For what they are, mopeds seem pretty pricey to me. I haven't really seen any local dealers carrying them, either. I can see the State having mixed feelings about them. Since they burn less fuel, the State makes less revenue from the fuel tax. I suspect if a significant number of mopeds hits the streets there will be a rise in injuries, because I suspect moped drivers will start "obeying" traffic regulations just like bicyclists.

Does anyone know whether the current generation of mopeds uses two-stroke engines?

Predictions are very difficult, especially about the future.

Here in Calif. Two-stoke engines are limited to the very small engines, chain saw size stuff.  I have looked at different two stroke motors for bicycle mounting to make your own whizzer type bike, but they will not ship them to a Calif. address. I'm sure you can get around that rule, but....

They are even trying to get rid of the small two strokers, can you imagine the size and weight of a four stroke chain saw.

I think as more scooters hit the road, the problem will be, the speed of the crash, five to ten mph on a bike is a lot different then the 30 to 60 mph on a scooter.

Every year I read of a few bicyclists going thirty mph down hill on their bike and loosing control and crashing and dieing. The bicyclist helmets are not made for those kinds of speeds, at least mine isn’t.

Gfurlo

The legistators of Ill-annoy have been going more goofy of late.

The chicago city council wants to make it a citable offense to cross the street while text messaging or talking on the phone.

And the state law makers want to have traffic fatalities involving distractions (cell phone) punishable by 3 years in jail, a not very big fine, and loss of driver's license for a year.

Its not so much that any laws come back to haunt us, its that so many laws are so dumb to begin with. I doubt that I would want to focus a legislator's efforts on anything. For years, I have thought of government as a giant game of "Hot Potato" involving dozens of hot potatoes. (This is my polite view of politics.)

Granted, nobody wants to see carnage on the streets much less participate in it. Its really tough to let Darwin prevail amongst us.  Nevertheless, in this instance, I would not want to waste the legislators' time on mo-ped/scooter laws. I would rather hold their feet to the fire of fiscal responsibility and world peace.

I hope everyone enjoyed the opening of the olympics last nite. I liked it a whole lot. Except for the part about Pres. Bush being there. Doesnt he know that there is a war going on involving americans for whom he is C-in-C? I think that he should get his butt out of Bejing and get his boots down in his war zone and fix his idiocy while taking some fire. If I was in his war zone and saw that my C-in-C was having a good time at the olympics, I would wonder where his priorities were? (Chicago's Mare Daley was at the olympics too. I aint very happy about that either. Not because chicagoland shouldnt host the olympics. But because I cant think of a worse idjit to be involved in the effort.)

The two major rules of business: Dont go to court until you are ready to win. Dont let any law be enacted unless it supports your interests. Thus, the main business tactic is to make govt dither until business needs something. Mo-ped/scooter laws seem like a dither in the face of so many other more pressing concerns.

Rant Start:...(deleted due to the automatic activation of Sturgeon's Law)... Rant End.

nobody rides half as well as they know how.

Goofy.

And the state law makers want to have traffic fatalities involving distractions (cell phone) punishable by 3 years in jail, a not very big fine, and loss of driver's license for a year.

I'd vote for it. I spend 4-5 hours a day on the road, and I watch people's lives(including my own!) be jeopardized all day long by distracted drivers.

If I could walk like that, I wouldn't need a doctor.

sunday, august 17, 2008. Chicago Tribune, Perspective, section2, p2

Judith A. Weinstein addresses the legality of helmets. She is a 'public health professional' and college professor. She believes that public health trumps rights of individuals. She got 23.5 column inches to make her points. As near as I can tell, she didnt do much homework on the issue.

Micheal Kerr, VP of the Motorcycle Riders Foundation, got 8.5 column inches to make his rebutt. He played the  traditional biker 'freedom' card. The arguement has been honed over the years so that it provides a nice set response. And it is a favorite with the newspapers. Mike has a tough job. I have been wrestling with the issue my whole life and doubt that I will ever do any better than Mike.

Judith says that bikers without helmets are less likely to have insurance. I wondered 'less likely' than who? Hasn't it been well established that bikers are more likely to be insured than cagers? Why didnt Mike jump on that? (WAG is probably because he doesnt get to see Judith's article before it prints and cant speak to her specific issues.)

Judith makes much of her 'public health professional' status. Yet, she is concerned about a small portion of traffic fatalities rather than the larger portion. I wish Mike would have asked why she cared about bikers with whom she has near zero experience. Why wasn't she more concerned with the larger number of cager fatalities? As a public health professional, shouldnt she be more concerned with doing the most good for the most people with whom she might have something in common? I wished Mike would have addressed her competence to expound on the issue.

Ultimately, I hold the Perspective Editor, Colin McMahon, rersponsible for the paucity of enlightenment on this page of the paper. The fact that Mike got any chance at all to present an alternate view is its only saving grace.

Edit: BTW Judith wanted to know why there isnt a helmet law in Illinois. If she had done any homework, she might have discovered that  Illinois riders worked hard and long to make sure that such a law would not stand and will not be enacted ever again.  Its my perspective that Judith needs to get one that includes a set of priorities.

nobody rides half as well as they know how.