Segway

[magid]

I still find this name a bit of an irritation, since as far as I know, it doesn't stand for anything in particular, so I always think it's misspelled (segue).

I thought it clear, though, that it's a vehicle: wheels, handlebars, motor, speeds comparable to a bike, all that stuff that says "vehicle" to me. Which would mean that it would need to be ridden on streets, or in bike lanes. But apparently I'm wrong: many states have already allowed them on sidewalks, because they're "Electric Personal Assistive Mobility Devices". Which is a category of one, the Segway.

There's information about this in the Globe this morning, describing all sorts of interesting dodgy sorts of things being done by the Segway people (in this article), in their attempts to get it approved for sidewalk use. I was particularly impressed with the spokesman who pointed out that in a collision between a pedestrian and a Segway-rider, the pedestrian wasn't going to be injured by the impact with the Segway, but the (subsequent) impact with the ground. I am amazed someone could say this with a straight face. And they want to have their pie and eat it too for a bunch of other things as well (helmets suggested, not required; insurance and training, similarly).

And on the more bizarre side, the Segway's creator is an interesting individual as well, having bought an island in Long Island Sound, North Dumpling. He then decided to call himself Lord Dumpling, and print his own currency, all with denomination pi. And he later seceded from the U.S., too.

Comments

[bitty.livejournal.com]

As annoying as they'd be on sidewalks, I can't imagine Boston drivers respecting them on the streets. I suspect that the thinking is that both people would survive a sidewalk collision, whereas the Segwayn would not survive a collision with an automobile.

[magid.livejournal.com]

I think of it as giving more impetus to making bike lanes, since bikes seem to have approximately the same issues of speed, survivability, etc. No one is suggesting that bikes be ridden on the sidewalks (not that many sidewalks are ridable, either).

[bitty.livejournal.com]

The problem is that Boston streets are old cowpaths, not really meant for cars to begin with. This makes creating whole new lanes difficult.

Also, bikes seem more flexible in evading an accident. And they can always hop the curb if necessary.

[magid.livejournal.com]

Boston streets aren't designed for the traffic they get. I wonder when it'll be bad enough to get people to agree to making downtown a car-free zone. Of course, if they'd just make the parking situation massively worse, there would be a lot more room on the streets for bike lanes (not to mention reasonable width car lanes, in some places).
Hm. Perhaps the elevated Central Artery should just be left as parking?

I don't know that bikes are more flexible. Certainly, there's more variability in speed, but they've got a longer profile that could be hit, too. I haven't been on a Segway, so I don't have a clue about how quickly they can change direction or anything like that. It would be easier to hop off a Segway quickly than to get off a bike, though.
And I've never hopped a curb on my bike, and don't know if I could.

[theora.livejournal.com]

It would be easier to hop off a Segway quickly than to get off a bike, though.

Unless you're the President, that is. (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030612/170/4dmvj.html)

And no, I have nothing more constructive to add. :D

[theora.livejournal.com]

Oh wait you already saw that...sorry, I need to read all the comments before shooting off mouth (fingertips?).

[queue.livejournal.com]

I hate when I do that. An email gets sent out to a list, I respond to it, and then I read other people's responses to the original emai, which already cover what I covered or make mine unnecessary.

And, no, I don't really have anything constructive to add, either.

[magid.livejournal.com]

*insert lovely origami here*

[magid.livejournal.com]

Ew, shot-off fingertips.
I'd prefer to have no blood and detached body parts in my journal, thanks! ;-)

[magid.livejournal.com]

I still think it just showcases his general abilities....

[pinkfish.livejournal.com]

Bizarrely, according to the RMV's rules (http://www.state.ma.us/rmv/dmanual/dmanual.pdf#Page=112), bicycles are allowed on sidewalks, but they must yield to pedestrians. This can be overridden by local ordinances.

[magid.livejournal.com]

That is so nuts.

And of course, in practice, bikes don't yield to pedestrians.
(2 weeks ago a friend of mine was run down by a guy on a bike on a sidewalk in Cambridge.)

[queue.livejournal.com]

Of course, just because they're safer on a sidewalk than on the street is no reason that they should be on the sidewalk.

[bitty.livejournal.com]

Certainly. But as far as the lobbyists go, it's the tack to take.

[magid.livejournal.com]

No taking tacks! There might end up being a Tacks Tax!

(Harriet yesterday, Pushcart today...)

On the (slightly more) serious side, you've got to wonder if it's safer on the sidewalk, when our esteemed Shrub managed to fall over trying to get on.
Somehow I can imagine other fine citizens of similar mental caliber *cough* managing to do equally stupid things. Perhaps it would be better to let Darwin have his way using traffic....

Side note: Jarrett Barrios is again doing things I agree with, as cited in the article (that makes it three times this year so far that I can cite). I suppose he's managed to get my vote already.

[magid.livejournal.com]

Makes sense to me. But laws these days seem to be trying to protect people from their own stupidity, rather than assuming they're responsible, thinking adults.