rsa supporting e-scooters

CrankyHaus

marcos_94 wrote: »

Im asking you why you think e-scooters should have a tax system but not cyclists

The simple answer is because they fit the definition of a mechanically propelled vehicle that currently requires tax, licensing, insurance etc. This may seem arbitrary but it's a good point to draw the line IMO.

An Garda seems to agree, it has opposed legalisation on safety grounds.

E-scooters present a safety risk through dangerous use, which is currently rampant. You may say bicycles are no different because an experienced and strong cyclist on a good bike and a favourable incline can reach similar speeds. I don't think this is the same as any idiot on an e-scooter being able to quickly accelerate to nearly 30 km/h on their first use and rocket down the footpath to hit someone.

Furthermore while safety concerns do arise with an increase in cyclists it is recognised that the social benefits outweigh these to the point that throttling cycling's appeal with taxation is undesirable. The same benefits aren't all present with e-scooters, particularly the health benefits.

1bryan

LeinsterDub wrote: »

This is a typical nonsense argument from motorist ,

We can't have x until we have infrastructure for x.
Okay lets build it so .
No one is using x there is clearly no demand for infrastructure of x

I'm not a motorist, I'm a cyclist. And, no, its not typical.

the fact is that e-scooters are illegal. That is not a factor in any of the cyclists vs motorists debates. Thus, your point is invalid.

1bryan

marcos_94 wrote: »

I dont think cyclists, pedestrians or e-scooters should have a tax system. Im asking you why you think e-scooters should have a tax system but not cyclists



With regards to speed, the most popular e-scooter manufacturers and models (Xiaomi, Ninebot, GoTrax) are limited to 25-28 kph. There are of course models that can go faster but are significantly more expensive. I dont have one but do cycle and can tell you thats not a difficult speed to maintain while cycling.

With regards to visibility, again, the most popular e-scooters all appear to have in built front and rear lights. This is much better than bikes where lights are extras and a significant share of cyclists dont wear high visibility clothing, nor have lights on their bikes.

Please elaborate on how existing cycling infrastructure is inadequate for e-scooters. I dont think there is any reason why e-scooters are incapable of using cycle lanes or us lanes when a cycle lane is not available, as cyclists do at the moment

you mentioned pedestrians and cyclists in the context of needing a taxation system, not me.

Someone else has articulated why e-scooters need one. And I concur with what they said.

Stark

1bryan wrote: »

I'm not a motorist, I'm a cyclist. And, no, its not typical.

the fact is that e-scooters are illegal. That is not a factor in any of the cyclists vs motorists debates. Thus, your point is invalid.

In a discussion about legalising something, the fact that it is not yet legal is irrelevant.

1bryan

ted1 wrote: »

Wheel size makes a difference, hitting a pothole or kerb with a road bike wheel is much more forgiving than hitting one with a scooter tyre

this is an excellent point, and it would leave the local authorities far more exposed to a civil claim, were a scooterist to have an accident after hitting a pothole.

1bryan

Stark wrote: »

In a discussion about legalising something, the fact that it is not yet legal is irrelevant.

your point, where you implied I was a motorist, is irrelevant.

Stark

1bryan wrote:

this is an excellent point, and it would leave the local authorities far more exposed to a civil claim, were a scooterist to have an accident after hitting a pothole.

How successful have cyclists been with civil claims due to inadequate infrastructure?

1bryan wrote:

your point, where you implied I was a motorist, is irrelevant.

Except I made no such implication. You're so good at taking their stupid arguments against cyclists and turning those against scooters though, that it's easy to see why people would make that mistake.

LeinsterDub

1bryan wrote: »

I'm not a motorist, I'm a cyclist. And, no, its not typical.

the fact is that e-scooters are illegal. That is not a factor in any of the cyclists vs motorists debates. Thus, your point is invalid.

Sorry let me rephrase that . This is a typical circular argument we often hear from the selfish and people who want to stop progress. e-scooters don't need special infrastructure, proper fit for purpose cycle lanes would also work for them.

rubadub

marcos_94 wrote: »

Please elaborate on how existing cycling infrastructure is inadequate for e-scooters.

I find it inadequate and I am on a cross country mountain bike!

The scooters tend to stick dead centre on cycle tracks, if I was forced to use one I would too. They are darting about missing the imperfections on cycletracks, and we all know these "perfectly good cycle lanes" are as rare as hen's teeth. Due to the physics and handling I find it rare to see somebody on a scooter checking behind them.

