Cops developing Ghostbusters-esque weapon to take out e-bike thugs British police officers are setting their phasers to stun in response to an explosion in scooter and electric bike-based crime. In the wretched hives of scum and villainy that are the UK's large towns and cities, petty crooks are increasingly upgrading to the nimble vehicles to better snatch phones or other belongings from the …
Just a guess - for cheap, unregistered, uninspected vehicles, I would guess the probability of charging fires is rather high. For their neighbors, especially if in a Grenfell like tower block, it's one more thing to worry about. The rental companies can be far more easily inspected and charging safety confirmed (e.g., not inside an inhabited building).
I have some knowledge on this matter, and can assure you that the fire risk has had no bearing on policy making and the illegality of public use of private e-scooters. Policy making for these, as a form or transport sits with DfT, and with a complete tin ear to safety concerns, DfT have been consulting on increasing the permitted size of scooter and bike batteries, and increasing the permitted speed. What could possibly go wrong?
Meanwhile, London Fire Brigade have described e-scooter fires as the fastest growing fire risk.
With the widespread introduction of 20 mph zones in metropolitan areas, there is a good case for raising the arbitrary 15 mph e-bike limit to 20 mph so that impatient car drivers don't attempt unsafe overtakes in the 20 mph zone. Everyone moving at the same speed is likely to be safer, so support the Active Travel objectives.
Safety first.
More importantly, why aren't they legal?
AFAIK, it's legal for somebody to take a 2-ton automobile on the road, with FAR more deadly consequences.
Legalize them. They're relatively harmless.
If you want to seize and crush something, why not do that to the cops?
They might be considered relatively harmless if they obeyed the rules of law, and weren't driven by twats. But since it is possible for a team of pace riders on bicycles to be travelling at nearly 30 mph in a public park, with a 20 mph limit, and actually kill someone without consequence - I'm not holding my breath for common sense here.
Feh. ‘Kids on scooters’ who do stupid things near trucks are in need of lessons from the two greatest Englishmen ever: Charles Darwin and Isaac Newton. And will get them. Lucky kids will learn about Newton’s Laws of Motion. Unlucky kids will learn about Natural Selection. Either way, the average intelligence of humanity will increase.
Yes, I used to play Carmaggedon. We need more wholesome, family-friendly entertainment like that. Why, it would keep the kids off the streets.
Here (Oz) they ride on the pavement, illegal, of course. They whiz past you from the back, no noise, it’s frightening. They are delivery guys, just one stiff fine, would send a message.Why they can’t use the road is beyond me, it’s not busy or dangerous. Just lots of restaurants. At least they do not ride on my lawn, only because I don’t have one.
> Why they can’t use the road is beyond me, it’s not busy or dangerous.
Sounds very much like someone who has never ridden a bike or scooter on a road. The number of near-misses I've had...
I've had cars cut corners by swerving *into the bike lane*, directly in front of me! I'm not sure they even knew I was there!
The police / DVLA do have a habit of going round and clamping / seizing vehicles without an MOT, and how long do you think it would be before you got pulled over if you drove round without licence plates?
It's relatively cheap and easy for tehm to detect lack of MOT and insurance, because of the ubiquity of ANPR, and an ability to check DVLA records in real time.
They can be legal with no change to the law whatsoever. The designer and user just need to make sure they meet the same rules as a road legal motorbike. (i.e. Proper lights, mirrors, proper brakes, registered with the DVLA, road tax paid, valid insurance purchased etc....
It's not legal to ride a motorbike in a cycle lane, so if they are licensed and insured as a motorbike, they couldn't be ridden in a bike lane either. I think this is literally a category error on your part (in this case, driving licence category A).
They need a licence and insurance.
All ebikes and escooters should need a helmet, moped licence and insurance. Most are faster and more dangerous than a 1960s moped.
The engine size was an old simple rating before high rpm two-stroke engines invented. Anything with more speed or acceleration than an average 50 yo police-person should be treated as a moped (helmet, moped licence and insurance) and anything over a certain acceleration or speed should need a full motorcycle licence. Even 50 years ago some 125cc bikes were faster than British Classic 1950s 500 cc models.
Also horses and horse "buggies" etc should need a rider's licence and insurance for the public road. See recent London havoc or any day in Limerick City.
More importantly, why aren't they legal?
Good question. Why aren't they treated like motorbikes - requiring a visible and legible registration plate, minimum third party insurance, a CBT for the rider to demonstrate basic competence, mandatory head protection, L-plates if no full driving licence is held, and taxed for road use? Maybe they should be a new licence category related to a category A licence - A3 perhaps?
