Mom wants e-bikes, e-scooters banned for kids after son's tragic death

[-]

CRAYONSEED@reddit

Cars have age restrictions and require a license. I agree cars are far more dangerous when misused, but we already treat them more seriously than e-bikes and scooters

[-]

Cars are regulated more strictly as products too. I don't want (normal class 1-3) ebikes banned, not even necessarily for kids, but I think legislation regulating "unlockable" ebikes/emotos sold as class 2/3s but designed for higher speeds isn't a bad idea, as well as stating new ebikes sold in the US have to confirm to UL 2849.

[-]

LitigantTester@reddit

Cars are dangerous, yes.

But they are a useful thing and most people really needs on the everyday.

A e-moto/e-scooter/e-bike on a 10 years old kid? Is a useful thing? No.

[-]

Hironoveau@reddit

I’m sorry for her loss but she can’t blame ebikes or escooters for her son’s death. That’s like blaming a gun sitting on a table instead of the person who used it.

[-]

Mitrovarr@reddit

I mean if a parent let a child have a gun and they shot someone (or thenselves), I absolutely would want the parent charged.

So yeah, if someone left a gun on a table and a kid got it and used it, I would blame the gun! Or rather the idiot who made it available.

[-]

count-me-0ut@reddit

So if a kitchen knife is left on a table and a kid got it and uses it you would like the parent to be charged for that?

[-]

Denver80211@reddit

E-bikes and scooters aren't the problems. It's parents buying overpowered e-bikes and scooters for their kids

[-]

Mitrovarr@reddit

They shouldn't be able to. It is unreasonable to expect parents to be experts at everything. A lot of them probably don't expect the cute little kid sized motorcycle to be able to go fucking 45 mph.

Also, because the parents are shit doesn't mean the kid deserves to die in a traffic accident nor that we should all have to deal with them until they do.

[-]

NullPointerReference@reddit

Requiring licensing to operate them seems like a reasonable thing.

All of these electric motorcycles need to be impounded and these kids need to start being charged with operating a vehicle without proper licensing.

That will put a stop to this nonsense real quick. You can get your dirt bike impounded for driving it on the street. Same policy should apply to these things.

[-]

Denver80211@reddit

Generally I'm not a fan of licensing for micro mobility devices but I think anything that exceeds 30 mph deserves some kind of regulation

[-]

NullPointerReference@reddit

Let me clarify. The class 1,2,3 ebikes should not be licensed. Police should be educated on what that class means. Anything outside that class is an emoto and should be treated the same as an engine powered motorcycle.

The problem is not that the appropriate laws do not exist. The problem is that the existing laws are not being effectively applied to the new technology.

[-]

underprivlidged@reddit

If you can't spend 5 minutes researching something for your kid, you shouldn't have kids.

[Insert any item name here] isn't the problem. Stupid assholes having sex is the problem.

[-]

Mitrovarr@reddit

Tons of people who shouldn't have kids do. You need to legislate for the real world.

[-]

BadluckyKamy@reddit

Unfortunately stupid asshole are more likely to have kids 🥲

[-]

Denver80211@reddit

It is definitely not unreasonable for a parent to be educated enough to understand the maximum speed of the device they are buying for their child
It is also completely reasonable to expect the parent to be responsible for their child's health
That's what a parent does. Does that mean the kid deserves to die? No. Does it mean the parent deserves to have a dead kid? Not sure if that's the right word but yeah they fucking earned it.

[-]

insuffcient_dopamine@reddit

Ban everything?

[-]

Revelati123@reddit

Electric motorcycles are already banned for kids. Like why do parents break the law by giving kids this shit then turn around and say "THIS SHOULD BE AGAINST THE LAW!"

Arrest the people who are responsible for breaking the law. That would be the parents...

[-]

gaspig70@reddit

Motorcycles (ICE or EV) are indeed illegal for kids to ride on public streets, nothing new there. They are perfectly legal to ride on private land and at many ORV parks (at least in WA) if they are 12 or older with adult supervision.

