Every single news article the has the word bicycle in it invariably has comments about how bikes need to be licensed, registered and so on. Instead of recapitulating it, here's a great example.
Instead of re-typing a reply every time I'll collect the answers here:
Bicyclists should require a license: Did these people not learn to ride a bike when they were a kid? If not maybe that is why they are so bitter. Does a 12 year old need a license to ride down the street to a friends house? Honestly, I took my motorcycle permit about 30 years ago and it is still valid. I'm 100% positive I could get my bicycle license. Did the fact that this person had a license help the person he killed? http://www.pressherald.com/2015/03/18/biddeford-man-gets-10-years-in-prison-in-fatal-accident/
Wearing a Helmet: It's a great idea and I do but I don't support nanny laws so let's leave it at that.
Bicycles should be registered: OK, this is a personal favorite of mine. I think it is a great idea. BUT, registrations should be directly proportional to the amount if infrastructure and wear and tear they impart to the road. So, I propose a modest amount like $0.25/pound. That would make my bike about 6 bucks to register and the average SUV $1000. I'm really looking forward to those paved shoulders.
Bicycles should be inspected: Well, I'm not sure that really protects anybody but the cyclist. I mean the last time that a cyclist killed or hurt somebody in Maine because their bike wasn't functional was......... Self certified could work with the possibility of a ticket for an infraction. In all seriousness the only thing I can think of that might be of concern is no brakes, and that can change in a day on a bike. I really don't think a formal inspection would do anything but cause a nuisance which would just be a bicycle deterrent. Yea, NO.
Bicycles should be insured: Seriously? Is there really a significant amount of data the shows that people on bicycles are causing that much property damage? Every once in a while you hear about somebody who hops in their car and mistakes the gas for the break and crashes through the front of a building, or maybe doesn't see another car in the blind spot and side swipes them, or slides on an icy road and has a head on collision with an innocent party, insurance is a good thing. Do you know how much damage would be caused to other peoples property if that was a bike? The upper limit would be scratched paint. Seriously? Insurance?
Bicyclists should follow traffic signals: Yes, of course. I wish they all did. I can truly say that I follow them all with the exception of the occasional rolling right turn through a stop sign when the coast is clear. I can also say that I roll through at a slower speed than 50-80% of the cars I see at stop signs. Again, not hurting anybody. Hell, I've seen cars go through stop signs without touching the breaks at speeds faster than I can get to on a bike.
Police should start enforcing the laws: Absolutely! But ticketing and fines should be commensurate to the amount of risk. If somebody in an Escalade runs a light and crashes into a busload of school children that should be a heftier fine than if somebody on a 10-speed does. But I am all for fining people that blow though lights, ride against traffic, ride at night without lights and all the other infractions that turn drivers into a bike hating public.
Bicyclists shouldn't be on the road, roads are designed for cars: Well, no, the roads are public ways for use by everybody. I use the roads to get to and from work, on my bike.
People on bikes slow me down when I'm going to work: So, if I'm going to work on my bike an somebody in a car is going out for ice cream they have less right to the road than I do? No, everybody has equal right to the road.