So the parents, attorneys, used their child's unfortunate accidental death to sue anyone they could - including their daughter's friend's family. This won't bring their daughter back, and it probably won't result in any improvement that would prevent a similar crash. It's just extortion because they can. And it probably will leave an even bigger emotional scar on the other girl who lived.
The fact that this was an e-bike is irrelevant, aside from perhaps the extra weight. It's difficult to imagine the kid was using the electric features of the bike while going down that steep hill, because you could probably coast on any bike faster than 25mph on a hill like that. Plenty of non-electric bikes could have a brake failure, assuming that was the case in this situation. And riders can misjudge their bike's handling/braking capabilities with the extra weight of a passenger. None of these things are intentional or justify lawsuits.
Perhaps the state should sue the parents for not helicoptering and ensuring that two kids didn't ride one bike down a steep hill. After all, if every other player involved is liable, then the parents should also be liable. Or nobody is liable because it was an unfortunate accident.
As horrible as it is to imagine losing a child, what I can't imagine is ever suing private individuals, neighbors, over what is clearly an accident. The other girl was only superficially harmed from the crash, so it's likely their daughter's death was one of those freak cases: hit her head just right even though she had a helmet on.
Most active kids probably engage in activities that have a non-zero chance of death or serious injury on a regular basis. 99.999% of the time, if injuries result, they are minor, but there's always going to be a few instances where the outcome is horrific.
Society is worse because of the lawsuit (and fear of lawsuit) culture this type of behavior results in.
Every few years you hear about a kid dying playing baseball (the last major league death was almost a century ago despite the ball flying around a lot faster and hundreds of thousands of games are played by people of all ages every year). It’s certainly awful, but imagine suing the league over a freak comeback hit.
I realize this is a quibble, but two people riding down a steep hill on a single bike would have been a really rare -- if not practically impossible -- occurrence before the advent of e-bikes. Very few conventional bikes were ever sold with capacity for a second rider, and getting to the point of trying that stunt would have involved more endurance than most kids are likely to possess.
On the other hand, many of the the newer motorcycle-style e-bikes are being designed, marketed, and sold, as two-seaters.
One of the rules for the "progressive drivers license" in my state, for teenagers, is that they can't have more than one teenager in the car at a time.
I would argue that pair riding down a hill on a bike would be very common for kids, regardless of whether they would be able to ride back up together or not. Firstly, it's fun and a bit crazy/wild. And the return trip back up might just be two kids walking and pushing one bike. After all, a non-e-bike would get used exactly like this by kids.
Really, giving a kid any kind of moving vehicle means new risks. Even if everything is right, crashes happen. I seriously doubt the one girl bought her e-bike with the strong consideration of it being a "two person bike". Besides, there are plenty of teens or adults who might weigh the same as those two girls together. The second seat is irrelevant.
That's fair. Maybe I've air-brushed my childhood experiences. Also, we didn't have any hills.
Here's one of the latest Trek ebikes. Roughly half of the marketing pictures show two riders. Naturally, the e-bike market is changing rapidly, and whatever I say could be wrong next week.
>but two people riding down a steep hill on a single bike would have been a really rare -- if not practically impossible -- occurrence before the advent of e-bikes
May be uncommon, but so are deaths from bicycle falls. Doesn't make them not exist. I know we would file friends on bikes going down hills from time to time. Usually stopped when we got hurt.
This is a bad take, because the parents are already obviously wealthy. The money will mean nothing to them. They want to force companies like Rad to change, and nothing forces that besides government force (Lol, at this point) or money.
In this case, they want them to not spec bikes with flimsy components like the pathetic brakes described by a half-dozen people in that article as needing constant adjustment, with the consequences of forgetting to do it every couple weeks that you might die. I certainly won't buy an e-bike with those kind of brakes myself now, and the fact that no sane person who knows the risk would, really does suggest that perhaps selling such a bike now that we've seen the risks, is very irresponsible. I hope they get a huge settlement or judgment that makes all e-bike makers reconsider the position on the spectrum of cheap vs. safe that they have chosen.