[-]

Throwawaydontgoaway8@reddit

Has one parent ever been convicted/charged for anything after someone under 16 has caused or been in an accident? I’ve never heard of one. Parents would stop giving 12 year olds 50 mile an hour machines real quick. It’s already pretty low with cars and alcohol cause they enforce it. What I don’t get is when you get it should be required to show an ID or insurance like when you get a used car. Maybe a couple are ignorant and that’d wake them up

[-]

HermannZeGermann@reddit

Yes, it happens all the time. That's literally what child endangerment laws are designed to address, among other things. Parents leave drugs on counter, toddler accidentally injests and dies: parents can be held criminally liable for murder (and obviously also child endangerment). Parents give ATV to teenager who dies in accident: manslaughter.

[-]

insuffcient_dopamine@reddit

https://abcnews.com/amp/US/mother-charged-involuntary-manslaughter-teen-sons-alleged-motorcycle/story?id=132586911

Do some googling.

[-]

Fujiyama_Mama@reddit

Because they're stupid.

[-]

ACAB007@reddit

Make helmets mandatory.

[-]

TooTallForMyCar@reddit

Agreed, but helmets aren’t mandatory on motorcycles in all states and that is insane to me.

[-]

C-D-W@reddit

Adults are capable of making their own decisions. Children... need guidance.

[-]

KingOfTheBigKids@reddit

I don't know, the number of adults I see on motorcycles without helmets shows me they aren't capable in the least.

[-]

BoringBob84@reddit

Part of the allure of riding a motorcycle is being exposed to nature and the thrill of the safety risk. In theory, it is the rider's body, so it should be their choice. However, in reality, their trip to the hospital or to the morgue has a reverberating effect across society - not just financial, but also the emotional suffering of friends and family.

[-]

junon@reddit

In reality, no one wants to get exposed to a June bug in the face at 0 mph, much less 60mph.

[-]

BoringBob84@reddit

Motorcycle windshields and eyeglasses protect against that. I don't ride without a helmet, but I can understand why other people want to.

[-]

junon@reddit

A large motorcycle windshield can, for the motorcycles that have them, which is the minority by far. Eyeglasses only protect the eyes, there's plenty of unprotected face left to hit.

[-]

TooTallForMyCar@reddit

I mean I get that type of thinking, but seatbelts are mandatory. There’s no downside to wearing a helmet on a bike or motorcycle, in fact, riding a motorcycle with a helmet is better. Less noise, protection from kicked up rocks, bugs, rain, wind. I can’t imagine riding without a helmet.

[-]

BoringBob84@reddit

There’s no downside to wearing a helmet on a bike or motorcycle

Sure there is - cost, weight, comfort, visibility, etc.

[-]

TooTallForMyCar@reddit

Cost is the only thing I can agree with. There’s plenty of helmets that aren’t heavy, perfectly comfortable (even more than not wearing them because they protect you from the elements, have visibility.

[-]

BoringBob84@reddit

I personally agree with you. My bicycle helmet is very lightweight and comfortable. I always wear it.

But other people have different priorities. One I hear often is from bicycle commuters who work in professional office settings and are expected to have perfectly-styled hair (especially women). I wish I could figure out how to make a helmet that wouldn't flatten the rider's hair.

[-]

jazzy663@reddit

That's all (aside from cost) entirely subjective, though.

[-]

TooTallForMyCar@reddit

That’s fair, I can’t imagine riding my bike without a helmet, but I’m a dude that wears gloves, riding jacket and pants though. But my riding is all long distance so I can see why someone that exclusively rides e-bikes might not agree. Less distance, not highway speeds.

[-]

C-D-W@reddit

But should they be for adults riding alone? I would think not TBH.

And I agree, I hate riding without a helmet, and I hate driving without a seatbelt. But just because something makes sense and is a good idea, I don't see why it has to be legally mandatory.

[-]

TooTallForMyCar@reddit

I mean the kid that died in the vid OP posted wasn’t wearing a helmet. If he had worn one, would he have lived? Who knows, but the odds would’ve been better than not wearing one.

