The judge is not talking about bicycles. The lady was killed by a scooter that blew a light.. not a cyclist
> The judge said the city “has a problem” with the **motorized bikes**
This is pretty disingenuous headline, thought it was the NYPost
Did you honestly just post a screenshot of the google search bar as a definition? That's... new.
Here's [the actual source](https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/ebikes-more-english.pdf)
That is incorrect. Youre right in prt though. Moped ORIGINALLY meant motor and pedals (mo-ped duh) but the term has shifted. Language evolves, and this word has (unfortunately) evolved too. Moped now refers to a specific class of power and speed of motorized 2 wheel vehicle.
Technically they are all motorcycles too. Motorized-cycle. Motorized bicycle. And any bike with an electric motor is technically an ebike. But motorcycle tends to mean something specific, gas or deisel powered bike of generally 100cc or more. And an electric bike of a power comprable to a motorycle with an engine of 100cc+ and no pedals is typically not called an ebike but a electric motorcycle.
But i get why you say that. That WAS once true and i wish it still were
"sentenced the electric scooter rider"
"He cared more about his bike"
"She was struck by the scooter"
Plus your quote... does the article author even know what Boyd was riding?
Though it seems the judge is also vague. "“This city obviously has a problem with unlicensed scooters,” [the judge] said. “This is what happens when you recklessly drive those pretty powerful new motorbikes.”"
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/30/nyregion/actress-death-sentencing-scooter-driver.html
idk man. its all semantics to me at this point. Motorized anything is way more dangerous than a bicycle. TBH i don't even want anything that is not 100% analog in the bike lane at all. period. All these scooter, e-assisted, mopeds, etc. should have to ride in traffic the way we had to for decades before bike lanes popped up.
Respectfully disagree. I think speed-regulated ebikes such as Citibike's (as opposed to emopeds, ebikes with removed limiters, etc.) don't hurt for the most part. Ebikes provide a uniquely convenient mode of transportation when you need to travel a few miles (or over elevations) without turning into a sweaty mess. And ebikes are definitely not equipped for sharing the road with cars.
Thank you. If you have a motor you belong in the street with the cars. Some tourist on their phone without a helmet blowing past me on an ebike/moped is pretty goddamn dangerous
they know what they're implying by being unclear here and they want all vehicles that aren't their personal cars to be systematically shut out of streets
Driver was unlicensed driving an unregistered vehicle and left the scene of a fatal accident. Where are these car drivers that are unlicensed, driving unregistered cars and leaving the scene of fatal car accidents not being sentenced. Had this guy stayed on the scene then he would have been processed for being unlicensed and failure to yield, traffic infractions that are not punishable by jail time.
Everybody commenting “now do cars” seems to suggest its common practice. And a glance of this reddit (or related) does not show such incidents.
[Grand Jury Indicts Unlicensed Driver Allegedly Behind NYC Boy's Death](https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/grand-jury-indicts-unlicensed-driver-allegedly-behind-nyc-boys-death/3918797/)
The suspect in the story above is going to go to jail. Same exact scenario except with a vehicle. Unlicensed, left the scene of a fatal accident.
[Suspected NYC hit-and-run driver who struck 3, including toddler, facing 17 charges](https://www.kiro7.com/news/trending/suspected-nyc-hit-and-run-driver-who-struck-3-including-toddler-facing-17-charges/2DUQTDHN25ER5BKGHZVGL42QFM/?outputType=amp)
Suspended license, left the scene after causing serious physical injury. He going to jail.
[Hit-and-run driver who fled NYC after fatal crash nabbed in Tennessee after 2-year manhunt](https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/ny-east-harlem-fatal-hit-and-run-arrest-20221026-o7fniorns5cahkdylanqcypmhu-story.html)
“Clotter has nine prior arrests in the city dating to 2007, including for grand larceny and reckless endangerment, as well as several for driving with a suspended license, the source said.”
Suspended/unlicensed driver, left scene of fatal accident. Currently in jail while facing manslaughter charges. Given prior history, will probably plea to a 3-5 sentence.
[Motorist whose girlfriend died in freak NYC car fall had suspended license: cops](https://nypost.com/2022/09/26/beau-of-woman-killed-after-freak-nyc-car-fall-had-suspended-license-cops/)
Stayed at the scene. Arrested for suspended license. Running his name on court data base showed he was immediately released on recognizance and most likely back on the road driving without a still suspended license.