If you watch many bike shows on youtube, you'll see that a lot of storebought bikes have woefully lacking brakes and usually need proper adjustment frequently to keep them working as good as they possibly can. And even well designed bikes can have failures when used outside of their expected scenarios (broken seatposts, handlebars). Most bike owners don't even think about bike maintenance unless something obvious is broken.
Heck, car parking brakes can fail on hills, so drivers need to know to turn their front wheels the right way to help prevent a runaway car. Many car parking brakes aren't designed for steep hills. Is the car maker at fault if the parking brake fails in an abnormal environment?
Some bikes with caliper brakes can have tire failures due to rim heating from long downhill braking. And a blown front tire could lead to a bad crash. Are the bike makers, wheel makers, brake makers, and tire makers at fault here too? Or perhaps California should be sued for making a road that's too steep?
As for rich people not suing because they need more money... these people sued their daughter's friend's family. How is that going to help? All that will do is add salt to the wound the living child probably has. In fact, it's just evil to do that to the other kid.
The child who was injured was not the driver. Two kids on one bike. The parents of the 11-year old driving, who survived, have paid out $1.2 million so far in a settlement.[1] Rad Power is suing them, on the grounds that the parents of the driver have to take on Rad Power's liability due to their child's bad driving.
The mother seems to be milking this for attention. Lawsuits, Twitter postings, a foundation, a mural, press coverage in People and the New York Times. But where's the forensic evidence that the e-bike failed? One of the arguments in the lawsuit is that the manufacturer is liable because, without power assist, the kids would not have been able to get a bike to the top of that hill.
That's pushing it.
For an alternate view, see this article in Outside Magazine.[2]
I’ve been riding in NYC for over 10 years and the ebike situation is getting ridiculous. People buy a bike that lets them ride fast with no training, and then ride like they are in a Terry Barentsen “Hotline” video (Google it).
Except unlike the people in those videos, they have no skill at all. “Unearned speed” is the term in cycling communities.
I’m genuinely surprised there aren’t more deaths. Blowing red lights without even looking, salmoning, texting while riding, it’s insane.
These stories are going to come out more and more.
I'm all for getting kids out and letting them be independent. I would ride my bike to the store across all sorts of roads when I was 12-13 year olds to buy rated R movies and Parental Advisory CDs. ("Mom, I'm going for a bike ride!")
When you add these 20-25mph+ ebikes (they can be easily fooled to go faster than legal) and no prefrontal cortex development the situation can get scary quick. Unfortunately we don't have the infrastructure or dedicated, separated bike lanes that make them safe. so stupid solutions like "banning them" are obvious and lazy but there's not much else to do immediately.
I know you're talking in general, but this specific case, the Rad bike DOES NOT exceed 20mph under motor power. I own a different model than the one in this case, but mine stops powering the motor at 19.8mph. It is not possible for the bike to go faster than that under power. If they've modified the bike in any way to bypass that limit, that's not the manufacturer's fault. Clearly, this road has a pretty decently steep hill. That would easily make it possible to reach speeds greater than 20mph, but it would not be under power of the motor. At this point, it's not any different from a non-eBike. The fact that this particular bike was an eBike is just a red herring to me.
So, stressing that a bike can go 20-25mph+ is misdirection. Any bike going down the incline described in TFA can reach those speeds. Parents not exercising parental controls and allowing their kids unsupervised activity in known dangerous conditions need to accept some responsibility.
It's not just the speed. The bike is heavier, and it had two people on it, making the braking distance a lot longer. And most untrained riders are afraid of using the front brake because they're afraid of flipping the bike, but on a decline the rear brakes are much less effective.
