Considering that the average Japanese pedestrian at night is 80+, wearing dark clothes and has bones less pliable than warabashi, I can see why they are concerned about drunks on bicycles.
I'm fine with it. If I'm headed for my local pub I walk and bus it.
If they actually crack down on this a lot of people will lose their license. At my local bar about half of the locals come and leave on their bicycles. Never done it myself, but I'm less worried about some drunk guy riding a bicycle at 2kph in the middle of the night with no traffic then the average crazy rider during the day.
Of course ideally no one should ride anything drunk, just talking about priorities. If they are gonna put an effort into something I would prefer they stop people riding on the wrong side of the road or people that plays with their phone while riding during the day when there are other people out.
During the 10 years I have gone to my local bar, everyone I know have safely gone home on their bicycles, while I have seen and have had numerous close calls myself with bicycles during the day.
Doesn't mean you can't crack down on both though, but doesn't seem like the more problematic of the two is given much effort.
Drunk cycliing isn't legal in the UK. It is somewhat socially acceptable and lots of people obviously do it, with the law seldom enforced by the police. But it is still very much, not legal.
Oh yes, silly me imagining it's possible to compare road use between different countries and ignoring that Japan is a magical land where the laws of physics don't apply. Next I'll be imagining that the UK has four seasons.
Silly you for thinking that the problem is people riding on the road when drunk in Japan.
They’re riding on the footpath where their risk of interacting with someone stepping out of a building, around a corner or just entering a narrow or crowded section is much much higher.
While it is in theory illegal to ride on the footpath in Japan it absolutely is not enforced and is the default place for bicycles in any moderately built up metropolitan area.
I think it shouldn’t be a blanket statement. There is a difference between having 1 beer drunk and having a whole bottle of wine followed by a whiskey kind of drunk. Don’t know the UK rule but in Germany they used to have a count you could go up to. Any more drunk and it is drunk driving.
I feel like this could have the unintended consequences of more drunk driving cars. « If I’m going to lose my license for driving a bike, might as well go by car; it’s cold tonight ». Obviously people won’t literally say this, but they might subconsciously think it
Authorities deemed that the offenders were "likely to pose a significant danger when driving a car".
Right. Except they're not driving a car. Lol.
I get that riding a bicycle drunk could be dangerous, but like, that's a stupid comment to make in this context.
Edit: sorry yeah I interpreted the comment wrong so it seemed out of the blue, but u/redditscraperbot2 explains it better.
This is a bit questionable for me, but to be clear I am anti operating a car, or bike under the influence of Alcohol.
The reason I find it questionable, is that the fine is different for people that have a drivers license vs those that do not. It seems a little unfair, when you get your driver’s License they don’t test your knowledge of bike rules (although similar, they are not 1:1).
In the states, if you’re driving your personal car but you are speeding it can affect your CDL (Commercial Drivers License), and that makes more sense to me.
Again, if you’re drinking please be safe and stay way from things with wheels but I think the fine should be the same for everyone.
It's the same traffic rules you have to follow with a car, so why not?
In germany you can also get points to your license for traffic violations while riding a bicycle.
I question the notion that they should be subject to the same rules. Idk it’s been a long time, when I was in Japan everyone rode on the sidewalk and generally acted more like pedestrians (and no one was particularly bothered about drinking or parking the things legally) but I thought this made sense anyway because realistically a bicyclist can’t do the kind of damage a driver can (sure if you’re bulleting like Lane Armstrong at extreme speeds maybe that’s an exception but in the general case).
I can't speak for japanese laws, but in germany, if you ride a bicycle on public roads it is a vehicle taking part in traffic (don't know how to write it correctly in english) and as such the same rules apply. Alcohol, ignoring red lights etc.
So I'd assume the japanese police works under the same system?
What’s the alcohol threshold to get you a fine or worse in Germany? In Japan is 0%. With last year changes this applies also to bicycles.
I don’t think most people argue that a fine for drunk cycling is unjust, but there’s something wrong if it’s the same penalty as driving a car or a truck.
There seems to be a lack of proportions, especially when the alcohol limit is already ridiculous. If I have a sip of wine and go home cycling why is that treated the same way as Tanaka san that gets completely wasted at the nomikai and hops on a car afterwards?
You have to ride your bicycle not only on sidewalks with pedestrians who can be injured by your impaired judgement, but you're also putting cars at higher risk of striking you, or being struck by you if you are impaired. The risk of injury and even death is much higher when you add a 20kg+ chunk of metal going 10-20kmph faster than walking into the equation. There really isn't a suitable middle-ground to deter the behavior, there's no cycling license to revoke.
