Think you're out by a few orders of magnitude there!but he's saying that the actual power of the motor is 750kw and not the advertised 250kw from the Engwe website
Think you're out by a few orders of magnitude there!but he's saying that the actual power of the motor is 750kw and not the advertised 250kw from the Engwe website
deliberately riding dangerously
I don't think many people deliberately ride dangerously. Or deliberately drive dangerously for that matter.
I doubt that anyone who ends up in court on a dangerous driving or dangerous riding charge gets there accidentally!I don't think many people deliberately ride dangerously. Or deliberately drive dangerously for that matter.
They make a conscious decision to behave in a certain way that leads to the charge
That reminds me of Withnail and I: "We've gone on holiday by mistake!".I don't think many people deliberately ride dangerously. Or deliberately drive dangerously for that matter.
The secondary issue is that even a lot of "road legal" ebikes esp those coming from China are extremely heavy - that bike is 38kg compared to my 22kg Raleigh folding e-bike. Add an 80k person to that and the victim was effectively hit by over 100kg of weight doing probably around 15-20km per hour.
That reminds me of Withnail and I: "We've gone on holiday by mistake!".
It is against the law to cycle along a footpath. There's no circumstance where an adult should do so. Crossing a footpath in order to gain access is different, obviously. The same applies to walking along a road; you can walk across it but don't walk along it if there's a footpath available.Sweeping childish generalisations aside, theres lots of shared use pavements with mixed use and cycle paths where you have to (directed to) cross pavement to use the cycle path. Anyone who claims otherwise simply has no experience and is ignorant of the realities (layout) of the infrastructure.
It's also hypocritical considering how many cross pavements to reach a driveway or such or indeed park wheels up on them in a car.
People walk in cycle paths all the time and collision are minimal because most people aren't going to cycle into pedestrians due to the risk of falling of and serious injury. It's self preservation and common sense.
In this case it's someone on a electric motorbike who is deliberately riding an illegal vehicle dangerously. It's ludicrous to compare this (or anyone deliberately riding dangerously) with the vast majority of people.
Is that akin to a conscious decision to post nonsense "accidentally"?Like a conscious decision to ride on the footpath? But not "deliberately"?
Why would you, or anyone with a grey cell in their head, make a conscious decision to deliberately cycle at that speed close to vulnerable wheel-chair users, babies in buggies, pedestrians, child or adult?If I'm cycling at 30Kmph in a cycle lane marked on the same plane as a footpath
I wouldn’t. That’s why I don’t use cycle paths that are just painted lines on the footpath.Why would you, or anyone with a grey cell in their head, make a conscious decision to deliberately cycle at that speed close to vulnerable wheel-chair users, babies in buggies, pedestrians, child or adult?
If the cycling infrastructure isn’t fit for purpose then cycle on the road. Don’t put pedestrians at risk by cycling on the footpath.No point following the law like a lemming if the law makes no practical sense. Are you going to stop at a stuck on red light for hours until they send out a crew to fix it.
If the infrastructure was perfect you could follow the law perfectly. But it isn't. There are many places where theres shared paths or cycle paths joined by pavement or no access or exit except via pavement.
If the cycling infrastructure isn’t fit for purpose then cycle on the road. Don’t put pedestrians at risk by cycling on the footpath.