How much time do you think someone peddling under their own power could maintain 20mph? Unless they have a lot experience biking, not much, so their exposure to high risk speeds is far less than a bike they can hop on and hold that speed the whole time.
20mph is fast as hell when you fall off or hit something.
They were going down a hill. It's trivial for anyone, even an inexperienced rider, to exceed 20mph on a downhill slope on a regular (non electric) bike. They also claim that the combination of disc brakes and a quick release axle is dangerous and can lead to the wheel coming off while at speed..............except the wheel didn't actually come off in this case. I feel bad for these people and their loss, but it's unlikely the fact that this was an electric bike, it had low trail, or a combination of disc brakes and a QR axle had anything to do with this. It's likely it was just the combination of an inexperienced rider, two people on one bike, and a steep hill leading to excess speeds, and would have happened on any other non-electric bike as well.
> How much time do you think someone peddling under their own power could maintain 20mph?
For as long as the hill lasts. I had a simple bike computer on my (not electric) mountain bike growing up, and once hit 33mph going as fast as possible down a hill in my neighborhood. Bombing down that hill I'd probably be at speeds over 20mph for a solid minute. A lot can go wrong in a minute.
Especially since teenage me enjoyed going fast, and would sometimes bike down the hill as fast as possible, then immediately turn around, pedal back up it, and do it again.
But we don't have many instances of flat ground accidents, all the serious injuries in the article involved going downhill, from what I could tell. And that's what I'd expect, as you can decelerate fairly quickly even if your breaks stop working, unless you're headed downhill.
What's this got to do with the price of tea in China? Not once anywhere have I seen someone claiming 20mph speeds powered by meat motor. Where are you coming up with that?
That's the speed most ebikes go to. My claim is that the risk for ebikes is higher than regular bikes because the average speed of ebike riders is higher.
Also, completely aside, 20mph on a regular bike is totally doable, just exhausting. Like running 10mph, most active people can do it pretty easily, but only in short spurts.
I do remember national and local news segments about kids dying or being disabled by cars while they were riding their bikes. Most of the time there had to be some kind of point to drive home so it was about lack of helmets or whatever. Not that they really help vs a car. But that's why I just lied about where I was going. I never would have been allowed to ride across the major roads where I was going. If I had died they would have victim blamed me too.
> Unfortunately we don't have the infrastructure or dedicated, separated bike lanes that make them safe.
How much risk does an ebike going 25mph+ pose to a cyclists on a regular bike, or a pedestrian? I know all of the bike paths near where I live ban any vehicle with a motor.
Does it say "no motorized vehicles"? That does not include ebikes in my area (Southern US).
What I'm talking about is what I saw when I traveled to China. They have these sections of the main streets that are just for 1 person electric vehicles/bicycles. Then they have the main road on one side and the pedestrian sidewalk on the other. That's more what I'm talking about.
> Does it say "no motorized vehicles"? That does not include ebikes in my area (Southern US).
Yeah, exactly. I think that varies area to area. In my area the county manages the trails, and they've made statements saying that those "onewheel" motorized boards aren't allowed, because they're motor vehicles. I assumed that also applied to ebikes, but you may be right.
It's not that I'm against an in-depth accident investigation like this. Go for it, by all means.
But this kind of thing is practically never done for the thousands of children and teenagers that die each year from being hit by cars. It's just expected, normal, the price of doing business.
Singling out ebikes seems like status-quo bias -- they get disproportionate scrutiny simply because they are new, not because of the level of risk they present.
> Singling out ebikes seems like status-quo bias -- they get disproportionate scrutiny simply because they are new, not because of the level of risk they present.
Yes. The local denizens of Nextdoor go on and on about the kids on eBikes, while it's the local drivers who are absolutely slaughtering each other and everyone else: https://ktvz.com/category/news/accidents-crashes/
Second the Strong Towns recommendation. They do great work.
We have one of those Rad bikes, and we paid to have it assembled so it was done right. They don't have the best brakes. So we have it maintained regularly. They do work when maintained. Any kind of bike needs some maintenance from time to time.