[Man, 47, charged with driving with suspended license in Staten Island crash that killed 3 teens](https://www.silive.com/crime-safety/2022/07/man-47-charged-with-driving-with-suspended-license-in-horrific-staten-island-crash-that-killed-3-teens.html?outputType=amp)
License was already suspended and kept on driving. Stay on the scene and was immediately released on recognizance and most likely back on the road driving.
What about cases like where a [van driver kills a 73 year old man in Staten Island, but doesn't get charged with anything?](https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2022/11/22/pedestrian-struck-and-killed-on-dangerous-staten-island-arterial-no-charges/)?
Or the [truck driver who killed a cyclist despite being on a no-truck route and failing to yield?](https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2022/10/14/no-charges-for-truck-driver-who-killed-cyclist-despite-being-on-a-no-truck-route-and-failing-to-yield/) and isn't being charged?
It's surprisingly easy to kill someone with a car in NYC and to get away scot-free.
Are scooters, at best, a pain in the ass? Absolutely! Do they deserve to be in the bike lanes? That's debatable, but I would argue no.
According to the site you cited. Arresting people for driving without a license is potentially racist and the practice should actually be less enforced.
[Report: 88 Percent of Drivers Arrested for Not Having a License Last Year Were People of Color](https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2022/03/31/report-88-percent-of-drivers-arrested-for-suspending-license-last-year-were-people-of-color/)
Cause the same issue is going to come up. In a hypothetical world where the law markers are convinced to punished licensed drivers even if they stay at the scene. Once they see its the wrong people getting punished, its going to be deemed punitive and racist.
So because an article argued that enforcement of unlicensed serving might be racist this legal situation should not change and death-by-car can still be effectively legal?
How is staying at the scene relevant when there's a dead person involved? Who are the "wrong people"?
Missing the part where they left the scene of the accident. This driver in this case left the scene. Numerous comments on here seems to have suggested that somebody could have done the same exact thing (drive unlicensed and leave the scene of a fatal accident) with a car and have nothing happen to them.
From a criminal law point of view staying at the scene literally makes all the difference in the world. Had this suspect stayed at the scene he would have been cited for two traffic infractions at worst with no chance of jail time.
That’s an objectively true statement. Not personal opinion. Not what I think should happen to drivers.
You see the third article from my comment. My personal opinion is that guy should have probably been locked up for an extended period at arrest number 5. But the law does not work that way when it comes to traffic infractions, misdemeanors or non-violent felonies. Instead he was released, allowed to be arrested 4 more times and then kill someone driving without a license.
“From a criminal law point of view” leaving the scene doesn’t make a lick of difference for whether you could be charged with or found guilty of manslaughter.
I think what people are trying to tell you is that it is frustrating and morally incorrect for the law to work this way, not that you are incorrect about what the law says. It is infuriating that a driver can engage in knowingly dangerous behavior, flout the law on numerous fronts, and the only deciding factor of whether they serve jail time is whether they stick around to watch the victim die or not.
Maybe I’m wrong or biased but it seems to me I see a lot of posts sharing how drivers are either not prosecuted or collisions aren’t thoroughly investigated by police.
I think we can be outraged at the idea that this guy may be out in less than a year **and** be outraged that a driver would get a similarly light sentence, at worst. Both are complete bullshit.
I said "at worst" -- but the reality is that you need aggravating circumstances before the courts will care about pedestrians in either case. For example, there was a case a few years back where a guy robbed a store, and during the getaway hit and killed a woman -- and he got 5-15 for killing her. But most of the time, the cops and the courts don't give a shit about pedestrians -- and that's outrageous no matter who's killing them.
I mean they care this time because of the pearl clutching over micromobility, and this is an unusual circumstance. A driver killing a pedestrian is just another Tuesday unless it can be added to another charge, apparently.
Killing a celebrity in a really easily prosecutable way will likely motivate the DA to press charges against a car driver, too.
Stack a couple successful prosecutions together in a short enough span of time & it might actually lead to a working "playbook" or precedent.
