I understand that rules for bike paths depend on local jurisdiction, but why wouldn't an e-scooter fit a bike path in Venice, CA?

Over here (Finland, like all of Europe) we have roads, we have bike paths, and we have pedestrian pavements. E-scooters are always good for bike paths, and if they move faster than 15 km/h, they are not to be ridden in pedestrian areas, only bike paths, even if they are not exactly bikes.

If there is a road, a bike path and a pavement, each group has their own lane. If there's only a road, everyone uses it, with pedestrians on the side and bikes next.

If there's a road and a pavement, then pedestrians and slow e-scooters use pavement and bicycles and fast e-scooters use the road.

If there is only road and bike path, motor vehicles use the road and everyone else uses the bike path, with pedestrians on the side.

I do agree what you say about music blasting mopeds...

> Over here (Finland, like all of Europe) we have roads, we have bike paths, and we have pedestrian pavements. E-scooters are always good for bike paths

Are you sure about that? Because it's not an EN15194 LEV, so whether it's considered a bike (allowed on bike paths) or a moped (not so) [edit: or are completely illegal as jdietrich reminds me] is a local / national concern.

For instance France just passed a law which will allow e-scooters on bike lanes with various limitations (and requirements, like a horn and both front and back lights). The law passed in February, and will take effect in September. E-scooters on bike paths is currently illegal there.

This kind of e-scooter is illegal to use anywhere in the UK, because they don't comply with EN15194 - you can't use them on the road because they don't meet the standards for a motorcycle, nor can you use them on pavements or cycle lanes. The government has mooted creating new regulations to legalise e-scooters, but we're a bit preoccupied at the moment with, well, you know.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/09/electric-sco...

Indeed, thanks for reminding me, I completely forgot to note that in the initial listing despite my very example demonstrating this case: e-scooters are currently illegal in france (because as you say they comply with neither EN15194 nor motorcycle standards), they may be legal next september.

Yes, in Germany e-scooters are legal to drive on bike paths and streets this week. You have to have insurance though, there is a max. speed of 20km/h and it needs lights and everything.

But if these scooters fit the requirements, they seem similar enough to bikes to allow them to drive on bike paths and streets.

Berlin has lovely bike paths covering much of the city and people still ride bikes on pedestrian sidewalks, especially (but not only) if there's no bike path there and they are supposed to use the street.

Some of the younger ones blasting music (yay bluetooth speakers) but I actually think that part is legal as long as they don't operate their phones while in motion.

So, yes, Europe is good at making traffic rules, but two-wheeled traffic has a lot of the same issues as in the US. (Maybe not in Finland?)

"Over here (Finland, like all of Europe) we have roads, we have bike paths, and we have pedestrian pavements. E-scooters are always good for bike paths, "

These escooters aren't even legal to use at all in any place that is public in the Netherlands, let alone that it would be decided where they should ride.

Ah, right: cycle paths are generally like this everywhere, but e-scooters going on them not necessarily. They're all over cities in Finland, Sweden and Denmark, though, and I've also seen them in Berlin.

Good. The Netherlands is so flat that there's no legitimate reason not to just use a shitty, beat-up, stealable bicycle like everybody else ;-)

In Los Angeles, Motorized vehicles are not permitted on sidewalks and paths. As a rider, you are liable for all personal injuries that result from your riding. Without insurance, you are putting your financial life in jeopardy. Think about it!

>Without insurance, you are putting your financial life in jeopardy. Think about it!

In addition to riders, if the scooter is a rental, I think there is a pretty solid claim to be made against the tech companies who scatter these scooters throughout cities (often times illegally) and allow them to be rented by anyone (with no training, no education of rules of the road, no offering of helmets, I’m not sure these thing come equipped with safety lights of any kind, etc...).

> I think there is a pretty solid claim to be made against the tech companies who scatter these scooters throughout cities (often times illegally)

I don't know about that, the device itself is not illegal, only its use on public way. And technically ignorance of the law is not a valid excuse.

It’s not just use of these devices on certain roadways, bike paths and sidewalks that may be illegal from jurisdiction to jurisdiction...but leaving them all over public spaces the way they do is also illegal in multiple jurisdictions (hence why city’s/counties began confiscating them and the scooter companies pulled out of a number of markets).

It’s not about ignorance of the law, if I get hurt by one I can sue both the rider and the scooter company.

The law is concerned with both actions and their intent. While placing the scooters on the street may not be illegal, the entire reason for doing so is for people to ride them. Its pretty clear intent to incite people to break the law for profit.

That very much makes the company involved with what happens when people do just that.

I agree, but, the practical reality in LA is that the police very rarely ticket people for riding these vehicles on the sidewalk. The insurance angle you mention is interesting, but let me ask the question: practically speaking, how would any pedestrian who is injured by a scooter rider in LA actually hold the scooter driver financially responsible? What is the mechanism? Will police actually even respond to a call for such an incident?

> how would any pedestrian who is injured by a scooter rider in LA actually hold the scooter driver financially responsible? What is the mechanism?

Same way they would if they were injured by a car, or by someone punching them in the face.

> Same way they would if they were injured by a car

oh. interesting. do these scooters have something like a license plate that one could use to trace back to the rider? do scooter companies service requests from random injured pedestrians for info about the rider of a particular scooter? does the DMV have a database of these vehicles? will the police help a pedestrian who tells them she was hit by a scooter and the rider just took off? if so, how do they find the rider? I mean, how does all that work?

> As a rider, you are liable for all personal injuries that result from your riding.

As a walker, you're liable for all personal injuries that result from your walking

As a dog owner, you're liable for all personal injuries that result from your dog.

> Without insurance, you are putting your financial life in jeopardy.

Most drivers are underinsured if they send a few people to the hospital. On a scooter though, covering the average cost of a scrape or the beyond costs of a broken bone isn't nearly as peril.

Let me restate my point;

Very few people have bicycle liability insurance, yet scooter liability insurance is a concern?

The scooter apps instruct you to use bike paths when available. That's why most of them are limited to 15mph so you can still use these paths, as you are moving just as fast as someone on a bike would anyway.