We are quite happy with the bike though. It has replaced a bunch of car trips for us, and among other things, I do most of the shopping for our family of four with it.
I am pretty comfortable getting around with a regular bike. I'm a fit cyclist. But the eBike is a step up:
* I can sit a person on the back of it. Even my wife if we're not going far (she's petite).
* I can carry quite a bit of groceries with it and not break a sweat.
* If it is hot outside, I use more pedal assist and get a pleasant cooling effect. In summer I'd much rather hop on my eBike than get in the hot car, as the eBike provides an instant breeze, whereas the car's AC takes some time.
* If it is cold outside, I can layer up a lot more on the eBike. If I start to warm up and feel like I might sweat some, I can use more pedal assist.
* I can cruise up hills, even on the hottest days, without showing up sweaty.
* It is, of course, faster than a regular bike. I like riding bikes and enjoy spending time on them, but sometimes you have to get somewhere quickly.
As others are saying, outside of a few issues with DIY bike assembly, the main issue with eBike safety is automobiles and especially the huge, heavy, high ones that have proliferated in the US in recent years.
We know how to do safer bike infrastructure. There are great examples in other countries that have pioneered it. Whether we want to make it safer or not is a policy choice.
> the main issue with eBike safety is automobiles.
If you're a fit cyclist, riding on decent surfaces, respect the safety speed limit and don't have to ride around pedestrians staring at phone with headphones randomly walking into your path.
Even in countries with good biking infrastructure ebike accident rate is comparable to motorcycles - because for the most part they are shitty motorcycles (brakes, tires, forks/frame) with the safety advantage of being limited to very low speed (which many people circumvent).
Strapping a child seat to a motorcycle would get me arrested/child taken by social services - bit strapping one on a ebike makes me hip.
> Even in countries with good biking infrastructure ebike accident rate is comparable to motorcycles
Well, sort of. If you go by count of any incident regardless of severity, sure. But stratify the results and the picture becomes very different. Motorcycles are far more likely to be seriously injured in an at-fault crash, whereas cyclists are far more likely to be seriously injured if the other party is a car and at fault.
Like I said that's true for single rider that's fit - but what about having a passenger on, or being driven by kid/older person ?
Ebikes seem like bikes but they let you go way faster than you would with a bio bike - I don't think it's responsible treating them as such and using child seats or allowing anyone to ride them without training/helmets.
Helmets don't do shit in a lot of cases when you get hit by an automobile - especially some lifted truck that is going to smash you square in the chest - which is why infrastructure is far more important than helmet wearing. Cyclists wear helmets in the US much more than in the Netherlands - and die at far higher rates because we have bad cycling infrastructure.
It's not a bad idea to wear one in any case in my opinion, but it really is about the infrastructure. Here's the same author of the piece being discussed explaining why he doesn't wear a helmet much:
A few years ago a coworker was hit by a truck riding in to work. He called me before getting into an ambulance and said he’d miss our 830AM meeting. Later, he had no recollection of that, he must have been in shock.
His helmet was split in two, and it messed up his shoulder pretty badly and needed months of PT, but no neurological damage that could be detected.
This is in Silicon Valley, he had moved from the UK a year or two prior.
I'm not disagreeing with that - I'm saying that even with that I still don't think it's responsible to ride around with a kid in a child seat on an ebike. Not judging you for your choice - if you're a responsible and experienced driver I'm sure the risks are way lower.
But it's not something I'd do, or support as a public policy.
> Overall, the report concludes that the main culprit in all bicycle (regular and electric) injuries was the rider’s own behavior (44 percent) — a steering error, for example — while 32 percent was road conditions. And the majority of these accidents affected only the rider. Two-thirds of the 110,000 traffic victims treated in Dutch hospitals last year were cyclists, VeiligheidNL says. The survey was conducted with hospitalized riders between July 2020 and June 2021.
