It's getting better, but a lot of places still don't have bike lanes. I'll ride on the sidewalk if I don't feel safe in the road, but I'm extra careful when I do.

So basically, you make peds feel unsafe so that you can feel safe.

The risk of a fatality or life changing accident is much much higher for a cyclist colliding with a car, than it is for a pedestrian being hit by a bike

Risk is an aggregate of damage and likelihood. Pedestrians are moving much more erratic than cars. This makes them more dangerous, unless you live in a community so violent that drivers actively harass cyclists.

The risk may be higher but it's not insignificant. Here is an example from the UK:

"The number of pedestrians fatally or seriously injured in collisions with cyclists has doubled since 2006"

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/07/number-pedestria...

If it was really significant you'd have quoted the number, not the headline:

In 2016 three pedestrians died in such incidents across Great Britain while a further 108 sustained serious injury.

But note, none of these deaths occurred on the pavement:

In 2016, 43 pedestrians died in collisions involving a vehicle on the footway or verge. None of them involved a cycle.

-- https://www.cyclinguk.org/campaigning/views-and-briefings/pe...

No. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16928450

You can't control peoples feelings.

Not the same type of scooter, but here in Amsterdam they put them on the bike path a few decades ago. And it's a major nuisance for cyclists. They are not compatible modes of transport and it's dangerous.

So the city passed a new law last year to start transitioning them back to the road.

What makes them incompatible? If they’re approximately the same size and speed I don’t see a reason they can’t share the same paths.