« Good news from the doc: I can ride again | Main | Moron of the Week, #40 »

09/11/2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

gingerbeard

I am for a revision of the change in the HTA reg as there is a definite difference between an e-bike that is first and foremost a bike, and the scooter clone.

Scooter clones are blatant efforts to get around licensing and insurance requirements. They are not designed or even sold to be used as bikes. An electric scooter should face the same requirements as a gas scooter.

Now a Bionx system or other system that is specifically designed as a pedal assist, something that requires you (for the most part ) to pedal, is very different. There is an obvious difference between a bicycle with an electric assist, and a scooter designed to get around insurance and licensing requirements, and the regulation should reflect that.

Bill

@Gingerbeard I agree with the notion of differentiating in the HTA, to a certain extent. If someone wants his e-bike to look like a Catrike or recumbent or mountain bike, I'm fine with that. I don't get the faux scooters. Is it because some of them are set up for a passenger? Is it because the owners/riders feel like lesser citizens to be on a "bicycle" but somehow feel better on a pseudo-scooter? Frankly, the laws are there: enforce them. If the pseudo-scooter is missing its pedals, fine the user. Fine 'em every time you see them. Ditto if they are on the sidewalk, riding without the required helmet, exceeding the maximum speed, etc.

The comments to this entry are closed.