Even in countries with top biking infrastructure ebikes are significanly more dangerous.
Again - if I suggested I drove my kid to kindergarten on a motorcycle I'd have social services on my door. When I'm exposing them to a similar risk on an ebike that's OK ?
If you think about this for two seconds, it's pretty normal that in the country that has done the most to eliminate cars as a risk to cyclists, cyclists injuries are more their own fault.
The stats from the article you cite say that eBikes are 1.6 times more dangerous, whereas road bikes come in at 2.0 and mountain bikes at 3 for mountain bikes.
So in the grand scheme of things, that extra speed has a bit of a cost but less than some kinds of completely human-powered bikes, and it's nowhere near the cost the lack of infrastructure in the US that is absolutely lethal.
Wow, I'm surprised that Keith Bontrager is quoted saying that quick release axles and disc brakes are not a design flaw.
This is absolutely known as a design flaw! Downhill mountain bikers have known for decades (since say the 2000s?) that combination of brakes and wheels is problematic, and it's known as an immediate red flag that a mountain bike is poorly specced and designed. It is done solely because quick release axles are slightly cheaper. Front disc brakes require a thru-axle design on the front wheel!
I also didn't see in the article, if the Rad bike had cable or hydraulic disc brakes. In my opinion, despite being very common, cable disc brakes are under-powered and unreliable for a heavy consumer e-bike. They are powerful but easily lose their adjustment (I have cable disc brakes on one of my own bikes).
I'm pleased to see someone taking these cheap, bad e-bike designs to court.
It's pretty easy to get out of control on a descent in any type of motorized or non motorized vehicle on the hills in the area described when one has little experience. We don't prepare adults for this with cars or children with bicycles, a motorized bicycle however lets one dig a much deeper hole momentum-wise than one would otherwise be capable.
Hydraulic discs are fine on steep hills, I have both GRX and Ultegra ones and they will stop you very fast. That’s on a much lighter bike though, and I doubt they’re putting Ultegra-tier bikes on cheap e-stuff.
Brake fade is a real issue, even with high end brakes. On a long hill, someone who's not comfortable with the speed will ride the brakes, just like inexperienced folks in cars do.
For a different definition of "fine." The problem with the steep hill and brakes for anyone will be losing control from either panic or over application.
Especially on a bicycle where you have a passenger onboard, high speeds are just best avoided.
I don't want to imagine anything about this situation, and my day has been made worse reading up on it. Sucks enough that this family lost a child, but the other child on the bike not only gets to live through an accident that killed a friend, but also is the reason their family got sued for over a million dollars?
And the rhetoric of "nobody has considered kids on these things" is ridiculous. Of course they have. ATVs have been a thing for a long long time. And it has been known for a long time that those are dangerous. Do we even allow three wheelers anymore? I remember we had motorcycles at that age growing up.
I'm sympathetic to the idea that too many kids are getting on these bikes without training or proper headgear and such. I'm not clear on what this story is asserting to be done about it. Some vague assertions about bad designs, but no design points actually called out. They reference an older design that was problematic, but specifically do not accuse the current bikes of using that.
I didn't get to what the current status of this lawsuit is. Is that known?
It's long form, don't expect a bullet point news release. The other family settled, presumably for whatever their insurance would pay. The suit vs RadPower is ongoing as far as I can tell.
There are two design problems. The first is quick releases, which no serious bike manufacturer would spec with disc brakes anymore; the actual industry had long moved on to through-axles at a time when RadRunner was still selling these bikes. They particularly don't make sense to spec when you are selling bikes to people who are expected to have no understanding of how they work.
The other design problem is that manufacturers like RadPower will install the most garbage flexy throwaway shit for components in places where they assume the customer can't tell the difference. That's how you end up with mechanical disc brakes; sure, they have plenty of stopping power when adjusted correctly. But they need to be adjusted for pad wear and a million other things, and when they were made out of sheet metal, that can be hard to do.
