shouldn’t cyclists as well

Re: Cyclists pay fair share (Letters, Oct. 3)

The letter-writer claims that cyclists should not be required to have insurance and licenses because “it’s a healthy enjoyable activity and should be encouraged.”

Driving cars is an enjoyable activity for many of us, too.

A lot of cyclists claim that biking is their primary transportation, so if motorists have to have insurance to cover accidents, property damage, and pedestrian injury, why shouldn’t cyclists be required to, as well?

Many of them ride dangerously – we all see it very often, and that includes the spandex crowd.

If a cyclist hits a car and damages it or hits a cyclist and injures the person, who pays for the costs? Probably not the cyclist.

Sorry, cyclists should be as responsible as motorists in this regard.

Larry Zilinsky

Saanich