Politicians get behind the e-scooter revolution

Politicians get behind the e-scooter revolution writes Graeme Paton
Transport Correspondent in the printed edition of The Times today!

Electric scooters should be fully legalised in Britain and enforcement
measures brought in to combat antisocial use, according to MPs………………………
see page 4 of today's edition for more!

Now, here is something for diehards to contemplate!

On 02/10/2020 11:15, colwyn wrote:

Politicians get behind the e-scooter revolution writes Graeme Paton
Transport Correspondent in the printed edition of The Times today!

Electric scooters should be fully legalised in Britain and enforcement
measures brought in to combat antisocial use, according to MPs………………………
see page 4 of today's edition for more!

Now, here is something for diehards to contemplate!

As I understand it, currently, all public use of these machines
(whatever name is finally chosen for them) is illegal and anti-social.

They are motor-cycles, though perhaps, if the foot is used for
propulsion part of the time, perhaps something more akin to the moped
end of things. The same licensing, registration, testing and C&U regs
need to be applied, including a requirement for the installation and
proper maintenance of brakes and lights, third-party insurance, MOT test
and certificate when of a certain registration age) etc.

On 02/10/2020 16:05, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2020 11:15, colwyn wrote:

Politicians get behind the e-scooter revolution writes Graeme Paton
Transport Correspondent in the printed edition of The Times today!

Electric scooters should be fully legalised in Britain and enforcement
measures brought in to combat antisocial use, according to
MPs……………………… see page 4 of today's edition for more!

Now, here is something for diehards to contemplate!

As I understand it, currently, all public use of these machines
(whatever name is finally chosen for them) is illegal and anti-social.

People are using them so it might be better to accept them.

There is precedence for allowing anti-social vehicles to use the streets
- motor vehicles. On top of being anti-social they also happen to be
very dangerous (though as we know, personal convenience is allowed to
override the danger). The story is that mass disobedience was a catalyst
to drop the red flag law.

They are motor-cycles, though perhaps, if the foot is used for
propulsion part of the time, perhaps something more akin to the moped
end of things.

Simple. Create a new category instead of trying to fit them into an
existing category. It's only words.

On 02/10/2020 20:09, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/10/2020 16:05, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2020 11:15, colwyn wrote:

Politicians get behind the e-scooter revolution writes Graeme Paton
Transport Correspondent in the printed edition of The Times today!

Electric scooters should be fully legalised in Britain and
enforcement measures brought in to combat antisocial use, according
to MPs……………………… see page 4 of today's edition for more!

Now, here is something for diehards to contemplate!

As I understand it, currently, all public use of these machines
(whatever name is finally chosen for them) is illegal and anti-social.

People are using them so it might be better to accept them.

And one could say the same of machetes around the London bridge area, I
suppose?

Or perhaps not.

There is precedence for allowing anti-social vehicles to use the streets
- motor vehicles. On top of being anti-social they also happen to be
very dangerous (though as we know, personal convenience is allowed to
override the danger). The story is that mass disobedience was a catalyst
to drop the red flag law.

Do you know what a non-sequitur is?

They are motor-cycles, though perhaps, if the foot is used for
propulsion part of the time, perhaps something more akin to the moped
end of things.

Simple. Create a new category instead of trying to fit them into an
existing category. It's only words.

You'd be content to be run over by one on a footway, seriously and
disablingly injured and then to learn that the "driver" wasn't insured,
would you?

Yeah, right.

Do you expect to be believed?

Seriously?

On 03/10/2020 00:21, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2020 20:09, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/10/2020 16:05, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2020 11:15, colwyn wrote:

Politicians get behind the e-scooter revolution writes Graeme Paton
Transport Correspondent in the printed edition of The Times today!

Electric scooters should be fully legalised in Britain and
enforcement measures brought in to combat antisocial use, according
to MPs……………………… see page 4 of today's edition for more!

Now, here is something for diehards to contemplate!

As I understand it, currently, all public use of these machines
(whatever name is finally chosen for them) is illegal and anti-social.

People are using them so it might be better to accept them.

And one could say the same of machetes around the London bridge area, I
suppose?

A machete is not a form of transport. Scooters replace an existing
dangerous and extremely anti-social form of transport.

Or perhaps not.

