cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/34367979
More barriers to cycling means more cars which means more dead cyclists/pedestrians. Help us defeat this terrible anti-safety bill.
cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/34367979
More barriers to cycling means more cars which means more dead cyclists/pedestrians. Help us defeat this terrible anti-safety bill.
No? None of the vehicles covered by this law are as fast as gas powered motorcycles or whatever it is you’re talking about. They’re also much lighter.
Not to mention you know this is just an excuse to do more police brutality and racial profiling. They won’t police the “good boys” (rich white kids).
I meant motorised bikes in the same speed range as ebikes. Mopeds, not motorbikes. You need a licence, insurance, tag for them. Why not for an equally fast (and dangerous) ebike/pedelec?
F = m * a
Mopeds are at minimum 2-3 times heavier than electric bikes, making them 2-3 times more dangerous since they have 2-3 times more force, without taking speed into account at all. Taking speed into consideration, class 1 and 2 e-bikes top out at 20 mph, while a 50cc moped (based on some preliminary searching, someone please correct me here) tops out at 30 mph, multiplying the force by 1.5x in comparison.
For velocity you want kinetic energy .5(mass*V^2)
That’s why braking distance scales exponentially with velocity. 30 vs 20 mph is over twice the energy at the same mass.
Tell that to the people run over or nearly hit by reckless ebike riders in the pedestrian shopping zone.
Do you think they would rather be hit by a moped??
I think they’d rather not be hit at all.
Mopeds are easily identified as they have tags, so they don’t dare to drive in the pedestrian zone.