> if you want to push it that far, you have to answer the question of why bicycle riders aren't required to have a driver license, carry insurance, register their bikes, and have license plates.
Because both the scale of destruction and death a cyclist is capable of is nowhere near that of someone driving even a small compact economy car, and the relation between damage caused vs suffered is nowhere as disproportionate?
A driver can plow through a crowd of dozens of people, killing and maiming, and not suffer the slightest injury.
> Because if you think a bike can't cause a serious accident, you haven't driven the roads too much.
Never has a cyclist damaged a building, much less obliterated a storefront or killed people sitting inside said building. Or taken out a traffic light, or telephone pole.
Never has a structural engineer had to evaluate a building or bridge after a cyclist hit it.
Never has a cyclist caused a mass casualty event.
A cyclist causing a death is so unheard of it's literally national news.