I wrote this as a response to the other thread, the thread got closed while I was writing it . . .

I can see both sides of this and believe that both sides are sincere. 350 fears another kill off. A kill off is differentiated from a die off, where a trend fizzles out due to a lack of interest; in a kill off, some act of legislation ends a trend.

He has stated that he fears what happened to mopeds in the early eighties. For those who don't recall. The nation faced a severe fuel shortage. One response to this is that many people started riding mopeds. They were, effectively, unregulated. I still have one with a city bicycle license label on it.

They were being used in the place of autos by many people . . . obviously something had to be done to stop that.

The solution was to declare them to be motor vehicles. This added the licensing and insurance requirements, creating, for all intents and purposes, the expenses of a second car. The result was that they all but disappeared, the change was nearly overnight.

I feel his fear has a solid historic foundation. However, there is a difference this time. This time there has been an effort to address the issue proactively. This is why laws, like those in California, are so important. These laws serve to define what an e-bike is, something that did not happen in the moped boom of the late 70's.

The moped boom occurred in a legislative vacuum. The moped filled a hole in the law. On the other side, the e-bike is being crafted to comply with, and create, laws.

What that law will say is the issue that 350 wants to see filled with his pet definition. On the other hand, I feel that the definition used by California is well thought out. A place that I do agree with 350 is that the "high power" e-bikes that dominate the ES forum may have the effect of turning opinion against e-bikes as they may become a means of skirting motorcycle laws.

That being said, a small number of hooligans should not be permitted to shape an entire transportation solution. I support performance limits, not power limits. I have seen many cases where the presence of a throttle has made the e-bike significantly more rideable.

We agree that there needs to be a definition, we just disagree on what that definition should be.

. . . we also disagree on one other point. I hold that this debate does not need to be inserted into nearly every e-bike thread . . .350 clearly feels that it should be part of nearly every e-bike thread. that is a strong point of disagreement.