They Won’t Obey The Law. So Why Pass It?

 

Community Board 6, Manhattan . Photo by Kevin Dugan for Streetsblog NYC.

People kill people. Therefore, laws against homicide and manslaughter are pointless.

Any lawyer who made such a statement probably wouldn’t be a lawyer for much longer. And anyone else who uttered it might be committed—or, in some places, elected.

While nobody in Manhattan’s Community Board 6–which includes the east side of the borough from 14th to 59th Street, one member of that wise and worldly body said something that is, at least to mind, just as logically flawed.

Or could it be that Jason Froimowitz has access that I lack to powers of reasoning. He was reactingto a bill, proposed by City Council Member Robert Holden, that would require, “ every bicycle with electric assist, electric scooter, and other legal motorized vehicle that is not otherwise required to be registered with the DMV, to be registered with DOT and receive an identifying number which would be displayed on a visible plate affixed to the vehicle.”

That sounds good on its face. But, perhaps not surprisingly for anything from Holden—who’s never met a cop or car he didn’t like—it’s not very well thought-out.  For one thing,  doesn’t address a legal loophole that allows moped buyers to leave the shop without registering the vehicle. So someone could buy a moped and the city would be none the wiser—and thus unable to enforce a mandate to plate.

The bill also does not acknowledge a major source of dangerous moped and ebike operation:  food delivery apps, which guarantee customers that their ramen will be delivered within 15 minutes or some similar time frame.  As it stands, delivery services and the restaurants that employ them face no penalties when their delivery workers maim or kill someone.

To be fair, requiring registration—from the point of sale onward—would make it easier to hold Doordash and their ilk to account, in part because the police will have one less excuse for not enforcing bans on motorized vehicles in bike and pedestrian lanes—and for not citing dangerous operation on the streets.

Froimowitz's objection to the bill, however, has nothing to do with the flaws I have enumerated.  Rather, he seems to think that passing any law to address the issue is pointless.  This would-be bastion of jurisprudential logic instead offers up this analogy as his reason for voting against the bill:

We currently require registration and license plates for motor vehicles in New York City and there is a prolific problem of vehicles obstructing, and removing, and defacing those license plates, so I fail to see how a solution requesting new implementation of  license plates would be effective. 

Before I proceed, I must say that I fail to see how a vehicle can obstruct, remove or deface a license plate.  And I am trying to wrap my head around "a prolific problem."  When someone or something is "prolific," they produce something in abundance, whether it's fruit from a tree or writing from a blogger.  A problem does not produce anything; it is produced and whatever produces it might be prolific if it is making more problems or anything else.

Now that I have pointed out the mixed metaphors and overall lazy use of language by a member of a community board that includes some of the city's most affluent and presumably best-educated residents, I will say, in fairness, that he is right on one count:  No regulation will stop all dangerous, discourteous and simply stupid behavior.  But to use that as a reason not to require registration and plating is a bit like saying that there shouldn’t be any restrictions on guns because someone, somewhere will find a way around them.

Knowing The Difference

Photo by Lauren Segal, for the San Francisco Chronicle 

 

One thing I’ve noticed is that in complaining about scofflaws on two wheels, people often conflate bicycles with e-bikes and what I think of as miniature motorcycles.

When I ask people to recount their “close encounters,” I learn, more often than not, that they were “buzzed “ by a delivery worker on a mini-motorcycle, a young person cavorting on an eBike or a motorized scooter who ran a red light.

So I was gratified to learn that in Marin County, just north of  San Francisco, two communities are explicitly targeting pre-adults who dart and weave among pedestrians.

Hiding Its Power

Cheaters want to win--and not get caught. So they find ways to conceal the ways in which they cut corners.

I don't cheat.  So how can I speak with such authority about cheaters and cheating?  Don't ask! 😉

Seriously, though:  How many ads have you seen for drugs that can't be detected or teas, potions or other things that will make whatever you drank, ingested or smoked the night before "undetectable?" 

Although Jacques Anquetil supposedly said that no one wins the Tour de France on salad and mineral water and the only rider to have won the Tour more often than the "gentle giant" had all of his victories voided because he aimed for "better living through chemistry," taking banned or simply risky or questionable substances is not the only way racers and other athletes have tried to gain unfair advantages.

