• KISSmyOS@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    No, I’m simplifying it to “If you want to use rule-breaking as reason to ban a class of vehicle, you have to apply it to all vehicles”.

    Or even shorter: “Don’t ban e-bikes for bullshit reasons”

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      “If you want to use rule-breaking as reason to ban a class of vehicle, you have to apply it to all vehicles”.

      But you don’t have to. And you wouldn’t treat everything the same since they aren’t the same. It’s like saying when designing traffic routes, you have to treat every class of vehicle the same. Of course you wouldn’t, you’d consider prevalence, design goals, feasibility, need, all kinds of things.

      Simplifying too much is a bad thing.

      • KISSmyOS@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        But you don’t have to.

        But the comment I answered at the beginning of this chain did.

        • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They’re applying it to e-bikes. They said nothing about being an universal policy that affects any other vehicles the exact same way.