Some laws are made to protect people from themselves, nobody appreciates a helmet until they get bonked in the head.

It’s like seatbelts, people cried and cried when they started passing seatbelt laws, but now it’s just expected and the norm. Helmets can be there too.

[-]

rave_spidey@reddit

Driving without a seatbelt you actually notice the effects. I've had to take a car a few miles with a cut belt. You slide around on the seat. These people won't admit they needed a helmet until they have permanent brain damage.

[-]

TechnicalPin3415@reddit

Then you do you.

[-]

lkstaack@reddit

The people that object to helmet use are the same ones that reject social medicine; they don't want anyone telling them what to do. They are willing to risk their own lives, and the lives of their children, for the freedom to feel the wind in their hair.

[-]

lkstaack@reddit

Adults are capable of making mature decisions, but many opt not to.

[-]

C-D-W@reddit

I'm okay with that for the most part provided it doesn't endanger others.

[-]

lkstaack@reddit

That's the argument that many made when California was considering a mandatory motorcycle helmet law. That was the argument Gary Busey, then a well known and influential actor, made. Until he suffered brain injuries from a motorcycle accident, and became an outspoken proponent for helmets.

It turns out that people sometimes don't fully consider all the potential consequences of their decisions. Plus, many victims of helmetless accidents relied on government aide (your tax dollars) to pay the medical and rehabilitation bills. So, it often does impact more than just themselves.

[-]

JPBillingsgate@reddit

The evidence to the contrary is immense.

[-]

thishasntbeeneasy@reddit

NH had a new bill come up that was trying to require people on bikes to wear helmets, despite people on motorcycles not having that requirement.

[-]

CBrinson@reddit

Where I grew up kids had to wear them even if adults didn't. I am not actually sure if it was the law but the local PD enforced it heavily. They would even show up and do checks at the off-road spots where you were paying to be there.

[-]

gaspig70@reddit

Different times. As a child of the 70's they just weren't a thing unless you were lining up at a race track. We ensured our kids always wore them though.

[-]

TooTallForMyCar@reddit

That reminds of when I was on a cross country motorcycle trip. I was leaving Idaho and going into Washington, and I stopped to take a picture of the “Welcome to Washington” sign. A group of riders stopped along with me, took out their helmets from their side cases, put them on, then kept riding. Like damn, just keep that on the entire time if you’re doing that!

[-]

WtchDoc@reddit

Increase insurance rates to such a level that if you opt to not wear one it will be inordinately expensive. Financial incentives will get people to change habits/choices than trying to pass a law that certain people will argue infringes their rights. Considering the healthcare costs are probably higher for a rider without a helmet, this would make increasing rates a more logical solution

[-]

aero_sock@reddit

it's not "but" but "also"

[-]

Designer_Can_6551@reddit

What? No, its "but" because of the contrast

[-]

thishasntbeeneasy@reddit

Isn't is fairly universal in the states that kids under 16 are required to wear helmets and are restricted to class 1|2 20mph bikes?

[-]

NullPointerReference@reddit

They are in many states.

In California, it's the law for under 18.

[-]

BoringBob84@reddit

Helmets are a barrier to bicycling for many people, due to cost, availability, comfort, visibility, or other reasons. Head injuries are a health risk. So is sitting on our asses, getting no exercise, and enduring tremendous stress in a car.

I prefer more proverbial carrots and less sticks. Instead of laws that punish poor people for not wearing helmets, I think that we should provide free or subsidized bicycle helmets for anyone who shows up on a bicycle and asks for one.

[-]

bensonr2@reddit

Helmets should be mandatory for kids (and I think already are in many if not most states).

But helmets are not magic and don't even prevent all head injuries.

They are not a substitute for safe riding habits and environments.

There are a lot of countries with far lower levels of helmet use and lower injury rates for cycling because they have far better cycling infrastructure and riding habits.

