Are you sure your friend was actually allowed to take that shortcut with an e-bike going 45 km/h?
If it looks like a bike and you ride it like a bike, you're not going to have any problems riding it where bikes are allowed. It sounds like you envision this person riding at absolutely maximum possible speed at all times.
How many times have you hit someone while riding a bicycle? I never have.
How much harm do you suppose it would do, leading to "massive legal trouble"?
Incidentally, 45kmh is 28mph, which I was just barely able to maintain on level ground on my road bicycle when I was fit. The "speed pedelecs" laws seem a bit silly rather than simply enforcing speed limits and penalizing reckless behavior.
>>How many times have you hit someone while riding a bicycle? I never have.
I suppose I should stop paying for car insurance then, since I never had an accident either. Or maybe more accurate example is that I shouldn't worry about the safety of my car, since I never actually hit anyone with it.
>>How much harm do you suppose it would do, leading to "massive legal trouble"?
There was a cyclist in london recently who ran into a woman on his modified bicycle, she tripped, hit her head on the pavement and died - he was subsequently found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to prison for many years.
You could run into someone at 5mph, they could hit their head on something and die. There is another case exactly like this going on where a person hit their head on a bollard and left him permanently disabled for life.
The entire point is that if you are on a path specifically forbidden for cycles, and an accident happens while you are cycling, you will be found guilty and will have to face consequences, most likely much harsher than if you weren't doing something forbidden.
I suppose I should stop paying for car insurance then, since I never had an accident either.
Ah, yes, because cars and bikes represent totally comparable risks to others.
Now you can go cite some more wildly improbable anecdotes, notable entirely because of how exceptional they are, as a response. I'll be over here looking at the 1.3 million people who die in car accidents around the world and not caring about e-bikes at all.
>>Ah, yes, because cars and bikes represent totally comparable risks to others.
The point is that "I don't see a point in doing X because X has never happened to me" is not a good argument.
Let's try a better comparison then - maybe I should cancel my cycling liability insurance, because I never hit anyone with my bike then?
>>I'll be over here looking at the 1.3 million people who die in car accidents around the world and not caring about e-bikes at all.
I don't see how that's relevant to what I said - you will be punished more harshly if you cycle where you shouldn't. The number of people who die in car accidents bears no relation.
If it looks like a bike and you ride it like a bike, you're not going to have any problems riding it where bikes are allowed. It sounds like you envision this person riding at absolutely maximum possible speed at all times.