Originally Posted by patc
You're thinking about it back-wards. Its not that some things (e.g. electric-assist bikes) are specifically banned; rather, anything NOT defined as allowed is the HTA is banned. To allow a new class of vehicle on the road it must be specifically added to the HTA.
I understand, but I guess my point is that electric bikes are so similar to regular bikes, they are almost in the same class. But yeah, I understand though - there is no particular logic to these things. Vodka is legal, tobacco is legal, marijuana isn't even though the damage inflicted is comparable - that's life.
In broader terms, I don't understand this need to list specific classes of vehicles. It doesn't really matter so much WHAT it is, does it? What matters is what it DOES. So it would make so much more sense to just define a set of criteria that a contraption must satisfy to be allowed on the road (you know - dimensions, braking capabilities, stuff like that) to ensure everyone's safety and convenience (obviously something 10 metres wide capable of max speed of 5 kmph shouldn't be allowed...
) But I know, I'm getting logical and reasonable again and that's not the way it works.
Seriously though - it is sad. There are so many wonderful machines: human-powered, engine-powered or a combo - that have so many cool applications and unique features and are fun to ride. Yet they are artificially restricted from using public roads which makes them impractical. The world would've been so much more fun if people had more transportational choices...
Originally Posted by patc
As to why it took so long, hey, this is the government!
Too true, too true...