Drunk cycling in Japan is illegal and carries significant penalties, including potential fines up to ¥1 million (approx. $6,500 USD) and imprisonment up to five years, with stricter rules and enforcement increasing since November 2024 for impaired riding, supplying alcohol to cyclists, or lending bikes to them. There's no specific BAC limit; impairment is enough, and police can use breathalyzers, with serious consequences like license suspension even for car drivers.
“Car” was probably a mistranslation and it was likely a vehicle that they meant to say. If i remember correctly, Japan classes a bicycle as a light vehicle.
Do i get charged for manslaughter if i regularly cut myself with a knife by accident? Isn't the fact they are cycling instead of driving shows that they are exercising good judgement?
No, both are bad judgement. One of the conditions of having a license are to show that you know not to operate vehicles under the influence. If you think there is a significant difference between cycling drunk and driving drunk then maybe you shouldn't have a licence either.
If you think there is a significant difference between cycling drunk and driving drunk then maybe you shouldn't have a licence either.
This is a mental sentence. The difference is that car accidents are the number one non-natural killer, but it's nearly impossible to find examples of people dying after being hit by a bike.
Bikes weigh ~50 times less than an average kei car. The average top speed of a cyclist is 15mph. Compared with a kei car going 45mph, a bike going 15mph has ~450x less kinetic energy.
Not to mention, with bikes going at much slower speeds both the cyclist and pedestrians have much more time to react ahead of any collisions.
I don't cycle drunk because it's dangerous for me, the cyclist, but treating the two as even remotely comparable is frankly mad.
It's not mental at all. You're a danger to yourself and others when drunk while cycling. I'm not gonna budge on this topic. I've seen some gnarly shit involving a drunk cyclist.
Danger to yourself, yes. Danger to others, also yes, but literally hundreds of times less so than a small car. But to say that "there isn't a significant difference" between the two, you've completely lost the plot.
No I haven't. A drunk cyclist on the road is a danger to themself, other cars, pedestrians who all have to actively work to avoid them. It's a completely unpredictable element on a public road and the right of people to use public roads safely trumps the right of a drunk guy to get home a few minutes earlier when he can just push his bike home at a reasonable speed.
I pray you are never the victim of one of these people.
The fact that you can not, legally, drive a car without detailed screening and licensing alone should tell you that it is, in fact, not even remotely the same.
I find it hard to believe you ACTUALLY think a car going 40 and hitting someone is the same as a drunk cyclist bumping into someone.
And if YOU can’t understand the difference between a car and a bike, then YOU should not be driving either. Normal people definitely have the cognitive abilities to see the difference and understand the risks of one over the other.
By the same sentiment, would you strip the driving license of a drunk person walking in the road? Because they are more of a danger to themselves and other road users than a drunk cyclist.
What about drunk walking then? I'm also using the road. I'm also a danger to myself and whoever walking besides me. I can easily knock someone onto the road killing them. Should my driving licence be revoked for that?
Yes obviously. You think these people are strapping on their helmets and turning on their lights when they start drink cycling. You want your dog or kid hit by one of these clowns?
Where the hell is the critical thinking in this thread?
What a terrible metaphor lol, yeah it would be much worse, chances are that two trucks head-on collision will result in higher fatalities and more damages. Also law is not based on what “was bad” or not, but intention or potentiality.
There is a reason why murder has a much higher sentence than rape in almost all jurisdictions.
Not everyone is usain bolt or sprinter, also please try running after getting drunk, I want to see how far you can go with top speed without vomitting afterwards
? I mean smoking is obnoxious, sure; but it's far from dangerous.
What they really need to crack down on are people using their phone, holding an umbrella, or disobeying road rules at intersections (which they mention in the article).
Oh, and also fine the shit out of fuck-knuckles riding those 50kph definitely-not-pedal-assist e-bikes. Seriously, fuck every single person who owns one.
I don't think I really need to argue the merits of not having people smoking while riding down sidewalks full of children, elderly, and people who just don't want to smell or inhale second-hand smoke. That's kind of an, either you're a decent person or you're not thing. Aside from a braking hand being limited by holding a cigarette or smokeless tobacco device.
I don't disagree on the merits of banning public smoking, and there are (weakly enforced) rules for that already.
What I'm saying is, tackling smokers on bikes shouldn't be next on the safety agenda. Cyclists play fast and loose with almost every single road rule imaginable. Parents riding overloaded, under-maintained mama-chari with barely functioning brakes. Fuckstick delivery bikes riding 30kph down the footpath on a 50kg steel e-bike. People blowing through intersections like they own the road.
