Do you believe in just banning things because people use them irresponsibly?

I think that is much more damaging than one person getting 4 kids dead, as much as this is already a tragedy.

Going with this reasoning people should be banned from using cars at all, because, frankly, I see a huge number of people driving completely irresponsibly and not thinking a whole lot about it until an accident happens.

Do we really want to live in a world where it is not possible to behave irresponsibly because all options were taken off the table?

>Do we really want to live in a world where it is not possible to behave irresponsibly because all options were taken off the table?

I lived in Singapore for a few years and that pretty much is that world and I was very happy. Don't really see the problem with banning things that people cannot stop to use irresponsibly and that cause loss of life, including cars. (well technically they're not banned, a license is just hard to get, 10% or so own a car).

Build good public transport, walkable cities, done. I mean have you actually considered how mental it is that we let people roam around in two tons of metal at high velocity next to pedestrians just to buy a bag of groceries. If people look back at this in 500 years we'll look like crazy cavemen

You should live by your own principles. Get rid of all knives in your kitchen. Because one was just used in France to behead a person.

Does this ultimatum still make sense?

The knifes in my kitchen only I have access to and I know I'm not going to behead anyone. However I live by my principles and I have no problems with banning knives in public, or vendors securing them. (which is relatively common around the world btw, see Japan, UK, much of Europe etc..)

I worked for Samsung. Some guys in Korea got into heated discussion and carved each other with kitchen knives available in the office. Guess what, no kitchen knives other than plastic.

Here in Poland people just started bringing their own EDC knives.

Are you for or against gun ownership?

> Do you believe in just banning things because people use them irresponsibly?

No, I believe in banning things when the vast majority use them irresponsibly.

That demonstrates that it's just not something we're capable of handling.

Or that we need a licence to drive them. Personally I think there should be the equivalent to a driver's licence for both ebikes and scooters.

But it would kill the industry if it was enforced now, so I hope we will get it later once people actually got the taste for it and want to continue using them even if they need to get a licence.

License has much more sense than outright ban.

I don't care for the "industry". They must adapt. Driving car requires license but the industry is still there.

But the licence came years after the car, that's exactly the point

Even in lanes explicitly stated as bikes-only, people don't give a shit. In Amsterdam it's particularly bad with the delivery drivers who're in a rush all the time.

In the US there used to be "ticket quotas" in some police departments. Near the end of a period, there could be cops everywhere checking for speeders if they were under quota.

The Dutch police could make a good revenue just from targeting food delivery guys. Excluding the newer e-bike delivery people, they are almost always speeding and driving like they just robbed a bank.

Indeed. Seems what's lacking is political will.

I would rather be run into by a guy who is riding a light electric step rather than a heavy middle aged man zooming along on a heavy electric bike.

Not sure you would know the difference. Hit at 20MPH differential speed is a lights-out moment.

Sure you would. It's a matter of masses. If I were a brick wall, you could hit me at 30 and you would probably take the worst of the exchange.

If we are both of equal size and mass, the damage will be approximately shared.

Of course if you were a brick wall, those two things are the same. Instantly accelerating to zero. If you were a moving brick wall, that's different.

But my comment is this: 20MPH is fast. The damage is grievous. Dead or nearly dead.

Its an issue. Bikes - 8mph. Scooters - 16mph. Cars - 30-40mph. None should be on the same path as the others. Yet we have just 2 paths.

Add in pedestrians - 2mph and now what? Its a hard problem.

There are three clearly distinct paths practically everywhere in the Netherlands: roads, bike paths and sidewalks.

That means the bikes, cars and pedestrians are already separated.

The mopeds/scooters (who go up to 45kmh / ~28 mph) are the only ones who don't fit in. That why they're constantly switching between roads, bike paths and sidewalks.

aren't moped expected to just drive on the main road, next to cars, and require a helmet and license plate?

Scooters are "more different".

Dutch law has two classes of 'moped'- both were originally conceived as motor-assisted pedal cycles, but in practice both are now mostly Vespa-type scooters with no option to pedal.

