4 ms·
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 objec
by clairity 8y ago
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.
- boomlinde 8y agoOn 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.
- nradov 8y agoThere 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.
- buckminster 8y agoIf 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. It's not as clear cut as you pretend.
- m4x 8y agoIs 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.
- quietbritishjim 8y ago> 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.
- clairity 8y agoi 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.
- drb91 8y agoWhy would you assume scooters would reduce fatalities?