As far as street safety concerns go, someone holding a cigarette is extremely low down on the list.
If they really crack down on this a lot of suburban bars will lose half of their customers. Many people are not going to walk or catch a taxi to their local bar.
Considering that the average Japanese pedestrian at night is 80+, wearing dark clothes and has bones less pliable than warabashi, I can see why they are concerned about drunks on bicycles.
I'm fine with it. If I'm headed for my local pub I walk and bus it.
I do wish they had night busses. Even if it's really infrequent.
Lmao
If they actually crack down on this a lot of people will lose their license. At my local bar about half of the locals come and leave on their bicycles. Never done it myself, but I'm less worried about some drunk guy riding a bicycle at 2kph in the middle of the night with no traffic then the average crazy rider during the day.
Those drunk bikers injure others and tend to run into cars, though. It's very dangerous
Of course ideally no one should ride anything drunk, just talking about priorities. If they are gonna put an effort into something I would prefer they stop people riding on the wrong side of the road or people that plays with their phone while riding during the day when there are other people out.
During the 10 years I have gone to my local bar, everyone I know have safely gone home on their bicycles, while I have seen and have had numerous close calls myself with bicycles during the day.
Doesn't mean you can't crack down on both though, but doesn't seem like the more problematic of the two is given much effort.
Yeah, I agree. There's a lot of shitty but sober riders, probably a lot more than those riding home drunk, dangerously late at night.
Definitely should police both
Those guys that go at olympic speeds on their bikes around people get off on it. One wrong moment and someone's seriously injured.
Them and the driving while on phone people, fuck em
Judging by the comments here, all the drink cyclists are strapping on their helmets, putting on their lights and perfectly alert when riding.
More alert than a typical Japanese driver watching TV on their commute, yes.
Or porn… Ive seen a taxi driver do it.
Neither should be doing it. Whataboutism doesn't make cycling while drunk acceptable.
It should be acceptable. It's legal in the UK and that works well - the risk is tiny and the policy probably saves lives by reducing drunk driving.
Drunk cycliing isn't legal in the UK. It is somewhat socially acceptable and lots of people obviously do it, with the law seldom enforced by the police. But it is still very much, not legal.
This is not the UK.
Oh yes, silly me imagining it's possible to compare road use between different countries and ignoring that Japan is a magical land where the laws of physics don't apply. Next I'll be imagining that the UK has four seasons.
Silly you for thinking that the problem is people riding on the road when drunk in Japan.
They’re riding on the footpath where their risk of interacting with someone stepping out of a building, around a corner or just entering a narrow or crowded section is much much higher.
While it is in theory illegal to ride on the footpath in Japan it absolutely is not enforced and is the default place for bicycles in any moderately built up metropolitan area.
I'm done arguing with people who think cycling while drunk is okay. I hope you never have to deal with something that changes your opinion on this.
I think it shouldn’t be a blanket statement. There is a difference between having 1 beer drunk and having a whole bottle of wine followed by a whiskey kind of drunk. Don’t know the UK rule but in Germany they used to have a count you could go up to. Any more drunk and it is drunk driving.
Gallagher : the sober person is looking around, on his smart phone, talking with his friend…but the drunk is trying to watch the road!
I feel like this could have the unintended consequences of more drunk driving cars. « If I’m going to lose my license for driving a bike, might as well go by car; it’s cold tonight ». Obviously people won’t literally say this, but they might subconsciously think it
Right. Except they're not driving a car. Lol. I get that riding a bicycle drunk could be dangerous, but like, that's a stupid comment to make in this context.
Edit: sorry yeah I interpreted the comment wrong so it seemed out of the blue, but u/redditscraperbot2 explains it better.
This is a bit questionable for me, but to be clear I am anti operating a car, or bike under the influence of Alcohol.
The reason I find it questionable, is that the fine is different for people that have a drivers license vs those that do not. It seems a little unfair, when you get your driver’s License they don’t test your knowledge of bike rules (although similar, they are not 1:1).
In the states, if you’re driving your personal car but you are speeding it can affect your CDL (Commercial Drivers License), and that makes more sense to me.
Again, if you’re drinking please be safe and stay way from things with wheels but I think the fine should be the same for everyone.
It's the same traffic rules you have to follow with a car, so why not? In germany you can also get points to your license for traffic violations while riding a bicycle.
