But do you? Is the problem that rules are being broken, or is there a real problem? www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...
But do you? Is the problem that rules are being broken, or is there a real problem? www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...
a silly argument out there is requiring cyclists to get lic. and reg. It’s stupid because at cycling speed/size it’s not enough force to do serious personal or property damage to others. Unregulated e-bikes and scooters have enough umph to cause damage. Still I’d take them over a cybertruck any day.
cardrivers generally do that shit. They will not even recognize that rules that make sense for piloting 2000+lbs of steel capable of going 100mph are not needed for less than 100lbs of steel not capable of reaching even 50mph. They´d love to not let anyone through a gap a car cant fit physically.
Everything can cause damage. But even a 50mph 100lbs e-bike is a nothingburger compared to any car, where 1000lbs would be exceptionally lightweight. 1000lbs= 450ish kg. This caterham 160, one of the lightest cars you may ever see on the road. 490kg.
Yes, and if Dutch children were barrelling down cycle paths in cars and showing up in hospital with gruesome and unusual injuries from doing so, we'd probably be discussing Doing Something About That, too.
That’s a bit of a ‘what-about-ism’ argument. No one is suggesting cars be allowed on trails. What’s next, let’s allow Honda civics in bike lanes because they’re smaller than a F150. There needs to be a limit somewhere.
The next time they built one more lane they should make one for 40-50mph traffic. People want to go 30-45ish mph with their 2-3 horsepower very green electric vehicles. There should be space for that. It should be an encouraged thing not a problem.
nah. I´m just not agreeing with your line-drawn kinda arguments, we just have a disagreement here. You draw the line at what is legal. There is no black and white here. It is all a sliding scale. There are no real lines, but there are small gaps- bicycle vs 90lbs cargobike and big gaps- car