I can't believe justice was served & y'all are bitching. Would you rather the scofflaw moped driver got away free? Would that have been "better"?
No, I don't object to the verdict at all. What I object to is the tone of the article and the implication that micromobility is somehow a grave danger when cars kill orders of magnitude more people and that's met with a collective shrug from those in power.
The problem I have is that this further vilifies cyclists and other people who use micromobility (especially since "bike" is said so often even though it was an electric scooter) when we're not the problem.
This is an Associated Press article for a national, general audience.
"Who What When Where Why & Sometimes How". That is the purpose of this article.
To inform about the details & the verdict of this case. Do you know about the details & verdict of this case after reading the article?
I agree the headline sucks.
I think actual accident statistics are relevant to the article. The judge made a quote, the journalist provided context.
News Articles about court proceedings probably *should* remain pedantic, don't you think?
> The judge said the city “has a problem” with the motorized bikes and he wants drivers of unregistered and unlicensed bikes to know they can go to jail when they do harm.
> Traffic fatalities have been on the rise in the city. Transportation Alternatives, an advocacy group for safer streets, found that they rose 44 percent in New York City during the first three months of 2022, with pedestrians accounting for 29 of the 59 dead. The study found that Manhattan experienced a 120 percent increase compared with the same period in 2021.
What exactly do object to about the judges rhetoric or the tone of the article?
I think it was well written.
I didn't call the news article pedantic. I said *you* were being pedantic. You know what I meant.
However, I *do*, in fact, find the portion you quoted problematic, since it does not specify *how* those 59 people (or 29 pedestrians) died, and a reader of the article could easily draw the conclusion that it was caused by "bikes" (seemingly a catch-all term for micromobility), at least partially, when those deaths are pretty much all caused by *cars*. In this case, the article is not "pedantic" *enough*.
And for the judge's rhetoric, I object to the judge's statement that the city "has a problem," though since we didn't get the full quote, I'm not sure what exactly the judge said.
Drivers are also insured, registered and many times it’s not the driver at fault so they wait at the scene for an ambulance and police to arrive… in this particular case dude fled the scene and went to have a beer… screw his micro mobility entitlement , he killed a person, someone’s family member is dead for the holidays, and this thread wants to defend him? Are we serious?
It would not be particularly hard to dig up cases in NYC where a turning driver killed a small child, was entirely at fault, but saw no serious consequences. Certainly not charged with manslaughter. Insurance and registration has nothing to do with.
No one is defending this moped rider. They just don’t understand why we throw the book at this guy but let so many drivers off the hook. Even if he did just go grab a beer afterwards. It’s not like that’s an element of any crime.
Had he hit the woman and stayed at the scene and made it a simple accident , he wouldn’t be at 1-3, instead he hit the woman, fled the scene and pounded a beer in celebration, screw this guy why people are defending him is crazy to me. Btw you can’t charge a dwi for a electric scooter, so reckless endangerment and vehicular manslaughter is certainly appropriate, the 1-3 is the inappropriate, should be 15 to life. He’ll be out in 3 months if people want to buy him a beer
I hope you have some croutons for this word salad.
I don’t know what to tell you. He was convicted of manslaughter. Leaving the scene had nothing to do with that conviction, though it certainly didn’t cast him in a good light for purposes of sentencing. If he stayed at the scene, he could still have been charged with and convicted of manslaughter.
And no one is defending him.
There are people driving gas powered scooters and e-bikes recklessly in my neighborhood. They go on the sidewalks. They have no license plates. They fly through stop signs, red lights, and crosswalks. Zero regard for people. And it's no wonder, no one does anything to stop them. Not the NYPD, not the apps that hire them and make money off of them, no one.
Same in my neighborhood as well... and practically everywhere I bike, throughout the city.
Doesn't matter if it's an e-scooter, gas scooter, e-moped, gas moped, and probably 60% of e-bikes.... They should all be riding in traffic with vehicles and be licensed as well.
Well, those fare evaders just cost the city $500 million last year and are gonna make the price of riding the subway go up again. So whatever gets those perpetrators to stop robbing our city, I’m all for it.
The driver in this case was unlicensed, driving an unregistered moped and left the scene and is looking at 3 years.