[-]

BlazeDragon7x@reddit (OP)

If he was wearing a helmet Colton would still be here... rough to say but its the truth

[-]

bensonr2@reddit

Not necessarily. Helmets often help with the more superficial head injuries. Severe impacts even when wearing a helmet don't prevent the brain from experiecing internal impact.

So he certainly should have been wearing a helmet because it certainly could have helped. But it still might have been the same result.

[-]

BlazeDragon7x@reddit (OP)

Lol stop! Wearing a helmet is as dangerous as wearing no helmet? Where is the logic?

[-]

Mitrovarr@reddit

Those countries (i.e. the Netherlands) also have very slow riding speeds, typically. E-bikes are too fast to not wear a helmets. Even a 16 mph class 1 is a lot deadlier than a utility bike being ridden at ~ 10 mph.

[-]

Sphere_3N@reddit

Umm no thanks and thankful with this admin we have 0% chance of it happening. Not all of us have hair compatible with a helmet. But all the bald people love to force it on others.

And I know the corny reply coming “RAtHER hAVE mESSY hAiR ovER a TBI”. Yeah thanks but in reality helmets were and always are a balance between safety convenience and comfort.

If I wanted to be forced to wear full gear I’d get a real motorcycle.

[-]

Denver80211@reddit

for moms

[-]

jaredthegeek@reddit

Blame the scooters and not that we have a society that values only cars and not having safe infrastructure for children to ride bikes and scooters away from traffic.

[-]

BlazeDragon7x@reddit (OP)

💯

[-]

BtenaciousD@reddit

Does she want to ban cars too? 6 kids are killed each day in the US in auto accidents.

[-]

Jeff_Pagu@reddit

So mom buys their 13 year old an e scooter, gets killed, and now wants them banned. Sounds like a personal problem IMO and she’s trying her best to not be held accountable for HER OWN decisions.

[-]

galleon484@reddit

'Mom whose son died slipping on a banana skin wants to see all bananas banned.'

Okay? This isn't news and it's ridiculous they are even reporting it.

[-]

collegetowns@reddit

Street where it happened. This is designed like a highway. This is simply not infrastructure to mix bikes with cars going this fast. They need separate bike infrastructure protected from cars going 60 MPH.

[-]

BlazeDragon7x@reddit (OP)

Rip Thirteen-year-old Colton Remsburg was not wearing a helmet when he was fatally struck by a pickup truck while riding an electric scooter on Mother's Day.

[-]

collegetowns@reddit

People are obsessed with helmets. But it is negligible at those speeds. They are not motorcycle helmets. The force is simply too great.

[-]

Fred_Dibnah@reddit

War is also dangerous, ban that

[-]

WarcraftTurok@reddit

Maga doesn't care about innocent people dying lmao what, why would they ban war when they started the current 2nd U.S. civil war among the other 8 countries they supported the bombing of.

[-]

Izzy4371@reddit

Did some random gypsy give her child said scooter? 🤔

[-]

EcstaticTill9444@reddit

I get the sentiment, but people change their minds. Or learn from their own mistakes. And her trying to raise awareness in other parents to possibly save their kids is admirable, especially because she probably knows that people will make comments like yours.

[-]

Pablo_petty_plastic@reddit

Parents are culpable for giving a 13 year old a powerful machine to use as a toy in traffic

[-]

whatshouldwecallme@reddit

Yes, but accurately assigning blame doesn't exactly help the dead child.

[-]

Pablo_petty_plastic@reddit

Thought she was doing media to help stop the next child from unnecessarily dying? Accurately assigning blame would be the right way to start preventing more tragedies

[-]

Izzy4371@reddit

I would fully endorse her “raising awareness”. Knock yourself out! That’s not what this is about though.

“I had choices and freedom and (didn’t exercise it or exercised it unwisely) so I will push to have your choices and freedom taken from you.”

That’s what this is.

And you know it full well — that’s why you tried to reframe it as some helpful ‘awareness’ to deflect.

[-]

Comsic_Bliss@reddit

She could also try raising awareness by pushing for better safety regulations and helmet use instead of reflexively trying to outright ban them, no?

