Discussion in 'Motors' started by Lethal`, Jan 28, 2020.
Why on earth would rentals be legal but not privately owned? What's the reason or rational for that?
to protect the public from the irresponsible(illiterate?) contingent who might otherwise use uninsured/non-compliant scooters ... it maybe a, gift horse, for the licensees
does look like cycle path use will be contingent on local government, authorising that useage mode, from govt doc
After my 4th shoulder/arm dislocation (yes 4th) Mrs Poole sewed pads into my cycling jacket on the shoulders & elbows
I've only come off once since then and they saved me another injury.
I've managed to get the scooter out the boot now, and it really is just that the front wheel bolt came loose. Nothing else was bent or damaged (bar a few scratches). I was able to undo the other side, re-seat the wheel and it's now working as before.
Will definitely be making sure those are done up properly firm. Might even add a bit of threadlock to make sure.
Given the number of folk I see riding bicycles along the pavement in the city centre I can't see it being long before a pedestrian or rider is seriously injured or killed.
I think they're a great form (green, efficient, low cost) of transport but there are way too many idiots out there to blanket allow them without restrictions like licensing, testing before being allowed to ride them and police actually bothering to enforce the law preventing their use on the pavement.
The police don’t enforce the existing laws where they are flat out illegal, what makes you think licensing will make any difference? It’s been illegal to ride a bike on a pavement and that isn’t enforced either. Frankly the police have better things to do with their time either way....
With that logic why don't we ban cars? They (or rather their drivers) seriously injure and kill people. Many of them drive on the pavement too. Example: https://twitter.com/BBCTomEdwards/status/1277974899768700935
Motor vehicles cause a lot more damage when they are involved in collisions so there's more reason to license and test to drive them.
Anyone remember this? (sorry couldn’t find the original video)
I’m sure there was even a thread about it on here.
I don't get the RNIB fears as I don't understand how they're any different to bicycles or electric cars. Similarly to visually unimpaired pedestrians, you can't blame the lack of sound as a reason as to why you should just be able to step out into the road away from a crossing.
Because it's always someone else's fault.
I agree, it’s no different to cycling but that’s not mentioned at all. If anything a bike can go much much faster (not with me riding mind). The article the BBC is running with is very one sided, with the ‘balance’ being provided by environmental arguments rather than counters to the speed concern raised. Headline isn’t great either.
E-scooters' UK speed limit 'shocks' blindness charity https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53253194
Either the person being quoted isn't very bright or the journalist has taken some artistic licensing with the quotes as while they might expect a sedentary 4mph or something akin to walking speed, the rest of the country was expecting the useful 15mph to commute around town that we've got.
I saw that. Talk about thick. I like how they're expecting the entire rest of society to go without to suit them instead of thinking 'You know what, we're in the minority, let's adapt'.
Blind people cant hear them coming. This was a problem with EVs and now they have to make a noise at low speed.
Completely forgetting that the operators can see people.
That doesn't seem to stop them crashing in to much larger objects, like cars.
Blindness comes in many forms, many blind people have some vision, be that shapes or peripheral vision, they also have other aids such as dogs and guides. It would be vary rare for someone who is completely blind to be walking around on their own without support.
The argument doesn’t really stack up, especially when you add cyclists into the conversation. Just typical I don’t like anything electric or cycling related nonsense.
The noise makers in cars are as much for phone zombies going for their next Darwin Award than they are for people who have a disability.
You also know that most collisions involving a car and cyclist are the fault of the driver and not as you imply.
And hearing things doesn't stop people with working vision walking in front of cars, busses and lorries.
Yea the driver often gets the blame for insurance and legal reason, but it doesn't actually mean it was their fault.
Separate names with a comma.