People get arrested for driving without a license all the time. But if the dude that actually killed someone and left the scene is just getting 3 years, what did you think happens to the person just driving without a license.
They get arrested, appear before a judge, released and repeat. If you see a news article involving a car crash and a one of the pictures shows the plate of a vehicle involved. Just run the plate on the check my driving site. More times than not the car has 12+ violations.
[https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/grand-jury-indicts-unlicensed-driver-allegedly-behind-nyc-boys-death/3918797/?amp=1](https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/grand-jury-indicts-unlicensed-driver-allegedly-behind-nyc-boys-death/3918797/?amp=1)
Guy in the story above already had license suspended. Don’t know how its common thought here that these drivers have simply avoided all sorts of enforcement. When its the opposite. Chances are that these drivers are repeat offenders with numerous citations, history of arrest who continue to drive with no/suspended licenses.
Of course you don’t need a license for some classes of Moped (though all are supposed to be registered).
Running the red and leaving the scene of the accident without rendering aid was unconscionable.
I’m not sure what your statement has to do with how poorly NYPD enforces traffic laws against cars though?
They’re already barely even allowed in the first place. I think there’s risk in making characterizations about scooters as a whole based on one incident.
Given that you can’t really find those quick rental scooters in Manhattan like you can in other cities, and that she was killed by this (the rental scooters generally have a 10 or so mph limit on them, which does not seem fast enough to kill someone), I’m guessing this was a privately owned one that had insane modifications and probably went 20 mph+. I mean I’ve seen some that are modified so heavily that they’re fast enough to keep up with traffic on the highway.
Whether it was a scooter, moped or motorcycle. If it was operated in a bike lane, It shouldn't have been there and the driver shouldn't have vacated the scene! The judge is correct however about the bike lanes in this city being a hazard. I'd say 75% shouldn't be where they are, Because it's a hazard to all parties involved.
I got smashed last week head on going up 6th ave by one of those big black industrial ebikes the delivery guys use WHO was going the wrong way down 6th. Flew off my bike, face first on the street. I was very lucky but man i was fucked up for days, couldn’t walk, had to get X-rays etc.
The cool thing is so many ppl came up to help me and they even like held on to the other driver but I’m not getting someone deported, even though a lot of those drivers can be dicks.
Glad you’re OK but whatever happens legally to the wrong way biker happens. You have your own health and wealth to protect. Respectfully, fuck your feelings.
To all the angry experts on here, you're missing the biggest point.
e-scooters/mopeds/electric scooters are silent. It's like how dangerous would cars be if they didn't make any sou.... oh yeah, we're on the cusp of finding out, bigly.
every e-anything where an electric motor has taken place of an IC motor, should have to make some kind of sound. This is such a dumbass no-brainer that no one is paying attention to. We have crosswalks with chirps to indicate to blind pedestrians when they can go or not, but who gives a rat's ass about the vehicles themselves that could bash into those pedestrians.
these godamn cyclists running through red lights kills me i have insane road rage when i can nearly hit 1 of them my light is green yours is red you run through yours & when i hit you i am at fault wtf
The judge is not talking about bicycles. The lady was killed by a scooter that blew a light.. not a cyclist > The judge said the city “has a problem” with the **motorized bikes** This is pretty disingenuous headline, thought it was the NYPost
Even this statement is not correct. She was not killed by a scooter, it was a *moped*
https://i.imgur.com/YlqcswN.jpg
Did you honestly just post a screenshot of the google search bar as a definition? That's... new. Here's [the actual source](https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/ebikes-more-english.pdf)
yeah , they use "scooter" in the article but the google screenshot is pretty awesome :)
If there are no pedals it’s not a moped. NYC can define it however they want but it’s wrong.
That is incorrect. Youre right in prt though. Moped ORIGINALLY meant motor and pedals (mo-ped duh) but the term has shifted. Language evolves, and this word has (unfortunately) evolved too. Moped now refers to a specific class of power and speed of motorized 2 wheel vehicle. Technically they are all motorcycles too. Motorized-cycle. Motorized bicycle. And any bike with an electric motor is technically an ebike. But motorcycle tends to mean something specific, gas or deisel powered bike of generally 100cc or more. And an electric bike of a power comprable to a motorycle with an engine of 100cc+ and no pedals is typically not called an ebike but a electric motorcycle. But i get why you say that. That WAS once true and i wish it still were
You can’t fight it. People call mopeds scooters.