But we shouldn't lose track of the most likely cause - they were two kids on a very heavy bike with a very relaxed position (read: difficult to control) going down a 14% incline. They probably picked up much more speed than they were expecting to, panicked and binned it. 99% of the time, they walk away with scrapes, and very rarely, they hit their head in just the wrong way to cause massive damage.
I know the points with regards to the brakes and the components. I even get the point that hydraulic would have better stopping power. I further get the point that you need regular maintenance on these bikes more than you do on the old beater bikes most kids used to use. (Indeed, my road bike is mechanical disk brakes. And we own some of these RAD bikes.)
None of that really enters here, though? The "wheel could have come off due to design" is irrelevant in a case where the wheel didn't come off. That it didn't have enough stopping power could be relevant? But even that wasn't asserted here, instead it was that the operator lost control and they crashed. Which sucks in every sense of the word.
Your gripe that they use cheap components would matter if you can show that this crash was a component failure. That isn't claimed.
This entire comments section is too filled with people grinding their axe to the tune of a dead kid excusing any logic to their claim.
This was a rollercoaster for me. The first half of the article, I'm annoyed at the parents for suing the other girl's parents, the helmet manufacturer, and the bike manufacturer, when they really can't point to anything specific that anyone did that was negligent. Accidents do happen.
The second half, I completely flipped. The author doesn't specifically claim it in this case, but it seems pretty likely that the brakes failed, and that the brakes are either undersized or low quality on these bikes. I haven't owned an e-bike before but the idea that you need to do brake maintenance every 200 miles is totally unreasonable. I've owned owned several bikes and ridden them way more than 200 miles and I don't think I've ever had to maintain the brakes at all.
I had been thinking about buying one of these actually, and now I will steer clear.
> The first half of the article, I'm annoyed at the parents for suing the other girl's parents, the helmet manufacturer, and the bike manufacturer, when they really can't point to anything specific that anyone did that was negligent.
There actually is something in the first half that if you read a little between the lines does seem like it might indicate some negligence by the other girl's mother:
>> Kaye thought it was cute and snapped a photo with her phone and texted it to Eme’s mom, who’s a friend of hers. She replied that if at some point the girls wanted to ride Eme’s sister’s new electric bike (it was a bat mitzvah gift), they were welcome to walk over and use it.
It was a new electric bike, and it was a gift for the sister, and the sister was probably 12 or 13 since that is the age for a bat mitzvah. I don't have any siblings, but from what I saw of friends who did growing up, a 12 or 13 year old who gets a gift like this is going to monopolize it for a while.
I'd expect then that Eme had little to no experience riding it, which Eme's mother should have known. At the very least that means they should not have been allowed to ride together, since riding with a passenger is much harder than riding solo.
Eme's mother than should not have invited the girls over to ride it, unless she was going to supervise to make sure they didn't do anything too risky for their skill level. If she did not supervise that might be negligent. If she did supervise but allowed them ride tandem that might be negligent.
I think that’s a very fair point. I definitely wouldn’t let a friend’s kid ride on the back of an ebike without explicit permission from the parents. That said, my money is on the brakes as the culprit based on all the stories of the author. If the brakes don’t work, even an experienced rider is probably going to get in trouble going down hill.
One of my least popular opinions, on the internet and in real life, is that you should have to be licensed to drive vehicles on the road. Including bikes. Not saying it's the same requirements to drive a car as it is to ride a bike, but just pretending you don't need to learn anything to ride a vehicle in traffic—especially a motorized one like an ebike—doesn't make sense to me. FWIW, I'm an avid bike rider, I just think it's hypocritical at best and dangerous at worst to say (as my jurisdiction does) that bikes are vehicles with all the rights and responsibilities of a car... but hey, you don't actually have to know what those rights and responsibilities are to drive one... or even prove you know how to operate the vehicle... just hop on and get goin'!
