145
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2026
145 points (97.4% liked)
Bicycles
6354 readers
2 users here now
Welcome to !bicycles@lemmy.ca
A place to share our love of all things with two wheels and pedals. This is an inclusive, non-judgemental community. All types of cyclists are accepted here; whether you're a commuter, a roadie, a MTB enthusiast, a fixie freak, a crusty xbiking hoarder, in the middle of an epic across-the-world bicycle tour, or any other type of cyclist!
Community Rules
-
No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
-
Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
-
No porn.
-
No ads / spamming.
-
Ride bikes
Other cycling-related communities
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Well, the same can be said for cars, so let’s not go there.
In countries where e-bikes are widely adopted like The Netherlands, e-bikes are responsible for a significant increase in cycling related injuries and fatalities.
So legislation is definitely needed to protect e-cyclists, regular cyclists and pedestrians.
They're just boomers who fall alone and get more severe injuries. The dutch can't even put on a helmet, that's how much they value their head.
If cars have seatbelts, bikes have helmets. It's not complex.
No need to make bikes pay insurance and vehicle tax. Have identification plates to be easily subject to traffic fines... Oh wait...
So, that’s legislation then.
And it’s not just the people falling off e-bikes but also regular cyclists pedestrians getting hit by e-bikes. Helmets won’t fix that.
pedestrains should also wear helmets of course. At least some should
Obviously, so should people sitting on the couch or eating dinner
Its mostly head injuries. These are between just a rider and the road, and the small number of fatalities were from geriatric riders that should have been in a wheel chair. The solution is to just wear a helmet.. And since its not harming anyone aside from the rider themself, that should be a personal choice. No need to increase the barrier to entry with license, registration, and insurance. Its like people are just trying to find ways to make money off the increase in popularity of e bikes.
Not really:
Also a no, a minority was in their 70s or older.
And if you need a wheelchair you can’t even physically get on an e-bike.
Only for some of the injuries. See above.
Most people will not wear a helmet if there is no legislation. We also take plenty of other measures to protect people, like seat belts in cars, banning smoking and drinking below a certain age. Also, society bears the cost. And it’s harming other people in the ER people whose diagnosis and treatment is being delayed because the ED and surgery are working a trauma case. And where do you find it’s only people vs the road? There are also plenty of young people and kids who buy illegal unregistered e-bikes with fat tires that look like a bike, but are more akin to an e-motor. Those often hit and cause serious damage to other cyclists and pedestrians.
Then how would you suggest filtering out the
?
Legislation doesn't protect anyone at all. It's just a feel good solution. You can look exactly at cars and see laws don't protect anyone.
Sorry, but that is just absolute nonsense. Just look at the vehicle deaths per number of vehicles or miles driven. What else do you think this drastic reduction in deaths comes from?
Small hint: it’s not because car manufacturers love people so much.
Seat belt laws alone have prevented hundreds of thousands of deaths.
Anti lock brakes had an equal or stronger effect. The safest crash result is the crash you avoid.
Obviously there are many incremental safety features that all had an effect.
But the point is, we wouldn’t have had the majority of them if it wasn’t for legislation.
You missed my point. You can still operate a car without putting a seatbelt on. You can even "trick" the sensor by putting the belt on first or a dummy latch. It doesn't solve the person chosing to not wear one.
Insurance doesn't stop crime or deaths l. A license or plate is only good for identification, it wont protect the rider. Having "stiff OVI" laws wont stop a person from driving intoxicated.
You can even look at OVI trends and see it's been fairly consistant with only slightly declining trend. However drug based OVI started increasing slightly due to legilization.
Your chart is misleading. It doesn't take into consideration of early vehicles that didn't have seatbelts at all or lack of safety devices (airbags, crumble zones, fibreglass bodies instead of steel). Manufacturers today are required to include all those safety devices for sale.
They could, but most people don’t. That’s why legislation works.
There is also nothing misleading about the graph.
Seatbelts = legislation.
Airbags = legislation.
Why do you think car manufacturers installed an unpopular piece of equipment at extra costs in the first place? Not from the goodness of their hearts.