Noel Rock reckons he gets to 17km/h on his one which is quite slow, if and thats a BIG IF he is telling the truth. Though it is common to see them overtake cyclists but alot of those are derestricted ones. Rocks one looks like the very popular Xiaomi model.

I always thought part of the idea of putting cycletracks etc was also to encourage fitness. If they do take off a lot cyclists will move onto the roads, as even with the traffic they may feel safer and be able to commute faster, I know I will, while legal it will engrave many motorists.

LeinsterDub

ted1 wrote: »

Wheel size makes a difference, hitting a pothole or kerb with a road bike wheel is much more forgiving than hitting one with a scooter tyre

The risk is entirely the riders unless the council has been negligent , same as cycling

magicbastarder

CrankyHaus wrote: »

I don't think this is the same as any idiot on an e-scooter being able to quickly accelerate to nearly 30 km/h on their first use and rocket down the footpath to hit someone.

well then, incorporate that into the legislation, a top speed for scooters.
someone on a scooter getting on one on a footpath and rocking into a pedestrian is already illegal, and will obviously remain so after any legislation might be passed. so i don't see how the point about some people using e-scooters dangerously has any bearing on the debate?
it's the usual argument used to bash cyclists - that because some cyclists behave like idiots, the rest of us get punished.

1bryan

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Sorry let me rephrase that . This is a typical circular argument we often hear from the selfish and people who want to stop progress. e-scooters don't need special infrastructure, proper fit for purpose cycle lanes would also work for them.

disagree. They are dangerous and need to be segregated from bicycles.

marcos_94

CrankyHaus wrote: »

The simple answer is because they fit the definition of a mechanically propelled vehicle that currently requires tax, licensing, insurance etc. This may seem arbitrary but it's a good point to draw the line IMO.

That is as it stands currently. What is under discussion is potential changes to this legislation to re-categorise e-scooters. i agree, that right now they are illegal by the letter of the law.

E-scooters present a safety risk through dangerous use, which is currently rampant. You may say bicycles are no different because an experienced and strong cyclist on a good bike and a favourable incline can reach similar speeds. I don't think this is the same as any idiot on an e-scooter being able to quickly accelerate to nearly 30 km/h on their first use and rocket down the footpath to hit someone.

I agree again that there is nothing stopping any idiot getting behind a scooter which is why, as per the RSAs public consultation, there may be training required for people wanting to buy an e-scooter, however, any idiot can currently buy an electric bike, nearly any idiot can get a drivers license, so what is required is appropriate enforcement of regulations to ensure the safety of all road users.

Furthermore while safety concerns do arise with an increase in cyclists it is recognised that the social benefits outweigh these to the point that throttling cycling's appeal with taxation is undesirable. The same benefits aren't all present with e-scooters, particularly the health benefits.

There are however certain shared benefits, including reducing the amount of people driving that would not have considered cycling due to lack of say shower facilities at work, there is of course the potential benefit in reduction of car use and thus reduction in emissions.

beauf

1bryan wrote: »

disagree. They are dangerous and need to be segregated from bicycles.

Do you have any stats to back that up.

LeinsterDub

1bryan wrote: »

disagree. They are dangerous and need to be segregated from bicycles.

[Citation needed] !

As a cyclist you should be well use to this unfounded , not referenced nonsense and shouldn't be using the same nonsense to try limit a mode of transport which will actually help make the argument of further and proper infrastructure for everyone expect motorists

marcos_94

rubadub wrote: »

I find it inadequate and I am on a cross country mountain bike!

The scooters tend to stick dead centre on cycle tracks, if I was forced to use one I would too. They are darting about missing the imperfections on cycletracks, and we all know these "perfectly good cycle lanes" are as rare as hen's teeth. Due to the physics and handling I find it rare to see somebody on a scooter checking behind them.

Noel Rock reckons he gets to 17km/h on his one which is quite slow, if and thats a BIG IF he is telling the truth. Though it is common to see them overtake cyclists but alot of those are derestricted ones. Rocks one looks like the very popular Xiaomi model.

I always thought part of the idea of putting cycletracks etc was also to encourage fitness. If they do take off a lot cyclists will move onto the roads, as even with the traffic they may feel safer and be able to commute faster, I know I will, while legal it will engrave many motorists.

I completely agree that cycle lanes are far from perfect! Have you ever ridden an electric scooter? Having tried one while away last year i can say i was surprised at how manageable they are. I thought they would be a bit more unbalanced.

