Away, Segway!

I tweeted the other day: "Why are bicycles hassled on sidewalks but Segways, usually piloted by inexperienced renters w/o a clue, can go anywhere?"

Came this reply: "I'm gonna guess because there's a law against riding a bike on the sidewalk and there aren't any laws about Segways."

Wrong guess. Beach regulations specifically prohibit motorized vehicles on the bike path -- but they're there. And the CA Vehicle Code section 407.5 defines a motorized scooter as any two-wheeled device that has handle bars, is designed to be stood or sat upon by the operator and is powered by an electric or gas motor. Drivers must be over 16 and wear proper head gear.

Children are put at the controls of Segways routinely in Santa Monica. In general, Segway riders seem to have helmets; pedestrians, skaters and cyclists they endanger, not so much.

More to the point, "Operator shall not operate motorized scooter upon sidewalk." [CVC 21235(g)].

So the real question is, why does the City of Santa Monica, whose police department is targeting bicyclists and chases other types of motor scooter off the bike path, make an exception for Segways? One reason might be as simple as class; Segways are a toy of people with money. Speaking of money, another reason might be that the City makes dough off Segway rentals. Or -- money again -- the City is afraid of a lawsuit by Segway, an aggressive national company, if Segway Inc is inconvenienced. The cops say that the city attorney has redefined Segways as wheelchairs, thus exempting them from vehicle rules, but that legal fig leaf defies common sense and common usage and was adopted only after other bike path users insisted that the motorized vehicle rule be enforced (by the way, Segway Inc. calls its scooters "personal electric balancing transportation," "robotic mobility platforms" and "Personal Transporters" -- no mention of wheelchairs).

Not to make a mountain out of a molehill (oh, heck, why not): there is little argument that police and prosecutors have discretionary authority to selectively enforce laws, to make exceptions in the interest of justice, compassion or public safety; but selective enforcement with regard to entire classes of offenders or offenses is a symptom of tyranny. A government that routinely applies arbitrary standards to the question of who can operate outside the rule of law in one area will soon find it easier to afford the same favor to friends, political allies and anyone with a pile of cash. Even where favoritism doesn't lead to corruption, it undermines respect for law. There are so many ways today in which respect for law is being undermined by selective enforcement big (banksterism, for example) and small (putting your tongue in your cheek and calling a Segway a wheelchair) that citizens must push back where they can.

Segway can make a valuable contribution to traffic gridlock. The vision of a throng of Segways ferrying commuters who have abandoned their cumbrous, polluting, gas guzzlers for the freedom and frugality of scooters is exciting. Factoring cost, size and weight, emissions, and so on, Segways are far cheaper and safer to operate than cars weighing more a ton and in most cases spewing air pollutants (even a Prius weighs 2900 lbs). The City of Santa Monica has banished bikes from sidewalks (arbitrarily, it seems to me -- Los Angeles doesn't do so, and state law doesn't require it), but once you've made the decision that bikes are unsafe on sidewalks, it makes no sense at all not to hold the faster, heavier Segways to the same standards.