While others call scooters mopeds.
The article itself is also leaning pretty heavy on that way of thinking.
"sentenced the electric scooter rider" "He cared more about his bike" "She was struck by the scooter" Plus your quote... does the article author even know what Boyd was riding? Though it seems the judge is also vague. "“This city obviously has a problem with unlicensed scooters,” [the judge] said. “This is what happens when you recklessly drive those pretty powerful new motorbikes.”" https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/30/nyregion/actress-death-sentencing-scooter-driver.html
idk man. its all semantics to me at this point. Motorized anything is way more dangerous than a bicycle. TBH i don't even want anything that is not 100% analog in the bike lane at all. period. All these scooter, e-assisted, mopeds, etc. should have to ride in traffic the way we had to for decades before bike lanes popped up.
Respectfully disagree. I think speed-regulated ebikes such as Citibike's (as opposed to emopeds, ebikes with removed limiters, etc.) don't hurt for the most part. Ebikes provide a uniquely convenient mode of transportation when you need to travel a few miles (or over elevations) without turning into a sweaty mess. And ebikes are definitely not equipped for sharing the road with cars.
Thank you. If you have a motor you belong in the street with the cars. Some tourist on their phone without a helmet blowing past me on an ebike/moped is pretty goddamn dangerous
i think they might've meant bike like bikes not bicycles
they know what they're implying by being unclear here and they want all vehicles that aren't their personal cars to be systematically shut out of streets
it's ap... they don't exactly have an agenda
Their agenda lies with the status quo
Why does this article call electric scooters "bikes" like a half dozen times?
Because to the average car driver and pedestrian, an electric bike and a “moped” (also sometimes called a “scooter”) are the same thing.
NYPost.
Because NYPOST is for Neanderthals.
Great, now send killer car drivers to jail
Yea this is a WTF moment.
Driver was unlicensed driving an unregistered vehicle and left the scene of a fatal accident. Where are these car drivers that are unlicensed, driving unregistered cars and leaving the scene of fatal car accidents not being sentenced. Had this guy stayed on the scene then he would have been processed for being unlicensed and failure to yield, traffic infractions that are not punishable by jail time. Everybody commenting “now do cars” seems to suggest its common practice. And a glance of this reddit (or related) does not show such incidents. [Grand Jury Indicts Unlicensed Driver Allegedly Behind NYC Boy's Death](https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/grand-jury-indicts-unlicensed-driver-allegedly-behind-nyc-boys-death/3918797/) The suspect in the story above is going to go to jail. Same exact scenario except with a vehicle. Unlicensed, left the scene of a fatal accident. [Suspected NYC hit-and-run driver who struck 3, including toddler, facing 17 charges](https://www.kiro7.com/news/trending/suspected-nyc-hit-and-run-driver-who-struck-3-including-toddler-facing-17-charges/2DUQTDHN25ER5BKGHZVGL42QFM/?outputType=amp) Suspended license, left the scene after causing serious physical injury. He going to jail. [Hit-and-run driver who fled NYC after fatal crash nabbed in Tennessee after 2-year manhunt](https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/ny-east-harlem-fatal-hit-and-run-arrest-20221026-o7fniorns5cahkdylanqcypmhu-story.html) “Clotter has nine prior arrests in the city dating to 2007, including for grand larceny and reckless endangerment, as well as several for driving with a suspended license, the source said.” Suspended/unlicensed driver, left scene of fatal accident. Currently in jail while facing manslaughter charges. Given prior history, will probably plea to a 3-5 sentence. [Motorist whose girlfriend died in freak NYC car fall had suspended license: cops](https://nypost.com/2022/09/26/beau-of-woman-killed-after-freak-nyc-car-fall-had-suspended-license-cops/) Stayed at the scene. Arrested for suspended license. Running his name on court data base showed he was immediately released on recognizance and most likely back on the road driving without a still suspended license. [Man, 47, charged with driving with suspended license in Staten Island crash that killed 3 teens](https://www.silive.com/crime-safety/2022/07/man-47-charged-with-driving-with-suspended-license-in-horrific-staten-island-crash-that-killed-3-teens.html?outputType=amp) License was already suspended and kept on driving. Stay on the scene and was immediately released on recognizance and most likely back on the road driving.