I'm Switzerland there are different categories of ebikes. Bikes under 20km/h (25km/h pedal assisted) 500w max do not require anything other than you must be over 14.
Ebikes that go faster (30 km/h or 45km/h pedal assisted max) 1000w max require a min. age of 16 and a special M license or vehicle license. Additionally you are required to get a plate for the Ebike and you must wear a helmet.
All ebikes require day time running lights and fast ebikes will also require a tachometer in 2024.
We do have issues with a new type of rollers that have replaced the old mopets. Those you can drive without any licenses or helmet if you are older than 16. This will probably change however even though they don't go over 20km/h they can still be dangerous.
I have an even less popular opinion that license exams should involve a simulator portion where 5-10% of the time, an unavoidable freak accident occurs and you fail.
In my head, people would calmly walk away from this, and it would serve as a stark reminder of how dangerous this all is, help reduce congestion by reducing licensed drivers, and encourage carpooling and expanded public transit. In reality, an angry mob would probably tar and feather me for trying to enact such a ridiculous idea.
It's sad because if better transit options existed I doubt these e-bikes would have ever proliferated.
Sad also how slow and ineffective government is, from the perspective of housing and transit, and more over from failure to regulate danger to the public well.
E-bikes are the most energy efficient forms of transportation. The problem isn't e-bikes. If anything making e-bikes more ubiquitous would be a good thing since it would lead to better dedicated infrastructure for cycles as well as more cycling training in everyday life.
No it isn't. Riding a bike to a nearby station doesn't require lithium mining and is better for your heart and body. Where did you come up with most efficient transit option? By what metric?
As a counterpoint, I can't imagine a better form of transportation for the area in which I live. It's hilly enough that I really don't want to try and haul my kids (5 and 11, both quite tall) around on a non-motorized bike, but our cargo bike gets us most of the places we want to go faster than a car or bus would. And I get exercise in the process. It's the most delightful form of transportation I've experienced.
I think there are a lot more of these stories to come.
My town (Boulder, CO) is inundated with what look like 12-17 year-olds absolutely tearing around on e-bikes. They are rarely petaling, 50/50 on helmet wearing, and often going 20-30 (or more) mph. I assume they have just defeated the speed governors. This particular group is essentially underaged, unlicensed motorcycle riders that uses roads, bikes lines, and sidewalks as it seems convenient. One of the fundamental safety problems is that although people are very used to cyclists here, they are not used to the car-like speed that these things go.
My town is inundated with people absolutely tearing around in automobiles. They often are staring at their phones, going above the speed limits, and driving huge trucks that are deadly in a crash with a cyclist or pedestrian. And those things don't even have speed governors!
i mean, aren’t 11 and 12 year olds a little young to be cut loose on motorized bikes?
it seems slightly weird to me to be blaming the bike here. bikes experience failures, that’s true of any bike. a more complicated bike has more failure points.
2 youngish kids on an e-bike on a hill with a 14% grade? e-bike or not, that’s a dangerous situation.
I thought you had to be 16 to legally ride an e-bike in Cali; I guess the Radrunner in question isn't powerful enough to be under that restriction? In any case, 11 year olds shouldn't be riding these.
The fact that this was an e-bike is irrelevant, aside from perhaps the extra weight. It's difficult to imagine the kid was using the electric features of the bike while going down that steep hill, because you could probably coast on any bike faster than 25mph on a hill like that. Plenty of non-electric bikes could have a brake failure, assuming that was the case in this situation. And riders can misjudge their bike's handling/braking capabilities with the extra weight of a passenger. None of these things are intentional or justify lawsuits.
Perhaps the state should sue the parents for not helicoptering and ensuring that two kids didn't ride one bike down a steep hill. After all, if every other player involved is liable, then the parents should also be liable. Or nobody is liable because it was an unfortunate accident.