Honestly a great take. While i generally doesn’t mind throttle-only use of an ebike, some of these machine is just way too fast, to the point people are starting to look at ebike like they look at car.
Honestly a great take. While i generally doesn’t mind throttle-only use of an ebike, some of these machine is just way too fast, to the point people are starting to look at ebike like they look at car.
I’m in full agreement, and want to note that the confusion regarding enforcement started well before ebikes became a thing, at least in California.
To see why, we have to turn back to the 1970s, when mopeds – legally, a “motorized bicycle” – were introduced. At the time, the definition described a “device” (so not a vehicle in California) with a max 30 MPH (48 kph) limit on level ground, a 4 HP (3 kW) max engine output, an automatic transmission , and operative pedals. This hewed almost identically to the original Swedish mopeds, which existed in the context of a max 50 kph speed limit in urban areas.
Fast forward to sometime in the 2000s or early 2010s, the California definition of moped gained a proviso for electric-powered mopeds, with a max motor output of 3 kW but removed the requirements for an automatic transmission (bc irrelevancy) and the pedals.
So since that time, enforcement of mopeds would have been confusing, since an electric motorcycle (always has been legal) and an electric moped can share the same appearance but differ only in limited power output and speed. Though the market for electric mopeds didn’t explode anywhere near what happened in the 2010s and 2020s with ebikes.
But the problem was always there, just now exacerbated. But I do think even the three-class system as implemented in California has other problems with enforcement as well.
For example, a class 2 and class 3 ebike have different operating requirements. To ride a class 3, the rider must be 16+ years old and a helmet is mandatory, even if over 18 years old. Under the law, to stop an underage rider on suspicion of operating a class 3 ebike would require separate information that the rider is not at least 16. In practice, this is an invitation for police profiling, stopping riders because “you look too young” and that’s patently objectionable.
If a rider is stopped for something else (eg the helmet requirement for class 3) and their age is noticed from their ID during the stop, then that’s a fair cop. But anytime that enforcement results in unjustified profiling and stops that are not premised by reasonable suspicion, that’s where civil rights erode. Not just for those riders that are pulled over, but everyone who travels the roads. No one would be safe.
P.S. Anyone looking through the history of the California Vehicle Code should be aware that there were once two definitions of “motorized bicycle”, one which meant moped and another which was the early prototype that preceded the ebike class system. The latter was removed circa 2018, after the class system was already in use for two years. That’s… totally not confusing at all, legislators…