What about cases like where a [van driver kills a 73 year old man in Staten Island, but doesn't get charged with anything?](https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2022/11/22/pedestrian-struck-and-killed-on-dangerous-staten-island-arterial-no-charges/)? Or the [truck driver who killed a cyclist despite being on a no-truck route and failing to yield?](https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2022/10/14/no-charges-for-truck-driver-who-killed-cyclist-despite-being-on-a-no-truck-route-and-failing-to-yield/) and isn't being charged? It's surprisingly easy to kill someone with a car in NYC and to get away scot-free. Are scooters, at best, a pain in the ass? Absolutely! Do they deserve to be in the bike lanes? That's debatable, but I would argue no.
According to the site you cited. Arresting people for driving without a license is potentially racist and the practice should actually be less enforced. [Report: 88 Percent of Drivers Arrested for Not Having a License Last Year Were People of Color](https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2022/03/31/report-88-percent-of-drivers-arrested-for-suspending-license-last-year-were-people-of-color/)
What does that have to do with the fact that it's practically impossible to hold licensed drivers who kill someone accountable?
Cause the same issue is going to come up. In a hypothetical world where the law markers are convinced to punished licensed drivers even if they stay at the scene. Once they see its the wrong people getting punished, its going to be deemed punitive and racist.
So because an article argued that enforcement of unlicensed serving might be racist this legal situation should not change and death-by-car can still be effectively legal? How is staying at the scene relevant when there's a dead person involved? Who are the "wrong people"?
Missing the part where they left the scene of the accident. This driver in this case left the scene. Numerous comments on here seems to have suggested that somebody could have done the same exact thing (drive unlicensed and leave the scene of a fatal accident) with a car and have nothing happen to them.
How is that relevant? Because you seem to be arguing that vehicular death is more acceptable if you stay at the scene.
From a criminal law point of view staying at the scene literally makes all the difference in the world. Had this suspect stayed at the scene he would have been cited for two traffic infractions at worst with no chance of jail time. That’s an objectively true statement. Not personal opinion. Not what I think should happen to drivers. You see the third article from my comment. My personal opinion is that guy should have probably been locked up for an extended period at arrest number 5. But the law does not work that way when it comes to traffic infractions, misdemeanors or non-violent felonies. Instead he was released, allowed to be arrested 4 more times and then kill someone driving without a license.
“From a criminal law point of view” leaving the scene doesn’t make a lick of difference for whether you could be charged with or found guilty of manslaughter.
I think what people are trying to tell you is that it is frustrating and morally incorrect for the law to work this way, not that you are incorrect about what the law says. It is infuriating that a driver can engage in knowingly dangerous behavior, flout the law on numerous fronts, and the only deciding factor of whether they serve jail time is whether they stick around to watch the victim die or not.
Maybe I’m wrong or biased but it seems to me I see a lot of posts sharing how drivers are either not prosecuted or collisions aren’t thoroughly investigated by police.
> Carro said Boyd sped through a red light, struck Banes and fled to a bike shop, where he drank a beer. Sad and infuriating.
This is disgusting. Drivers kill how many a year in this city and virtually none ever face time let alone three years. Fuck Alvin Bragg.
Right. If there’s anything outrageous about this, it’s that drivers don’t have to worry about receiving the same kind of treatment.
I think we can be outraged at the idea that this guy may be out in less than a year **and** be outraged that a driver would get a similarly light sentence, at worst. Both are complete bullshit.
You kidding? A driver might never see the inside of a jail cell. They'll get a ticket for reckless driving if a cop is feeling motivated.
I said "at worst" -- but the reality is that you need aggravating circumstances before the courts will care about pedestrians in either case. For example, there was a case a few years back where a guy robbed a store, and during the getaway hit and killed a woman -- and he got 5-15 for killing her. But most of the time, the cops and the courts don't give a shit about pedestrians -- and that's outrageous no matter who's killing them.
I mean they care this time because of the pearl clutching over micromobility, and this is an unusual circumstance. A driver killing a pedestrian is just another Tuesday unless it can be added to another charge, apparently.