I’m no lawmaker but generally, you don’t want the people who do ride drunk saying “fuck it i’ll take the car since it’s the same anyway”.
Good citizens won’t do both anyway, this is stupid.
I question the notion that they should be subject to the same rules. Idk it’s been a long time, when I was in Japan everyone rode on the sidewalk and generally acted more like pedestrians (and no one was particularly bothered about drinking or parking the things legally) but I thought this made sense anyway because realistically a bicyclist can’t do the kind of damage a driver can (sure if you’re bulleting like Lane Armstrong at extreme speeds maybe that’s an exception but in the general case).
Does the law state that drink riding is illegal though?
I can't speak for japanese laws, but in germany, if you ride a bicycle on public roads it is a vehicle taking part in traffic (don't know how to write it correctly in english) and as such the same rules apply. Alcohol, ignoring red lights etc. So I'd assume the japanese police works under the same system?
What’s the alcohol threshold to get you a fine or worse in Germany? In Japan is 0%. With last year changes this applies also to bicycles.
I don’t think most people argue that a fine for drunk cycling is unjust, but there’s something wrong if it’s the same penalty as driving a car or a truck.
There seems to be a lack of proportions, especially when the alcohol limit is already ridiculous. If I have a sip of wine and go home cycling why is that treated the same way as Tanaka san that gets completely wasted at the nomikai and hops on a car afterwards?
You have to ride your bicycle not only on sidewalks with pedestrians who can be injured by your impaired judgement, but you're also putting cars at higher risk of striking you, or being struck by you if you are impaired. The risk of injury and even death is much higher when you add a 20kg+ chunk of metal going 10-20kmph faster than walking into the equation. There really isn't a suitable middle-ground to deter the behavior, there's no cycling license to revoke.
Drunk cycling in Japan is illegal and carries significant penalties, including potential fines up to ¥1 million (approx. $6,500 USD) and imprisonment up to five years, with stricter rules and enforcement increasing since November 2024 for impaired riding, supplying alcohol to cyclists, or lending bikes to them. There's no specific BAC limit; impairment is enough, and police can use breathalyzers, with serious consequences like license suspension even for car drivers.
It would also be stupid in Germany? The differences in weight and speed between a car and a bicycle are uhhhh noticeable
“Car” was probably a mistranslation and it was likely a vehicle that they meant to say. If i remember correctly, Japan classes a bicycle as a light vehicle.
No it's not. If someone shows a pattern of poor judgement when operating a vehicle, which a bicycle is, then it makes sense to suspend their license.
Do i get charged for manslaughter if i regularly cut myself with a knife by accident? Isn't the fact they are cycling instead of driving shows that they are exercising good judgement?
No, both are bad judgement. One of the conditions of having a license are to show that you know not to operate vehicles under the influence. If you think there is a significant difference between cycling drunk and driving drunk then maybe you shouldn't have a licence either.
This is a mental sentence. The difference is that car accidents are the number one non-natural killer, but it's nearly impossible to find examples of people dying after being hit by a bike.
Bikes weigh ~50 times less than an average kei car. The average top speed of a cyclist is 15mph. Compared with a kei car going 45mph, a bike going 15mph has ~450x less kinetic energy.
Not to mention, with bikes going at much slower speeds both the cyclist and pedestrians have much more time to react ahead of any collisions.
I don't cycle drunk because it's dangerous for me, the cyclist, but treating the two as even remotely comparable is frankly mad.
It's not mental at all. You're a danger to yourself and others when drunk while cycling. I'm not gonna budge on this topic. I've seen some gnarly shit involving a drunk cyclist.
Danger to yourself, yes. Danger to others, also yes, but literally hundreds of times less so than a small car. But to say that "there isn't a significant difference" between the two, you've completely lost the plot.
No I haven't. A drunk cyclist on the road is a danger to themself, other cars, pedestrians who all have to actively work to avoid them. It's a completely unpredictable element on a public road and the right of people to use public roads safely trumps the right of a drunk guy to get home a few minutes earlier when he can just push his bike home at a reasonable speed.
I pray you are never the victim of one of these people.
The fact that you can not, legally, drive a car without detailed screening and licensing alone should tell you that it is, in fact, not even remotely the same.
I find it hard to believe you ACTUALLY think a car going 40 and hitting someone is the same as a drunk cyclist bumping into someone.
And if YOU can’t understand the difference between a car and a bike, then YOU should not be driving either. Normal people definitely have the cognitive abilities to see the difference and understand the risks of one over the other.