[-]

Designer_Can_6551@reddit

MAKE THEM CARRY INSURANCE. PROBLEM SOLVED.

[-]

geoffpz1@reddit

Here is the problem. Ins = registering. Registering = strict new rules from people that have no idea what an ebike is, let alone an emoto. Rules = sticking to bike paths and off sidewalks etc. Bike paths suck in most cities, let alone rural, so you are simply giving cops another job that is impossible and causing undue pain to commuters. Ins is not going to cover an e-bike that takes someone out on the sidewalk anyway, so what is the point besides replacement if stolen? Been riding fast ones since covid, Motorbikes as a kid. I do not know the answer, but it aint that. The appeal, for commuters and grocery getters, like me, is that I can go on the back trails and take the safest and most direct route to the store. Sometimes, I have to go on the sidewalk or in a field or something. That will go away, just as you don't see honda 250 enduros cruising the forrest preserve on your weekend walks. That would be sad. IMHO Emotos = dirtbikes and should be limited, massively(age restrictions and speed would be a good starting point). Ebikes = transportation that should have it's own classification regardless of speed.

[-]

Designer_Can_6551@reddit

such a biased take. its the answer 100% because when they damage other vehicles on the road, hiding behind the "ITS JUST A BIKE" isnt going to fly.

Instead, what happens is you grab the bike/scooter, lock it in your car until the cops show up. Get information and be ready to battle in court because the rider is still liable but without insurance its a never ending circlejerk.

[-]

SilentIyAwake@reddit

You shouldn't have bought it for him.

[-]

fgreen68@reddit

Oversized trucks are way more dangerous. Ban them.

[-]

One-Treat4655@reddit

She is absolutely correct. Only pedelacs for kids nothing that throttles.

[-]

LitigantTester@reddit

Even a pedelacs, the kid really needs it?

No.

Maybe with 16 years old and passing a test on a driving school...and riding mandatory with helmet/front/rear lights always on and maybe even a reflective vest...Ok.

[-]

Dirt_Bike_Zero@reddit

Mom buys her kid an escooter then let's her kid ride it illegally, so we need more laws. Brilliant.

Bikes dont break laws, people do.

[-]

NumaNuma92@reddit

An e-bike with pedals and 20-25km/h assist is fine, as long as it’s driven responsibly. The problem is a lot of people are calling e-motorcycles with no speed limit or pedals for e-bikes. Kids should never drive e-motorcycles.

[-]

Serdones@reddit

Tragic story. As a dad with a four year old, it's literally one of my worst nightmares. But total bans for kids shouldn't be necessary. Most budget e-scooters don't hit 20mph. You can hit 20mph and up pretty easily downhill on a regular scooter. The same accidents can happen whether an electric motor is involved or not.

Obviously not wearing a helmet isn't going to improve the situation. Did we not all read Mick Harte Was Here in elementary school? I hate to point fingers after what she went through, but she didn't have to get her son an e-scooter with a 28mph top speed. If the helmet was such a point of contention, he just didn't have to have the scooter.

My son's only four. I'm sure the dynamics can be more challenging with a teenager who's far more vocal. Hopefully it'll be less of a battle in my household since I ride and I'm constantly modeling wearing a helmet. He also has to wear his helmet while riding in the bike trailer or practicing on his own bike.

I'm not at all necessarily of an anti-regulation, put-it-all-on-the-parents mindset, but this seems like a clear instance where the parent stepping in and being the primary enforcement on bike safety would've made the biggest difference. Even if helmets were mandatory there, it's not like police are always going to catch it. Police in my city can barely keep up with all the cars driving around with expired tags.

[-]

BoringBob84@reddit

If the helmet was such a point of contention, he just didn't have to have the scooter.

FWIW, you sound like a great parent.

I ride and I'm constantly modeling wearing a helmet.

Children learn what they live, and you seem to be a good teacher.

[-]

rcklmbr@reddit

I just had an elderly friend get hit by a car while walking and killed. Should we ban walking too?