There is precedence for allowing anti-social vehicles to use the
streets - motor vehicles. On top of being anti-social they also happen
to be very dangerous (though as we know, personal convenience is
allowed to override the danger). The story is that mass disobedience
was a catalyst to drop the red flag law.

Do you know what a non-sequitur is?

Something like trying to compare an e-scooter with a machete.

They are motor-cycles, though perhaps, if the foot is used for
propulsion part of the time, perhaps something more akin to the moped
end of things.

Simple. Create a new category instead of trying to fit them into an
existing category. It's only words.

You'd be content to be run over by one on a footway, seriously and
disablingly injured and then to learn that the "driver" wasn't insured,
would you?

It's not inevitable.

Yeah, right.

Do you expect to be believed?

Seriously?

I can easily believe that you are frightened of spiders.

On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 11:15:41 +0100
colwyn wrote:

Politicians get behind the e-scooter revolution writes Graeme Paton
Transport Correspondent in the printed edition of The Times today!

Electric scooters should be fully legalised in Britain and
enforcement measures brought in to combat antisocial use, according
to MPs……………………… see page 4 of today's edition for more!

On the one hand it makes sense for city use as e-scooters are very easy
to use- you just stand and go, no swinging a leg over or reaching for
the controls. On the other hand I wonder how they'll cope with the
inherent instability under braking caused by the high and forward
centre of mass relative to the short wheelbase, and susceptibility of
the small wheels to being swallowed by potholes.
I guess they can be smart enough to manage deceleration optimally to
reduce the tip hazard, but they can't overcome the basic physics.
Maybe they'll evolve into something with larger wheels further apart,
perhaps somewhere to sit ...

On 03/10/2020 11:36, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/10/2020 00:21, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2020 20:09, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/10/2020 16:05, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2020 11:15, colwyn wrote:

Politicians get behind the e-scooter revolution writes Graeme Paton
Transport Correspondent in the printed edition of The Times today!

Electric scooters should be fully legalised in Britain and
enforcement measures brought in to combat antisocial use, according
to MPs……………………… see page 4 of today's edition for more!

Now, here is something for diehards to contemplate!

As I understand it, currently, all public use of these machines
(whatever name is finally chosen for them) is illegal and anti-social.

People are using them so it might be better to accept them.

And one could say the same of machetes around the London bridge area,
I suppose?

A machete is not a form of transport.

But people *do* use them so (according to your "logic"), it might be
better to accept them.

Scooters replace an existing
dangerous and extremely anti-social form of transport.

That's no way to describe walking. It's about right for footway cycling,
though, as I know you will agree.

Or perhaps not.

There is precedence for allowing anti-social vehicles to use the
streets - motor vehicles. On top of being anti-social they also
happen to be very dangerous (though as we know, personal convenience
is allowed to override the danger). The story is that mass
disobedience was a catalyst to drop the red flag law.

Do you know what a non-sequitur is?

Something like trying to compare an e-scooter with a machete.

Or like failing to see a valid comparison.

They are motor-cycles, though perhaps, if the foot is used for
propulsion part of the time, perhaps something more akin to the
moped end of things.

Simple. Create a new category instead of trying to fit them into an
existing category. It's only words.

You'd be content to be run over by one on a footway, seriously and
disablingly injured and then to learn that the "driver" wasn't
insured, would you?

It's not inevitable.

It isn't inevitable that you or I will be run over by a drunken driver
at 23:45 tonight, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable to drive whilst
drunk or that we should be content with such a person driving in that
condition.

Does it?

Yeah, right.

Do you expect to be believed?

Seriously?

I can easily believe that you are frightened of spiders.

Data?

On 07/10/2020 22:02, JNugent wrote:
On 03/10/2020 11:36, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/10/2020 00:21, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2020 20:09, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/10/2020 16:05, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2020 11:15, colwyn wrote:

Politicians get behind the e-scooter revolution writes Graeme
Paton Transport Correspondent in the printed edition of The Times
today!

Electric scooters should be fully legalised in Britain and
enforcement measures brought in to combat antisocial use,
according to MPs……………………… see page 4 of today's edition for more!

Now, here is something for diehards to contemplate!

As I understand it, currently, all public use of these machines
(whatever name is finally chosen for them) is illegal and anti-social.

People are using them so it might be better to accept them.

And one could say the same of machetes around the London bridge area,
I suppose?

