California Assembly member proposes driver's license for e-bikes

[mschwett]

Kids have been riding bikes on public roads (such as neighborhood streets) for 100 years without licenses or insurance. Yes, kids on 2 wheels is dangerous but the danger to others is minimal - it's vehicles hitting people on bikes that is the majority of the safety problems and this goes for ebikes as well. I do agree that parents need to do a better job helping their kids understand how to be as safe as possible and to keep out of streets as much as possible (remain on sidewalks when possible).

The idea that an ebike that can assist to 20mph or even 28mph is the real safety threat is simply not true. Most riders on anolog bikes achieve speeds in that range on downhills and can even achieve those speeds on flats for some distance will effort. There really is not added safety risk because ebikes can average higher speeds but that is what is implied over and over again by these threads.

kids have been riding on public roads for 100 years on UNPOWERED bikes. maximum speeds reached on level ground are closer to 10mph than 28mph. the risks are completely different and the results of the last few years in places where kids ride ebikes have validated what ought to have been common sense for any parents : don't give children relatively powerful motorized vehicles to operate on public roads and sidewalks.

 

[Chargeride]

by 2050 walking will require a licence.

There is no end to it by its very concept.

If Jesus appeared tomorrow, he would require healing and feeding documents.

 

[RunForTheHills]

Not long ago, I watched a teen or young adult on an analog bike cut diagonally across a busy intersection against a red light. He didn't even slow down approaching the intersection. Of course a bad driver in a car is much more dangerous and there are just as many, if not more, of those.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

by 2050 walking will require a licence.

There is no end to it by its very concept.

If Jesus appeared tomorrow, he would require healing and feeding documents.

So let's hear your solution. Assuming you'd like to keep the ebike access you so clearly enjoy.

 

[Ken M]

Strongly disagree. Ebikes enable weak, untrained riders (like kids who'd never leave their screens for bicycles otherwise) to reach and maintain speeds otherwise well out of their reach on flats and hills.

The lower-end RadRunner-type ebikes typically ridden by kids here in coastal SoCal are also usually 2-3 times heavier than unmotorized bikes, and their Surron-like e-motos can be even heavier.

So, double the mass and speed and you have an ebike with EIGHT TIMES the kinetic energy to deposit into the pedestrian it hits. That alone completely changes the injury potential.

But powerful ebikes also enable weak, untrained, judgment-deficient riders to do wheelies and other dangerous stunts on busy streets and MUPs and donuts and rooster tails in parks and on trails. And that's exactly what many of the teen male ebikers here do.

All of which is precisely why this sign just appeared at a nearby park:

View attachment 208868

This in a place where seemingly everybody young and old has an ebike and can ride it year round. And where local governments have spent literally billions (in San Diego County alone) on infrastructure to promote bicycles as car replacements and healthy outdoor recreation.

We're losing the bushel for failure to identify and deal directly with the bad apples — complicit manufacturers, dealers, and parents included.d

I do view e-motorcycles like the Sur-ron as problematic but my guess is that there have been few pedestrian injuries caused by ebikes on mixed use trails. Most of the serious accidents have most likely been autos hitting ebikes or kids crashing going a bit too fast. I understand that hospitals are reporting large increases in emergency care due to ebike accidents but is that just mimicking the increased use? This matters.

I've seen data from European studies that indicated that the vast majority of bike riders were hitting average speeds exceeding 20mph (typically around 28mph) when riding down hills so these top speeds have been common for a long time. Sure ebikes allow riders to go faster on flats and uphills but is that where most of the rider caused accidents occur or is in on downhills? This is information that should be important to making sound safety decisions but it's not possible for find the statistics.

Kids do think they are indistructable....we've all be thru that phase and learn it's not true. I do not want any kid to suffer a bad accident (I broke 3 cervical vertebrae in my neck at 57 year old when I hit ice on wooden bridge that forever altered my riding ability but I still love ebikes for their potential). I think there is regulatory capture efforts by the oil and auto industries to keep ebikes in the fitness/leisure/recreation use realm which is why I believe it's important to have regulations that enable effective urban mobility on ebikes.

 

[stompandgo]

I spend more time riding on rail trails (mixed use paths) than any other surface, and the unruly high speed e-bike riders are a problem. It's one thing to be riding at 21-22 mph with nobody else around, and slowing to a reasonable speed when coming across another user. Being buzzed by a pack of kids going 40mph is another. On the flats. There's no comparison to analog riders.

The CCRT just put up radar speed limit signs that display your speed. They supposedly have cameras in them. I will take a closer look on my next ride.

 

[6zfshdb]

I spend more time riding on rail trails (mixed use paths) than any other surface, and the unruly high speed e-bike riders are a problem. It's one thing to be riding at 21-22 mph with nobody else around, and slowing to a reasonable speed when coming across another user. Being buzzed by a pack of kids going 40mph is another. On the flats. There's no comparison to analog riders.

The CCRT just put up radar speed limit signs that display your speed. They supposedly have cameras in them. I will take a closer look on my next ride.

I ride the same way and am also seeing more of these reckless e-motos on the trail. So much so that I bought a Garmin RearVue 820 radar to warn me of encounters with these illegal bikes.

 

[Mr. Coffee]

Just to be clear, this thread was about AB 530. Which died in committee as of February 2024. This is a zombie thread.

 

[Chargeride]

So let's hear your solution. Assuming you'd like to keep the ebike access you so clearly enjoy.

Limit the reach of global totalitarionism.
They offer no promise of a line in the sand for absolute control, they are high as a kite on it.
Modelling the world on Singapore will eventually turn California into a zero tolerance authoritarian state.

Its a glorious irony that the British were beaten there by a bicycle blitzkreig.

Why did Singapore fall?

On the 15th of February 1942, Lt General Arthur Percival signed the largest surrender in British history at Singapore. The city was supposed to be a fortress, but his force of 85,000 men had been defeated by just 35,000 Japanese troops. So how did the Japanese defeat a numerically superior...

www.iwm.org.uk

 

[Mr. Coffee]

Limit the reach of global totalitarionism.
They offer no promise of a line in the sand for absolute control, they are high as a kite on it.
Modelling the world on Singapore will eventually turn California into a zero tolerance authoritarian state.

That is a load of horse poop.

In a world where corrupt jack booted goons are disappearing people in the middle of the night, to conflate "totalitarianism" with "e-bike regulations" is obscene. By making such foolish statements you are trivializing the real suffering and fear that too many people have in 2026.

 

[Chargeride]