A lot of the problems of them being ridden recklessly, or used in the commissioning of crimes would be mitigated by them being easily identifiable via their registration plate. If I were to rob someone while riding a moped or motorbike, which I have had to take a test to prove I am competent to do (riding the bike that is, not robbing), I'd expect a knock on the door from plod enquiring about whether my vehicle has been reported stolen, whether I was riding it at the time, and would I mind awfully accompanying them to the station for a nice little chat and a cup of tea.
There are a couple of reasons this doesn't happen; firstly, the police in this country are woefully under-resourced because $politics, and secondly, if they pursue someone who is not wearing protective gear, such as a helmet, and the rider has an accident, they are on the hook for it. this is exemplified by the relatively recent case of the kids in Cardiff who were going round on e-bikes, got pursued by the cops, and then ended up getting killed; cue riots and a lot of anti-police sentiment, so they really can't do the right thing here.
I believe the unofficial policy, at least around here, is that if the scooter is involved in an accident, or other incident, the police will take it away and destroy, but they won't otherwise pursue the rider. Of course, as well as having their scrote-wagon confiscated, the riders will be done for driving an uninsured vehicle too, because it is not possible to insure these things on the road, due to them being illegal to ride on the road (or pavement). The rental ones you see in many cities have a special license from the government and insurance for use; personally, I think these should go in the crusher too, as they are most often seen begin ridden on pavements, the wrong way up one-way streets, with two or more riders on the, or by school kids, or indeed any combination of the above (like the one I saw a few weeks ago just after school kicking-out-time with 4 kids on it, going down the pavement). They are essentially unpolicable, so in IMHO, should be done away with.
We have rental scooters here in Darwin. They ride where they want and are a total menace. I have had to slam on the brakes a few times when they have shot out into the road in front of me.
Helmets are supposed to be mandatory, but hardly anyone wears them.
The health system is having to cope with a large number of scooter related presentations. As seen by the idiots riding here at 'faceplant corner':
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-20/there-were-111-e-scooter-related-emergency/101554582
is really just another way for Tory chums to get stuck into the magic money tree that is the UK taxpayer.
The US has been dreaming of things like this for nearly a century. And all it has to show for it is a Concorde size bill for R&D without the Concorde.
Because, despite what TFA says, it is not illegal to own them (as has been pointed out already, above).
It is illegal to ride privately-owned escooters on the public roads *and* on the public pavements.
You can ride them on private land, such as your living room. Or you could talk to the owners of a local old airfield and see if they'll let you ride around, just like you can drive your street car at speeds above those legal on the public highway.
Probably this company - 10 years ago they were developing a magnetron device to "stop cars and small boats" - no wonder UK Gov is interested!
https://phys.org/news/2013-12-pulses-immobilize-cars-rf-safe-stop.html
Later it seems they were bought by Teledyne, an aerospace/defence conglomerate which also manufactures magnetrons in the 3-30kW range.
"Police hope the device will be harmless to humans and other devices."
Danish police already use these ... at least they did to stop a motorbike in an episode of "The Bridge"
An alternative solution might be just to do some basic policing and stop people on illegal escooters/emopeds, charge them with lack of motor insurance and seize and crush the vehicles. (Hint, try anyone with a Deliveroo bag)
Very roughly, in the UK (and probably elsewhere) you don't need a license, insurance, VED etc. for a directly human propelled conveyance such as bicycle. For an e-bike to be legal (and this may be changing) the 'e' part can only assist. ie you need to still be pedalling. It can't be the sole method of propulsion. If the motor can propel the conveyance without human effort then it is classed as a motor vehicle.
"Also, how likely is it that an e-bike thug will snatch a phone in plain sight of an officer wielding the equipment?"
It was so long ago, I can't remember when I last saw an officer on the beat in a public place. So the effectiveness of this tool will primarily depend on whether an officer is in range when an e-scooter mugging occurs - probably never, so the actual effectiveness will be zero.
The amount of energy required at source would be very large as the inverse square law applies and, even at a couple of meters from the motor, it would need a large battery at the very least. Then you have to factor in legal bike and mobility scooters both of which litter our streets.
Banning hoodies and facial coverings unless the weather is sub zero would be easier to apply. Then you will also have a religious issue to get around....
The only solution is more bobbies actually on the streets. As someone else wrote, illegal scooters should be confiscated on site and disposed of.