With regards to the weaving to avoid imperfections, i do that while cycling, as do most cyclists, and I also try to safely avoid potholes while driving. That is a common trait amongst the different road users and not just scooterists. Cyclists are just as guilty of hogging the middle of cycle lanes, again not exclusive to scooterists.

1bryan

magicbastarder wrote: »

well then, incorporate that into the legislation, a top speed for scooters.

if they were legalised, and it was deemed they could use existing cycling infrastructure, I would contest that the e-scooter needs a fundamental redesign. The current design has the rear light no more than 3/4 inches from the road. This is near useless. The rear of the e-scooter should be considerably higher, in order to fix a light to it.

And agree on them being capped on speed. To use a more relevant analogy, e-bikes cut assistance at 25 km/h. Given e-scooters are 100% assisted, a top speed of less than 20km/h would be sensible (though this could introduce different risk issues).

beauf

rubadub wrote: »

...I always thought part of the idea of putting cycletracks etc was also to encourage fitness. If they do take off a lot cyclists will move onto the roads,...

Cycling is not just about fitness. Its a valid form of transport used by millions.

In a city in grid lock and polluted, any alternative to driving like eScooters should be tried.

1bryan

LeinsterDub wrote: »

[Citation needed] !

As a cyclist you should be well use to this unfounded , not referenced nonsense and shouldn't be using the same nonsense to try limit a mode of transport which will actually help make the argument of further and proper infrastructure for everyone expect motorists

I've read this a couple of times and it makes no sense.

1bryan

beauf wrote: »

Do you have any stats to back that up.

its from personal experience of cycling, daily, in the city centre.

LeinsterDub

1bryan wrote: »

I've read this a couple of times and it makes no sense.

Okay , i'll put in different terms, stop pulling stuff out of your arse and presenting it as fact

marcos_94

1bryan wrote: »

if they were legalised, and it was deemed they could use existing cycling infrastructure, I would contest that the e-scooter needs a fundamental redesign. The current design has the rear light no more than 3/4 inches from the road. This is near useless. The rear of the e-scooter should be considerably higher, in order to fix a light to it.

And agree on them being capped on speed. To use a more relevant analogy, e-bikes cut assistance at 25 km/h. Given e-scooters are 100% assisted, a top speed of less than 20km/h would be sensible (though this could introduce different risk issues).

I think the rear lights currently are a good starting point, and I believe it was a good idea by the manufacturers to have them in built unlike bikes. They could definitely be better placed but at least they are there and are bright.

A speed limit is definitely required, but it should match the speed of e-bikes so as to not lead to potential "congestion" as a result of a scooter holding up an e-bike for example. I think what should be implemented is a reduction in acceleration power so as to somewhat mimic e-bike acceleration

1bryan

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Okay , i'll put in different terms, stop pulling stuff out of your arse and presenting it as fact

thats incredibly mature.

LeinsterDub

1bryan wrote: »

its from personal experience of cycling, daily, in the city centre.

So that's a no then.

LeinsterDub

1bryan wrote: »

thats incredibly mature.

I did try to put it in a more mature way but apparently you didn't understand that post.

beauf

1bryan wrote: »

its from personal experience of cycling, daily, in the city centre.

Well you should share your experience properly then.
I'm none the wiser from your comments thus far.

magicbastarder

folks, please keep it clean.

magicbastarder

i do understand that there's a worry that smaller wheels might be a cause to believe that they're more unstable. however, i don't know whether this is actually borne out in reality.
can someone explain to me what else is fundamentally unsafe about scooters, which cannot be addressed in legislation/enforcement?

CapnHex

A point I don't understand here. A couple of posts mentioned escooterists and then cyclists hogging the middle of the cycle lane. Is there such a thing as the middle of the cycle lane? Most cycle lanes that I use are only suitable for 1 bike width, that is in order to overtake slower moving cycle lane traffic, it is required to move outside the cycle lane. Please don't tell me that faster cyclists expect slower cyclists to move into the gutter to allow them to pass more easily, I thought that was motorist logic.

1bryan

magicbastarder wrote: »

i do understand that there's a worry that smaller wheels might be a cause to believe that they're more unstable. however, i don't know whether this is actually borne out in reality.
can someone explain to me what else is fundamentally unsafe about scooters, which cannot be addressed in legislation/enforcement?

interesting question.

Have any of the pro e-scooter side mentioned what kind of concessions, if any, they would be agreeable to, in order for e-scooters to be legalised?

At the moment it seems they want the same rights as cyclists without any kind of concessions. Of course I'm open to correction on this.

Once we knew what potential legislation would look like, then it would be easier to answer your question.