Both require insurance and an 'insurance plate' which is a different format from the standard licence plate seen on motorcycles. The rider must be licensed, but this can be either a car or a motorcycle licence (or a moped-specific licence which can be obtained from the age of 16, compared to 18 for cars and motorcycles).

The 'snorfiets' scooters have blue number plates, and are legally supposed to be limited to 25 km/h. The rider does not need to wear a helmet.

The 'bromfiets' scooters, with yellow number plates, are legally supposed to be limited to 45 km/h, but the rider must wear a helmet.

(In practice most scooters seem to routinely go much faster than they are supposed to be capable of)

In general, both types of scooter can use some, but not all, bike paths. A snorfiets is allowed on more bike paths than a bromfiets is- bromfietsen must ride on the main road in built-up areas.

All I can say is that the reality is that they come right at me on the bike path on the wrong side of the rode at 16+ mph. Every single time I go biking.

Whatever rules exists here exist on paper only.

I can understand. When vehicles of different cruising speeds share a roadway, the faster ones are perpetually passing. So always oncoming straight at you. It gets worse with increasing density - instead of passing occasionally, now you're passing pretty much all the time.

Its a hard problem to solve.

Ebikes and smaller scooters seem to have standarized at 16mph (25kph). That is perfectly compatible with bike lanes. A bike in a hurry can easily go over that.

Imperfectly compatible. Sure bikes can go that fast, but rarely do. The disparity in average speed results in frequent passing which is most of the problem. Head-on collisions and clipping become a thing. That's kind of the whole ball game, and why they don't get along on paths.

Almost no bikes actually go that fast, while the scooters practically always do, which is they they drive in the middle of the lanes or into oncoming traffic. Thus head on collisions etc.

It depends on your local bike culture I guess. In the US scooters go 15mph and bikes go like 12mph if you are in street clothes, ~20mph if you are in spandex.

Mixed traffic is a problem that every freakin heavy industrial site in the world has managed to solve.

We just can't solve it for cities because people have their heads up their asses and everyone wants their preferred class of traffic to get preferential treatment.

How was it solved? Consider that a designed environment is different from a built-up city with paths intended for horse-and-carriage.

By cautious rules and the ability to fire anybody who didn't follow them.

That works very well. Much better that distracted drivers and speeders.

But rules and people don't get along that well. Folks get tired and impatient. Even in the industrial environment there are expected failures per 100,000 hours etc.

Still, agreed we'd all do better with a more professional class of driver and licensing.

I am referring to the little foldable two wheel platform vehicles as scooters. I am not championing the motorcycle things.

Outside NL, the "step" is a scooter, and the "scooter" is a moped.

Mopeds should be banned from bike paths, or there should be heavy enforcement of speed limits on paths.

A little folding 2 wheel platform vehicle going 16kph is certainly no worse than a large Dutchman riding the same speed on a 35kg omafiets... not to mention the person on a 40kg electric bike who is doing 23kph.

> A little folding 2 wheel platform vehicle going 16kph is certainly no worse than a large Dutchman riding the same speed on a 35kg omafiets

A light bike doing 16 kph will knock you down but not seriously injure you unless you're unlucky.

Mopeds are doing more like 16 mph (25kmh) and easily weigh 70+ kg. That's a fast and heavy chunk of metal. If that hits you, you will be badly injured or killed. That changes the stakes of the bike paths from scraped knees to death or brain injury.

As I have tried to explain throughout my comments, I am referring to what the Dutch call a "step" - like what Bird has been putting in cities around the world. I am absolutely not talking about mopeds (small motorcycles).

I very much do not want motorycles or mopeds or even fast electric bikes (which can weigh nearly as much as the rider) on bike paths. A scooter/step weighs about 15kg, and more importantly, most of its weight is very close to the ground. It might knock your feet out from under you if it hit you, but it won't crush your ribs or head unless you're already lying on the ground.

That’s how I ride. Would you rather I was in a big truck?