The inverse square law applies, but the power required for a unidirectional radiator with a small beam width is significantly less than what would be needed for an omni-directional radiator. My guess is this would be a point and shoot type weapon with a vary narrow beam width, therefore quite viable - especially if it is powered from a backpack-style, unlicensed particle accelerator.
UK rental e-scooters carry insurance and are registered (and tested) to be safe on our roads, just like all other powered vehicles here and require at least a Provisional Drivers license and a credit card to rent them. Privately owned pedestrian assisted vehicles like e-bikes do not require insurance nor have to be tested for safety.
The problem comes when Daddy buys little Johnny a 15Mph cheap & nasty e-scooter that 10 year old Johnny then rides on the pavement terrorising other users. For some stupid reason we never seem to prosecute the parents for such actions. Their kid, they bought him the e-scooter, their responsibility!
Personally I think all road vehicles (bicycle, horse, scooter, etc.) should be required to carry insurance just like trucks, buses, cars and motorcycles. It is ridiculous that a bicycle or e-bike capable of 30+ Mph does not require insurance but a Moped (limited to 30Mph) does require insurance. Those vehicles designed for use on the pavement (sidewalk for the colonials ;-)) are limited in the UK to no more than 4Mph and do not require insurance or testing as they are no more threat to other users than another pedestrian. Additionally if you ride your bicycle on the pavement you can be nicked for that too, but it is rarely enforced.
Finally, as has already been stated, all of this is moot if there are no Police to be seen anywhere, and no amount of whizzy ray-gun-zappers are going to help with that.
UK rental e-scooters carry insurance and are registered (and tested) to be safe on our roads, just like all other powered vehicles here and require at least a Provisional Drivers license and a credit card to rent them.
In theory, yes. In practice, tell that to the four kids in school uniforms I saw clinging onto each other on the back of one a couple of weeks ago. It's obvious that the rental companies don't want to enforce the rules (and cut into profits) and that the police have no resources to do so. It is apparently trivial to circumvent the checks on licenses and credit cards if groups of schoolkids can defeat them.
"It is apparently trivial to circumvent the checks on licenses and credit cards if groups of schoolkids can defeat them."
It does make me wonder if the "trivial...defeat" is simply someone with a valid licence authorising the app. But then a proper check would make sure the credit card account name matched the drivers license too, so, erm...yeah...something, something, mumble...
No country on Earth implements mandatory bicycle insurance. But it has been trialed many times and always abandoned as a waste of time and money. Last time I checked, only Japan and North Korea persisted with mandatory registration and number plates. Though Denmark and the Netherlands have mandatory VIN registration as an anti-theft measure, it's not illegal to ride without one.
There's a very long and drawn out conversation to be had around bicycle registration and insurance, but the easiest counter to it is that it's been tried many times and almost always abandoned as a waste of money with no tangible benefits offered. Most countries want to encourage their lazy population to ride a bike, and mandatory insurance is sort of at cross purposes with that. (Never mind that a majority of cyclists do have third party cover via other insurance) The fact is that bicycle injuries are infinitesimal if you remove the ones that happen whilst breaking the law. And then the solution is to enforce existing law, not introduce new ones that will still be unenforced.
"if you remove the ones that happen whilst breaking the law"
Here lies the issue. Cyclists in London seem to think that zebra crossings and red lights do not apply. Mixed with some insanely stupid bike lanes which literally put pedestrians and cyclists in conflict in the name of safety and you have a right royal mess.
I got abuse from a bike rickshaws near Covent Garden as I dared to cross the road when the traffic light was red and the green man was solidly lit.
Traffic lights (they cam ignore), or filter into a narrow gap with speed bumps?
I must admit, I had no idea what a "floating bust stop" might be until I followed your link. They really do look downright dangerous because most cyclists will NOT slow down, even though legally, pedestrians always have right of way (except under limited circumstances, usually where pedestrians are not allowed, such as motorways, and even then you still don't have a right to mow them down!)
"There's a very long and drawn out conversation to be had around bicycle registration and insurance,"
Not to even mention at what age and type of bike it starts at. Toddlers on bikes, even under supervision, needing insurance? :-) Or those silly "micro" bicycles for adults where the knees have bend outwards cod the bike is so small :-)
For all the car drivers in the UK, the Motor Insurers Bureau Scheme (MIB) recently estimated that one million uninsured drivers were on UK roads.
https://www.heald.uk.com/news/uninsured-drivers-the-looming-threat-in-the-uk-and-heres-why/#:~:text=The%20Motor%20Insurers%20Bureau%20Scheme,buildings%20in%20high%2Dtraffic%20areas.
So even if it was made to be a legal requirement, why would ebike riding robbers insure their vehicle?
