IT is hard to fault the logic (Path to safety, Melville Times, October 21) that banning under 17s from cycling on roads will reduce cyclist deaths.
Nevertheless, cycling is a pathway to driving, through learning road rules, signs, routes and judging vehicle speeds.
Unlike a car, a bicycle is not a complex, high-velocity, potentially lethal vehicle, so should not require licensing and exams.
Banning under 17s would stop cycling to school, although the lack of the proverbial school bike shed has not sent a good message either.
Paths are not as safe as we think. My son was run over cycling on the pavement by a car reversing from a driveway.
Let us not discourage children delivering newspapers to our door by bicycle (both of my children have enjoyed the independence of doing a newspaper round together for years now).
Explore safer cycling by children, and encourage more of it. The costs amount to little more than painting a few more bike lines (wider ones) on our roads, and honouring the Amy Gillett Foundation recommendations (A Metre Matters).
Older children could marshal their younger siblings and friends on the ride to school, promoting safe and law-abiding cycling. Add a parent in a reflective vest if you are nervous.
Let us give our children the chance to dodge the four, modern-era, apocalyptic horsemen of diabetes, atherosclerosis, mental illness and obesity, by moving under their own power.
PHIL NICHOLLS, Fremantle