[-]

byneefattah@reddit

yes, it should be illegal for humans to not be inside cars.

[-]

Deeznutseus2012@reddit

No parent should ever have to lose their child and for that alone, I pity her.

But with that caveat in place, this clearly delusional, grieving mother's personal crusade to avoid accountability for buying what is clearly an unsafe product for her child and just as clearly not instilling good safety instruction, or joining him for supervised rides in order to do so by trying to outright ban all PEVs is insane.

It is not even close to a rational response. A car killed her son. Not the the scooter. If anything, she should be calling for a ban on motor vehicles, or advocating for fully protected and isolated cycling infrastructure.

This propaganda piece is one big 'appealing to emotion' logical fallacy, where they trot out a rich woman in tears to advance terrible agendas and make a terrible argument doing it.

It's disgusting.

[-]

CRAYONSEED@reddit

I’d be very ok with getting a license or having an age restriction (16-18) for e-bikes. It’s too much to ask unsupervised children to be responsible and measured

[-]

Realistic_Mix3652@reddit

I agree with e-scooters. Their wheels are just too small to be able to go much above 10mph safely. That just physics and can't really be designed around.

Regarding the ebikes. I'm willing to bet if you ask anyone involved in these regulations to describe an ebike they would describe an e-moto.

How do we get people to disconnect e-moto from ebike?

[-]

LitigantTester@reddit

E-bike=motor only power if you pedal. No throtle. Max 25kmph. E-moto= throtle and/or over 25kmph.

I think e-scooters are insane. In Spain legally could reach 25kmph, and 250w motor Max.

The same speed and power for a e-bike of 6000€/$, with 29" wheels, 2 inches wide, hidraulic brakes with 220mm rotors, 160mm front and rear travel suspension...

I think legal ebikes in Europe id going in the right way.

I only give some extra power for bikes, maybe 500w, and keep the speed limit on 25 and only by pedaling of course.

But i think we need to ban ebikes/e-scooters for under 18kids.

I'm sorry, but if you want to ride something powered you should go to the driving school at 15/16 at least.

Here in Spain you can see 8 years old kids on e-scooters riding without helmet, front/rear light off, and speeding everywhere.

[-]

Kakawfee@reddit

I think we just genuinely more education. It's a newer tech that the public doesn't understand the safety concerns. I don't think separating the two is a good idea, because both are genuinely dangerous regardless of the speed. What we need is better education, and more regulation in terms of safety (gear and bike).

[-]

StankoMicin@reddit

That's right. Make it so they can only get around by car.

God people are reactionary. I'm very sorry for her loss, but banning micro mobility for those who can't drive isn't the answer

[-]

Dramatic_Bluebird595@reddit

They can ride bicycles like we did?

[-]

coop_stain@reddit

Why is a car the only other option? Pedal bikes exist….and they work great.

[-]

WarcraftTurok@reddit

Nah, not for adults

[-]

SnooDucks9653@reddit

I agree. And we should make the most dangerous vehicle illegal as well - the passenger automobile.

[-]

BazzaFox@reddit

Who bought him the e-scooter and let him ride it without safety equipment?

[-]

toaster404@reddit

Of all the obviously dangerous pieces of not a car equipment out there, eScooters are at the top. This is a car-scooter collision issue. Not an eScooter issue.

She may well be right about banning for under 14. I'd like to see real analysis and study. If he's under 14, where was she? The scooter went to 28 mph! And she didn't confiscate it. She knew the risks and let him go. Hypocrite.

Meanwhile, mom drives at 100 mph to get to the hospital. What a hypocrite. Cars are the largest issue. Kid hit by car, but it's the eScooter's fault? This is head up where it doesn't shine territory. Not that small-wheeled over-powered eScooter aren't inherently dangerous, but if everyone behaves and doesn't run them over, they're not horribly life-threatening.

From a legal perspective, I'm considering comparative fault. Who is more at fault here? Depends on the facts, but even where the driver is clearly at fault, the cyclist/scooterist/skater gets blamed for being out there. Too often things are backward.

[-]