I find that article odd: it implicitly assumes that it's ridiculous to ban electric scooters on pavements that are intended for pedestrians, but the ban seems like a pretty good idea to me. Why does it matter how old the law is? Or how funny-sounding it is?
It then only briefly touches on why they're not allowed on the roads, saying that lights and breaks are required as if that's also ridiculous. Actually that also sounds very reasonable to me! Is that really such an arduous requirement?
I could understand if someone disagreed with my opinion. But the article's tone is that my opinion isn't even valid. Now that is ridiculous.
it would be helpful if you stated why you hold your opinion, as an opinion by itself doesn't actually contribute to the conversation. with that said, most objections are a variation on (1) safety or (2) nuisance.
on the safety issue, we should look at the differential effects of scooters on overall safety and hold a greater good standard. so let's say the baseline safety record of a city is 1 death and 10 injuries per thousand people on the streets. if scooters on sidewalks (vs on roads) changes that to 0.5 deaths and 12 injuries per thousand, that's a net gain in overall safety and scooters should be allowed, regardless of your opinion of them.
on the nuisance issue, i'd suggest a majority standard. if 10% of people think scooters are a nuisance, while 90% think they're great, then we should allow scooters.
that would be the (or a) democratic way to resolve the issue, rather than spouting opinions at each other.
If the deaths are being moved from scooter riders - who made the choice - to pedestrians - who didn't - then the scooter riders should stay in the road. In my opinion.
Is it any different to car drivers (who "made the choice") killing pedestrians?
Advocating for scooter riders to be forced onto the road is absolutely advocating for more unnecessary deaths. Car vs. scooter is dramatically more lethal than scooter vs. walker. It really is clear cut.
If you are concerned by the way scooters are used on the footpath then advocate for more courteous scooter use.
There's no reason why people can't use scooters safely on the footpath. It might take people a while to learn how, but fundamentally scooters don't pose a significant risk to walkers the way cars do to scooters.
> it would be helpful if you stated why you hold your opinion
I agree, although you've guessed roughly what the reasons are. I certainly agree that if I'm in a 10% minority then the law should change!
But the point of my comment wasn't really to push my opinion as such. More just to point out to the GP that there could be a reason the law is the way it is above it being written by someone thinking of donkeys and pigs - an attitude that came off as quite arrogent, to be honest.
i didn't read the article that way, but i can understand your perspective. to be fair, i think squealing, romping, pooping pigs and donkeys might be more of a nuisance to more people than scooters are.
it's dangerous to ride on major roads if you're not in a car (truckers apparently call motorcyclists "organ donors"), so i propose a middle ground: encourage scooters to use secondary roads, which have less traffic, so they won't need the protection of the grade-separated sidewalk. this already happens for bikes through the placement of unprotected bike lanes on those secondary roads, rather than on major thoroughfares. but for major roads, allow scooters and bikes to use the sidewalk if there is not a protected lane.
the longer term vision would be to convert parking lanes into protected travel lanes for bikes and scooters, leaving sidewalks solely to pedestrians.
On the safety issue, if putting scooters on the road increases the number of injuries and putting scooters on the sidewalk increases the number of injuries (although somewhat less), the UK already made the obvious choice in terms of safety by practically banning scooters altogether.
There is already a democratic way to resolve the issue. Ask the elected politicians to change the law, and vote them out if they don't do what you want.
Because it's still legal to use a kick scooter on the same pavements. Most countries have the law that e-scoots can be used on the pavements as long as you're going walking speed.
It then only briefly touches on why they're not allowed on the roads, saying that lights and breaks are required as if that's also ridiculous. Actually that also sounds very reasonable to me! Is that really such an arduous requirement?
I could understand if someone disagreed with my opinion. But the article's tone is that my opinion isn't even valid. Now that is ridiculous.