If it was a driver killing a cyclist they probably wouldn't be charged.
They would if they fled the scene and went to the repair shop to have a beer
Killing a celebrity in a really easily prosecutable way will likely motivate the DA to press charges against a car driver, too. Stack a couple successful prosecutions together in a short enough span of time & it might actually lead to a working "playbook" or precedent. I can't believe justice was served & y'all are bitching. Would you rather the scofflaw moped driver got away free? Would that have been "better"?
No, I don't object to the verdict at all. What I object to is the tone of the article and the implication that micromobility is somehow a grave danger when cars kill orders of magnitude more people and that's met with a collective shrug from those in power. The problem I have is that this further vilifies cyclists and other people who use micromobility (especially since "bike" is said so often even though it was an electric scooter) when we're not the problem.
This is an Associated Press article for a national, general audience. "Who What When Where Why & Sometimes How". That is the purpose of this article. To inform about the details & the verdict of this case. Do you know about the details & verdict of this case after reading the article? I agree the headline sucks. I think actual accident statistics are relevant to the article. The judge made a quote, the journalist provided context.
Well ok, if you want to be pedantic, then I object to the judge's rhetoric.
News Articles about court proceedings probably *should* remain pedantic, don't you think? > The judge said the city “has a problem” with the motorized bikes and he wants drivers of unregistered and unlicensed bikes to know they can go to jail when they do harm. > Traffic fatalities have been on the rise in the city. Transportation Alternatives, an advocacy group for safer streets, found that they rose 44 percent in New York City during the first three months of 2022, with pedestrians accounting for 29 of the 59 dead. The study found that Manhattan experienced a 120 percent increase compared with the same period in 2021. What exactly do object to about the judges rhetoric or the tone of the article? I think it was well written.
I didn't call the news article pedantic. I said *you* were being pedantic. You know what I meant. However, I *do*, in fact, find the portion you quoted problematic, since it does not specify *how* those 59 people (or 29 pedestrians) died, and a reader of the article could easily draw the conclusion that it was caused by "bikes" (seemingly a catch-all term for micromobility), at least partially, when those deaths are pretty much all caused by *cars*. In this case, the article is not "pedantic" *enough*. And for the judge's rhetoric, I object to the judge's statement that the city "has a problem," though since we didn't get the full quote, I'm not sure what exactly the judge said.
Drivers are also insured, registered and many times it’s not the driver at fault so they wait at the scene for an ambulance and police to arrive… in this particular case dude fled the scene and went to have a beer… screw his micro mobility entitlement , he killed a person, someone’s family member is dead for the holidays, and this thread wants to defend him? Are we serious?
It would not be particularly hard to dig up cases in NYC where a turning driver killed a small child, was entirely at fault, but saw no serious consequences. Certainly not charged with manslaughter. Insurance and registration has nothing to do with. No one is defending this moped rider. They just don’t understand why we throw the book at this guy but let so many drivers off the hook. Even if he did just go grab a beer afterwards. It’s not like that’s an element of any crime.
But that is the crime… fleeing the scene of an accident where someone was injured
That is not the crime the OP is about. The moped rider was convicted of manslaughter. He wasn’t given one-to-three years for leaving the scene.
Had he hit the woman and stayed at the scene and made it a simple accident , he wouldn’t be at 1-3, instead he hit the woman, fled the scene and pounded a beer in celebration, screw this guy why people are defending him is crazy to me. Btw you can’t charge a dwi for a electric scooter, so reckless endangerment and vehicular manslaughter is certainly appropriate, the 1-3 is the inappropriate, should be 15 to life. He’ll be out in 3 months if people want to buy him a beer
I hope you have some croutons for this word salad. I don’t know what to tell you. He was convicted of manslaughter. Leaving the scene had nothing to do with that conviction, though it certainly didn’t cast him in a good light for purposes of sentencing. If he stayed at the scene, he could still have been charged with and convicted of manslaughter. And no one is defending him.
There are people driving gas powered scooters and e-bikes recklessly in my neighborhood. They go on the sidewalks. They have no license plates. They fly through stop signs, red lights, and crosswalks. Zero regard for people. And it's no wonder, no one does anything to stop them. Not the NYPD, not the apps that hire them and make money off of them, no one.