Over the past few years, riders have been caught with "boosters" concealed in various parts of their bikes.  I am not naive enough to think that all of the riders hiding mechanical and electronic "aids" in whichever parts of their bikes--or clothes or bodies--have been detected.  And, given a development I've just become aware of, I wouldn't be surprised that more will choose not to play by the rules.

Quella, a British company known for urban single-speed bikes (what some call "cafe racers) has developed a line of such machines that aren't what they seem, at least to the uninitated.  At first glance, it might seem like another bike from its flagship Varsity line. (Interesting, isn't it, that it shares a model name with one of the most-maligned and best-selling bikes of all time?)  Actually, it is--except for the rear hub, which is larger in diameter than what one normally finds on such a bike.  Inside that hub are a battery, torque sensor, GPS, Bluetooth and motor.

Yes, you read that right.  That bike has an electric assist, but tries to hide it. Now, of course, I don't think it would get by a race registrar or commissaire but, if someone could figure out a way to fit everything I mentioned into a hub, I am sure that, in time, someone will figure out a way to make such a hub look like the more slender ones we are accustomed to seeing on such bikes.  After all, your Android or iPhone has more capacity than the computers that took the Apollo astronauts to the moon and back.

Also, I imagine that the sensors and motor can be made more powerful, and able to go for longer distances and periods of time on a single charge.  The current system will only push a rider up to 15 MPH with 40Nm of torque--and has a maximum range of about 40 miles on a single charge.  So, this system will only help riders on short rides over flat terrain--which is how such bikes are usually ridden anyway.  

But if (or perhaps I should say when) the engineers figure out how to make the assist go faster and further on a single charge, this system could be a temptation or a boon (depending on your point of view) for some racer who needs a little edge and believes he or she won't get caught--or that the rules or their enforcement will change.

It Was A Nice Ride--While It Lasted

In 2010, Minneapolis became the first major US city (Denver was the first) to launch a bike-share program.

Now the program, known as "Nice Ride," is ending.

The chief reason is an operating deficit, a result of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota ending its contract with Lyft, the ride-share company that has operated Nice Ride.  

After reading and hearing a Minnesota Public Radio report, however, I think the end of the road, so to speak, for Nice Ride has as much to do with how bike-share programs have changed and are leaving older programs behind.

For one thing, in many cities, bike share programs have turned into micromobility schemes.  According to Nice Ride executive director Bill Dossett, only 15 percent of micromobility rides were taken on the iconic lime-green pedal bikes.  As in other cities, motor scooters and ebikes have gained popularity.

That helps to confirm two of my suspicions, based on my observation of bike share programs in my hometown of New York and other cities.  

One is that the people drawn to the share programs weren't cyclists. When bike share programs started, they used the bikes for short trips. But, as share programs began to offer ebikes and scooters, users shifted to those conveyances.  

The other is this:  People who use micromobility programs are not using them in place of driving.  Rather, they are substituting their ebike and scooter trips for mass-transit rides--or for short rides with ride-share services like Lyft.  That, I believe, is one reason why Lyft has acquired, or been co-sponsoring or operating micromobility plans in other cities.  In other words, Lyft knows its market.

One thing that ride-share companies and micromobility schemes have in common is this:  People use phone apps to access them--except in Minneapolis.  Dossett says that Nice Ride plans to sell its 1333 bikes and 198 docking stations, but admits that it might difficult to find buyers because the bikes and stations were designed before those apps came into use.  Also, not many people or shops may want the bikes because they have custom parts and, as Dossett explains--and I can attest--"it takes a lot longer to maintain one of those bikes if you just have to fix a flat." (If you've ever had to fix a rear flat on a Raleigh DL-1, or any similar bike with rod brakes, you have some idea of what he's talking about.)  So, he says, the best hope might be to sell some of the still-usable parts

 

Lancaster Bans eBikes From Sidewalks

Some of you may believe that I have a bias against e-bikes.  I won't try to disabuse you of that.  My prejudice stems, in part, from pride (apologies to Jane Austen):  I can pedal; I don't need no stinkin' motor," I tell myself.

OK, now I have revealed two more things about myself:  I talk to myself and, worse, I use double negatives. About the latter, I tell myself, if they're good enough for other languages, why not English?

