• frog 🐸@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Because I’m in favour of kids not dying unnecessarily?

    Additionally, depending on the country 16-19 is considered old enough to ride a motorbike, in which case they’re also old enough to ride an e-bike at similar speeds. The fact is that teens are a broad range, and there’s plenty of things that 16-19 year olds are considered mature enough to do that 13-15 year olds aren’t. Just because a 16 year old can ride a motorbike and 18 year olds can smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol doesn’t magically make 13 year olds mature enough to do so. The same should apply to e-bikes: an e-bike that can go faster than 20mph is basically an electric motorbike, and should be similarly age-restricted.

      • frog 🐸@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        More than they should, especially when they’re on electric bikes going at speeds up to 45mph. There is plenty of evidence that directly demonstrates that the chance of death increases exponentially with increased speed. The more children there are on e-bikes with their speed limiters cut, the more children die unnecessarily as a result. And those aged 13-14 are children, not adults. You’re not going to change my mind on this, and I’m not going to change yours, so there seems to be no point in debating this further.

        • Quatity_Control@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is no debate and I’m not trying to change your opinion. If you could please follow the bouncing ball, I’m explaining to you that your opinion has no data to support it. You’re just clutching your pearl necklace and screeching. Feel free to continue to do so, but please don’t continue to post irrelevant articles and claim the whole brain development thing. It’s simply not relevant.