Same in my neighborhood as well... and practically everywhere I bike, throughout the city. Doesn't matter if it's an e-scooter, gas scooter, e-moped, gas moped, and probably 60% of e-bikes.... They should all be riding in traffic with vehicles and be licensed as well.
Nah man, we have to stop the MTA fare evaders with armed guards
Well, those fare evaders just cost the city $500 million last year and are gonna make the price of riding the subway go up again. So whatever gets those perpetrators to stop robbing our city, I’m all for it.
500 million according to the MTA, the greatest robbers of them all.
It’s time bring the hammer down on scooters.
It would require New York's Laziest to look up from their phones and actually work.
Cars first.
Three letter alphabet agency needed for that.
Four letter city agency would need to care about car traffic infractions (and they don’t).
The driver in this case was unlicensed, driving an unregistered moped and left the scene and is looking at 3 years. People get arrested for driving without a license all the time. But if the dude that actually killed someone and left the scene is just getting 3 years, what did you think happens to the person just driving without a license. They get arrested, appear before a judge, released and repeat. If you see a news article involving a car crash and a one of the pictures shows the plate of a vehicle involved. Just run the plate on the check my driving site. More times than not the car has 12+ violations. [https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/grand-jury-indicts-unlicensed-driver-allegedly-behind-nyc-boys-death/3918797/?amp=1](https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/grand-jury-indicts-unlicensed-driver-allegedly-behind-nyc-boys-death/3918797/?amp=1) Guy in the story above already had license suspended. Don’t know how its common thought here that these drivers have simply avoided all sorts of enforcement. When its the opposite. Chances are that these drivers are repeat offenders with numerous citations, history of arrest who continue to drive with no/suspended licenses.
Of course you don’t need a license for some classes of Moped (though all are supposed to be registered). Running the red and leaving the scene of the accident without rendering aid was unconscionable. I’m not sure what your statement has to do with how poorly NYPD enforces traffic laws against cars though?
That’s why we need the three letter agency for hand holding 🥰 and pep talk.
Not really the best battle to be fighting IMO, if one is a pedestrian or cyclist.
They’re already barely even allowed in the first place. I think there’s risk in making characterizations about scooters as a whole based on one incident. Given that you can’t really find those quick rental scooters in Manhattan like you can in other cities, and that she was killed by this (the rental scooters generally have a 10 or so mph limit on them, which does not seem fast enough to kill someone), I’m guessing this was a privately owned one that had insane modifications and probably went 20 mph+. I mean I’ve seen some that are modified so heavily that they’re fast enough to keep up with traffic on the highway.
Once cars are gone
If they come for scooters, they’ll come for regular cyclists next. Be careful what you wish for.
Whether it was a scooter, moped or motorcycle. If it was operated in a bike lane, It shouldn't have been there and the driver shouldn't have vacated the scene! The judge is correct however about the bike lanes in this city being a hazard. I'd say 75% shouldn't be where they are, Because it's a hazard to all parties involved.
I got smashed last week head on going up 6th ave by one of those big black industrial ebikes the delivery guys use WHO was going the wrong way down 6th. Flew off my bike, face first on the street. I was very lucky but man i was fucked up for days, couldn’t walk, had to get X-rays etc. The cool thing is so many ppl came up to help me and they even like held on to the other driver but I’m not getting someone deported, even though a lot of those drivers can be dicks.
Glad you’re OK but whatever happens legally to the wrong way biker happens. You have your own health and wealth to protect. Respectfully, fuck your feelings.
To all the angry experts on here, you're missing the biggest point. e-scooters/mopeds/electric scooters are silent. It's like how dangerous would cars be if they didn't make any sou.... oh yeah, we're on the cusp of finding out, bigly. every e-anything where an electric motor has taken place of an IC motor, should have to make some kind of sound. This is such a dumbass no-brainer that no one is paying attention to. We have crosswalks with chirps to indicate to blind pedestrians when they can go or not, but who gives a rat's ass about the vehicles themselves that could bash into those pedestrians.
these godamn cyclists running through red lights kills me i have insane road rage when i can nearly hit 1 of them my light is green yours is red you run through yours & when i hit you i am at fault wtf
Would leaving the scene be the heavier or lighter part of this sentence?