That's the insurance angle, but this is like legislating against Sword crimes when the numbers tell a different story....
Transport for London publishes statistics every year for accidents sorted into both mode of transport and also where the accident involved another vehicle.
In 2022, there were only 2% of incidents involving cyclists as the other vehicle compared to 65% by car.Also 0 deaths caused by cyclists but 39 by car, 23 by goods vehicles, 7 by Bus/Coach and 2 each for Motorbikes and Taxis....
So why legislate and crack down on bicycles when 39 deaths were cause by cars alone along with 2067 serious injuries with 0 deaths and 105 serious injuries by bicycle...
https://content.tfl.gov.uk/casualties-in-greater-london-2022.pdf
How about we abandon the idea of an EMP pulse for the e-bike and just go straight to a turbo charged taser that can travel quickly and accurately over a reasonable distance to hit the scumbag. In theory the human body can conduct the charge to the e-bike so a double whammy and with luck, the copper might get two goes at shocking, to teach mummies innocent little darling a lesson.
Simpler, have a reverse alarm tag.
Current tags the phone sounds an alarm when a tag goes more than 6m away, instead carry a tag, when phone rapidly accelerates to beyond 6m away, it explodes its battery…
Yes I know this is extreme, however, the issue is stopping the theft so we need to use the phone itself to take counter measures…
Just because you can leave them anywhere, doesn't mean you should.
What if someone in a wheelchair wants to get past that bit of pavement? I mean the difference between being an arsehole and a respectable member of society is ~1ft. Stop being a lazy sod.
My solution to a badly parked e-bike it to remove the battery pack. Hide it:
I assume that is a fairly expensive component. The e-bike-hire companies must know the last person to loan the bike. Make the inconsiderate parkers too expensive. Get them kicked and banned.
<righteous indignation>Grrr!</>
Yes, destroying a company's property because their customers are assholes, that's very ethical behaviour.
They all do have options to alert them to badly parked vehicles. Done it many times. First time offenders get a warning, second time a fine, third time lose the ability to rent.
Or so they say...
Here the council occasionally removes them when the assholery of parking is really off the scale, like the moron who parked on a pedestrian crossing, on the ribbed pavement that serves as a tactile guide for the blind. In that case I think you can be quite sure the rental company pases on the cost to the customer.
But can anyone prove it was the last user who parked it inconsiderately or just some yob kicking one over later? Do they have sensors that show it parked at least upright before it later gets kicked over? Or are they built to a price and don't have this sort of sensor?
If you're going to shoot RF energy from anything like a meaningful distance to scramble something's command bus/data you need to one heck of a lot of power and an array that can focus it in the desired direction. I'd be surprised if they cram all that into into something that can be stored in the boot (trunk) of a vehicle, never mind making it portable enough to deploy in time to stop a hooligan making off with someone's phone - and that assumes one is lucky enough to have a Police officer on hand to start with (street policing seems to have all but stopped in everywhere but sensitive areas of London). Added problem: what happens to anyone carrying a mobile device that happens to be in the antenna's envelope? It stops an e-scooter then it'll kill mobile phones, shop tills and anything else within range.
And that's before anyone bangs on about 'it'll give us all cancer/Covid/a morbid desire to watch daytime TV.
"We find it hard to imagine that even London's finest could reach and maintain sprinting speeds in excess of 15.5 mph."
That would be meters per hour? This is the Met, remember, the force infamously needing to supply uniform trousers with vast waistlines.
The mind's eye (it has to be in the mind, because you are unlikely to set your physical eyes on a bobby on foot patrol) presents an image of a typically ovoid officer, made more so by the stab-proof vest concealed beneath his bulky high+Vis jacket, lumbering along with a huge backpack like a glow in the dark camel.
By the time he's noticed a phone theft in progress and set off in waddling pursuit, he'll be too out of breath to unship his emp ray gun, let alone point it at the target. This might work better for officers in cars, or even mounted on ebikes of their own, at least until the villains figure out how to shield the motor. But as a tool for any hypothetical bobbies on the beat it seems unlikely to be effective, not least because you'd need a lot of foot patrols to even have a chance of spotting the theft in progress.
I've actually looked into this for unrelated reasons and found that hitting the resonant frequency (typically a multiple of 2 MHz) of motor controller IC clock usually causes a shutdown.
Now what we *really* need is room temperature or at least >210K superconductors which would make the antenna that much more efficient.
Incidentally I am amazed that the Met haven't started tracking E-scooter (mis)users using the motor RF emissions themselves.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