By the same sentiment, would you strip the driving license of a drunk person walking in the road? Because they are more of a danger to themselves and other road users than a drunk cyclist.
Sweet, sweet logic
What about drunk walking then? I'm also using the road. I'm also a danger to myself and whoever walking besides me. I can easily knock someone onto the road killing them. Should my driving licence be revoked for that?
Does rollerblading count?
Yes obviously. You think these people are strapping on their helmets and turning on their lights when they start drink cycling. You want your dog or kid hit by one of these clowns?
Where the hell is the critical thinking in this thread?
Critical thinking is thinking than driving a truck and a bycycle while intoxicated are not the same thing.
Yes they’re both bad but one is very obviously worse.
So if a drunk cyclist swerves into an oncoming truck it wasn't as bad because he was only a bike?
People here are seriously forgetting how their own actions might hurt others.
Yes. Correct. Generally we have harsher judgments for things that endanger others than things that endanger you.
What a terrible metaphor lol, yeah it would be much worse, chances are that two trucks head-on collision will result in higher fatalities and more damages. Also law is not based on what “was bad” or not, but intention or potentiality.
There is a reason why murder has a much higher sentence than rape in almost all jurisdictions.
Yeah no, you're right. I kind of interpreted the comment wrong.
Like they arrest this drunk guy and say, "if you were driving a car it would be dangerous."
I'd be like, "yeah, and if I was flying a plane it would also be dangerous right"
You worded it much more clearly than whoever made the comment in the article.
Next stop: Jaywalking. If you ignore a red light as a pedestrian there is a higher chance you might do it as well in a car
Right except you can reach 20-30kph when cycling and could fatally hit someone with that speed
Anything can be fatal. But the odds are miniscule for a bicycle collision.
Bullshit. I personally know two people who have died as a result of bike collisions in Tokyo, It's dangerous
Less than 100 fatal collisions where a bicycle was at fault in the whole of Japan and you personally know the victims of two of them? Doubt.
"where a bicycle was at fault" is doing a shit ton of heavy lifting in your comment. Extremely deceptive
Why not ban running or walking when drunk?
An 80kg person hitting you at a brisk speed could end up killing you.
Not everyone is usain bolt or sprinter, also please try running after getting drunk, I want to see how far you can go with top speed without vomitting afterwards
You’re too drunk to run but riding your bicycle at top speed?
Probably a lot further than you could sober based on your attitude.
You don't have to be going fast to hurt someone.
So explain why it's fine to walk around drunk?
What about roller blading while drunk?
In the US you can get a DUI on a bicycle, a horse, or even just sleeping in your car without the keys in the ignition.
Good. Next they need to start regularly fining people for smoking while riding bicycles too.
? I mean smoking is obnoxious, sure; but it's far from dangerous.
What they really need to crack down on are people using their phone, holding an umbrella, or disobeying road rules at intersections (which they mention in the article).
Oh, and also fine the shit out of fuck-knuckles riding those 50kph definitely-not-pedal-assist e-bikes. Seriously, fuck every single person who owns one.
There's several wards in which walking and smoking, riding and smoking, etc. is illegal but they don't attempt the enforce it.
Yes. And that should be enforced. But that's a public courtesy rule, not a safety rule.
I don't think I really need to argue the merits of not having people smoking while riding down sidewalks full of children, elderly, and people who just don't want to smell or inhale second-hand smoke. That's kind of an, either you're a decent person or you're not thing. Aside from a braking hand being limited by holding a cigarette or smokeless tobacco device.
They're going to get far more exposure to bad air from cars and trucks than they are from a passing biker
I don't disagree on the merits of banning public smoking, and there are (weakly enforced) rules for that already.
What I'm saying is, tackling smokers on bikes shouldn't be next on the safety agenda. Cyclists play fast and loose with almost every single road rule imaginable. Parents riding overloaded, under-maintained mama-chari with barely functioning brakes. Fuckstick delivery bikes riding 30kph down the footpath on a 50kg steel e-bike. People blowing through intersections like they own the road.
As far as street safety concerns go, someone holding a cigarette is extremely low down on the list.
Soon it will be when you leave the izakaya and walk home your drivers license will be suspended too.
Slouching against a building wall will still be legal.
Teacher at school got caught..that caused a right rumpus
I’m wondering if you said you didn’t have a driver license, what would they do?
Drunk cycling or phone cycling, streets are very dangerous these days after sunset. Finally they doing something about it.
If they really crack down on this a lot of suburban bars will lose half of their customers. Many people are not going to walk or catch a taxi to their local bar.
Is this more than one drink?