Anyway, now you can, if you wish question my grammatical competence and my mental health along with my impartiality when it comes to two-wheeled vehicles.

Oh, but there's another component to my bias against eBikes, which I haven't revealed to very many people--until now. (And it still may not be very many people, depending on how many readers this post garners!)  You see, one of my very first encounters with an e-bike, a couple of years or so before the pandemic, was much too close.  I crossed Broadway at Crescent Street and was walking toward one of those stores you go to for a light bulb or a battery when something glanced off my left elbow.

I recognized the guy--a delivery worker I'd seen before on a mountain bike that had as much rust and gunk as paint or rubber (and possibly metal).  That night, he was astride one of the first eBikes I'd seen in this city.  I cursed at him, not only for nearly knocking me down, but for his seeming indifference, which was reflected by the manager of the restaurant when I complained to him.

I haven't patronized that restaurant since--which, to be fair, I hadn't patronized much up to that point.  But I guess that, like most New Yorkers, I have become accustomed or resigned to the eBikes.  As I've mentioned in other posts, I can understand why some delivery workers would use them:  They might be delivering orders from one of those apps that promises you'll get your pizza, tacos or whatever within a certain time frame.  Or they might be a family's main breadwinner--whether that family is here or in El Salvador or China or some other far-away place-- speak little or no English and be aging--and have few or no other employment prospects.  

But one opinion I've developed, and won't change, is this:  They don't belong on any path lane, sidewalk or other pathway used by bicyclists, pedestrians or anyone else moving about without a motor--with the exception of motorized wheelchair users.

The Bureau of Police in Lancaster, Pennsylvania seems to share my opinion.  This week, they released a statement banning electric bikes--along with skateboards and unicycles-- from sidewalks. 

Now, since I don't cross paths (pun intended) with  skateboarders and unicycles as often, I haven't developed as strong feelings about them.  My main complaint about skateboarders is that they stop frequently, sometimes in the path of cyclists, often without intending to do so.  The few times I've had to do a quick dodge around a skateboarder, he (nearly all I've encountered have been teenage boys and young men) was apologetic and polite.  And I've had so few encounters with unicyclists that I really don't think about them.   But, I can understand why some pedestrians--especially if they are elderly and have mobility issues--would feel endangered by skateboarders and unicyclists.  

It Doesn't Make Sense, And I'm Not Surprised

 If something is logical, it doesn't necessarily make sense.

I don't remember where I read, or from whom I heard, that.  But it has helped me to understand some strange and unusual developments--and to feel equal parts of shock and disgust but absolutely no surprise.

One such development is this:

The GMC Hummer EV All-Wheel-Drive e-bike is the Frankenstinian offspring of the maker of the world's most over-the-top motor vehicle and Recon Power Bikes.  

Before I say anything else, I should point out that a bicycle cannot be all-wheel-drive.  "All" refers to entities of three or more; then again, I guess "both-wheel-drive" doesn't have the same macho appeal.  

Now that I've done my writer/English teacher duty, I want to explain how this contraption makes perfect sense.  I will start by laying out an axiom that comes from years of observation:  The fancier the van or pickup truck, the less likely it is to be used for any sort of work.  So those souped-up diesel-powered rigs with the most unnecessary  accessories and flashy (or garish) paint jobs are, more than likely, being driven by some 20-year-old (whether chronologically or emotionally) dude who's overcompensating for how little he contributes to society and where he's lacking in his body, if you know what I mean, as well as his mind.

The ridership of fat-tire electric bikes is very similar to the drivership of those begirded, bejeweled (well, at least it's jewelry for the ones who drive them) behemoths.  By straddling a two-wheeled vehicle that has pedals, even if they're used only to start the engine, riders of those machines think they're projecting an image of hard work and toughness.  Put them on a bike without a motor and even I, at my age, could run rings around most of them.

Anyway, if a Hummer driver is going to bring a bicycle with him, I don't think it would be a light, airy road machine or even a high-end mountain bike.  Such bikes simply won't do for someone who's trying to compensate for, well, all sorts of things.  If he's going from four wheels to two, he simply cannot give up that feeling of invincibility he gets from the roar of an engine and the width of his tire tracks.

So...In its way, the new Hummer eBike is completely logical, at least given its target market.  But does it make sense?  Probably not, to or for anyone not in that target market.