A machete is not a form of transport.

But people *do* use them so (according to your "logic"), it might be
better to accept them.

Did you ever go to B&Q when they were trading illegally on Sundays?

Scooters replace an existing dangerous and extremely anti-social form
of transport.

That's no way to describe walking. It's about right for footway cycling,
though, as I know you will agree.

Well, waving a machete around might be more practical than an e-escooter
for clearing a path through the pedestrians on Oxford Street. But in
most places, that is what a car is for.

Or perhaps not.

There is precedence for allowing anti-social vehicles to use the
streets - motor vehicles. On top of being anti-social they also
happen to be very dangerous (though as we know, personal convenience
is allowed to override the danger). The story is that mass
disobedience was a catalyst to drop the red flag law.

Do you know what a non-sequitur is?

Something like trying to compare an e-scooter with a machete.

Or like failing to see a valid comparison.

You're certainly good at making those.

They are motor-cycles, though perhaps, if the foot is used for
propulsion part of the time, perhaps something more akin to the
moped end of things.

Simple. Create a new category instead of trying to fit them into an
existing category. It's only words.

You'd be content to be run over by one on a footway, seriously and
disablingly injured and then to learn that the "driver" wasn't
insured, would you?

It's not inevitable.

It isn't inevitable that you or I will be run over by a drunken driver
at 23:45 tonight, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable to drive whilst
drunk or that we should be content with such a person driving in that
condition.

Does it?

Do you know what a non-sequitur is?

Yeah, right.

Do you expect to be believed?

Seriously?

I can easily believe that you are frightened of spiders.

Data?

It's a logical step.

On Saturday, 3 October 2020 at 00:19:32 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:

Do you know what a non-sequitur is?

https://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/2020/10/08

On 08/10/2020 08:57, TMS320 wrote:

On 07/10/2020 22:02, JNugent wrote:
On 03/10/2020 11:36, TMS320 wrote:
On 03/10/2020 00:21, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2020 20:09, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/10/2020 16:05, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2020 11:15, colwyn wrote:

Politicians get behind the e-scooter revolution writes Graeme
Paton Transport Correspondent in the printed edition of The Times
today!

Electric scooters should be fully legalised in Britain and
enforcement measures brought in to combat antisocial use,
according to MPs……………………… see page 4 of today's edition for more!

Now, here is something for diehards to contemplate!

As I understand it, currently, all public use of these machines
(whatever name is finally chosen for them) is illegal and
anti-social.

People are using them so it might be better to accept them.

And one could say the same of machetes around the London bridge
area, I suppose?

A machete is not a form of transport.

But people *do* use them so (according to your "logic"), it might be
better to accept them.

Did you ever go to B&Q when they were trading illegally on Sundays?

When was that?

Scooters replace an existing dangerous and extremely anti-social form
of transport.

That's no way to describe walking. It's about right for footway
cycling, though, as I know you will agree.

Well, waving a machete around might be more practical than an e-escooter
for clearing a path through the pedestrians on Oxford Street. But in
most places, that is what a car is for.

Or perhaps not.

There is precedence for allowing anti-social vehicles to use the
streets - motor vehicles. On top of being anti-social they also
happen to be very dangerous (though as we know, personal
convenience is allowed to override the danger). The story is that
mass disobedience was a catalyst to drop the red flag law.

Do you know what a non-sequitur is?

Something like trying to compare an e-scooter with a machete.

Or like failing to see a valid comparison.

You're certainly good at making those.

I know.

They are motor-cycles, though perhaps, if the foot is used for
propulsion part of the time, perhaps something more akin to the
moped end of things.

Simple. Create a new category instead of trying to fit them into an
existing category. It's only words.

You'd be content to be run over by one on a footway, seriously and
disablingly injured and then to learn that the "driver" wasn't
insured, would you?

It's not inevitable.

It isn't inevitable that you or I will be run over by a drunken driver
at 23:45 tonight, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable to drive
whilst drunk or that we should be content with such a person driving
in that condition.

Does it?

Do you know what a non-sequitur is?

I do. You clearly don't (in that you imagine that the opposite is one).

Yeah, right.

Do you expect to be believed?

Seriously?

I can easily believe that you are frightened of spiders.

Data?

It's a logical step.

Data?

No?

OK.