Why Unrealistic E-Bike Laws Are a Threat to Freedom, Health, and Community
Across the country, states are quietly flirting with—or flat-out adopting—unrealistic e-bike laws. One of the loudest current examples is New Jersey, but it’s far from alon🚴♂️ Why Unrealistic E-Bike Laws Are a Threat to Freedom, Health, and Community — And Why We Need to Wake Up Now
Across the U.S., states like New Jersey are proposing e-bike laws that would require driver’s licenses, insurance, and registration for anyone riding an e-bike at all.
That’s not just unreasonable — it’s ridiculous.
Here’s the truth that lawmakers need to hear loud and clear:
Class-1 e-bikes — the kind limited to 20 mph with motors of 750 watts or less — should be treated just like regular bicycles.
If a bike has pedals, assists only while you pedal, and cuts off at 20 mph, then it is functionally and legally categorized as a bicycle, not a motor vehicle.
So why are some policymakers acting like these bikes are motorcycles in disguise?
Speed Is Being Used as a Scare Tactic — But It Doesn’t Hold Up
Some critics say “e-bikes go too fast!” But here’s what the data shows:
✅ Average traditional road cyclists frequently ride 18–25+ mph. Professional and recreational riders often exceed 20 mph on pedal power alone.
✅ Research demonstrates average e-bike trip speeds around the 20 km/h mark (~12 mph)—and in some cases up to ~24 km/h (~15 mph) — similar to many pedal cyclists, especially recreational riders.
So let’s be clear:
Pedal bikes regularly hit or exceed the very speeds that lawmakers are using as a justification to regulate assisted bikes.
Are kids who pedal a hard gear downhill suddenly going to need licenses next?
No — because that argument is nonsensical.
E-Bikes Are About Access — Not Laziness
There’s a myth that e-bikes are “cheating” or “not real exercise.”
But numerous studies have found that:
📍 E-bike riders meet moderate physical activity guidelines even with motor assistance.
📍 E-bike riders ride more often and farther than traditional cyclists, increasing their overall weekly activity.
📍 Health research shows cycling (including e-bike riding) contributes to improved cardiovascular health, mental well-being, and cognitive function.
One study concluded:
“E-bikes are an active form of transportation capable of providing much of the cardiovascular health benefits obtained during conventional bike use.” — TH Hoj, et al.
And another review found that e-bike trips result in riders engaging in moderate exercise commonly, not just gentle cruising.
So no — they’re not just “motor scooters with pedals.” They promote health, not couch sitting.
Weight and Power Arguments Are Fear-Based, Not Fact-Based
Here’s a favorite fear argument from anti-e-bike legislators:
“E-bikes are heavier, so they’re more dangerous and shouldn’t be treated like bicycles.”
That argument collapses under simple logic:
👉 You can weigh 170 lbs on an e-bike.
👉 You can weigh 300 lbs on a pedal bike.
Does weight magically make traditional bikes unsafe? Of course not.
Weight has nothing to do with whether a vehicle should be categorized with bicycles — especially when Class-1 e-bikes top out at 20 mph of motor assist.
This is fear dressed up as “science.”
Let’s Be Consistent: If Speed Is the Issue, Regulate Every Bike
If lawmakers want to restrict all bicycles capable of exceeding 20 mph, then fine — let’s create laws based on actual performance, not on fear of technology.
Because:
A regular pedal bike can and frequently does surpass 20 mph on trails and roads — without a motor.
Yet no one is demanding racer licenses for cyclists — even competitive cycling events often see riders hitting 25, 30, 35+ mph without a second thought.
So the question becomes obvious:
➡ Why single out Class-1 e-bikes and treat them as something other than bicycles?
Other Jurisdictions Get It Right
Federal U.S. standards (like those codified in Title 23 of the U.S. Code) clearly define e-bike classes:
➡ Class-1: assist only while pedaling, tops out at 20 mph
➡ Class-2: throttle assist, tops out at 20 mph
➡ Class-3: assist up to 28 mph with speedometer
Most states recognize this three-tier system, and most do not require licenses or insurance for bikes that meet these specs.
Yet some states without this classification system default to treating e-bikes as motorized vehicles — which leads to policies that make zero sense on trails or bike paths.
The Real Benefits Being Ignored
Here’s what lawmakers are missing when they legislate out of fear:
🌱 E-bike adoption reduces car trips and carbon emissions.
❤️ More riders = better public health outcomes, especially among older adults.
🚴 Trails become more accessible to riders who otherwise couldn’t handle strenuous terrain.
And maybe the most important point:
E-bikes make biking inclusive. They bring people into the cycling community who would otherwise never participate.
That’s not a problem — that’s a massive win for health, community, and transportation equity.
So What’s Really Driving These Laws?
Not safety.
Not data.
Not logic.
It’s fear and lack of understanding.
When people don’t understand technology, they often react by trying to suppress it — but that never solves the underlying issue.
What we need instead is:
✅ Education for lawmakers and the public
✅ Consistent application of e-bike classifications
✅ Enforcement focused on behavior — not equipment
✅ Common-sense policies that align with how real riders use bikes today
⬇️ THIS IS NOT AN EBIKE…IT IS AN ELECTRIC DIRTBIKE ⬇️ (Still awesome, but not an electric bicycle)
Bikes Should Be Free to Ride — Not Overregulated
Let’s be really clear:
➡ Class-1 e-bikes are bikes.
➡ They help people ride more, ride longer, and stay healthier.
➡ They shouldn’t be punished because some people don’t understand them.
➡ And they shouldn’t be held to a different standard than pedal bikes that go just as fast.
We need real conversation — not fear-based policy.e. What’s happening should concern everyone who cares about trails, health, commuting, and common sense.
Some proposals would require driver’s licenses, insurance, registration, or outright bans for e-bikes—often without any real understanding of how e-bikes actually work, how they’re classified, or who’s riding them.
And that’s the problem.
Health & Wellness: The Data Is Clear
This isn’t opinion—it’s reality.
Riding an e-bike is infinitely healthier than sitting on a couch.
E-bike riders:
- Ride more often
- Ride longer distances
- Maintain consistent cardiovascular activity
Strict laws don’t make people healthier.
They send them back indoors.
If Regulation Is Needed, Here’s the Adult Way to Do It
I do see both sides. Bad actors ruin good things. Enforcement matters. Trails need protection.
But if a state wants accountability without destroying the category, here’s a reasonable solution:
✔ Class-Based Enforcement
- Regulate only bikes outside Class 1 specs
- Enforce what already exists
✔ Voluntary or Light Inspection
- Annual shop inspection
- Simple compliance sticker or stamp
- Similar to boats or ATVs—but only if needed
✔ Education First
- Signage explaining bike classes
- Trail rules based on behavior, not power source
- Penalties for reckless riding—motor or not
Do not punish compliant riders because enforcement is inconvenient.
This Is About Education, Not Fear
A lot of anti-e-bike sentiment comes down to one thing:
People hate what they don’t understand.
E-bikes aren’t the enemy.
Ignorance is.
If states like New Jersey—and others watching closely—push these laws forward without education, they will:
- Kill a growing mode of transportation
- Push riders into noncompliance
- Undermine health, access, and mobility
And once that damage is done, it’s very hard to undo.
RELATED LINKS:
State of New Jersey – Pending / Updated E-Bike Regulations
Link title: New Jersey’s Proposed E-Bike Regulations and Licensing Requirements
Why it matters:
This is the source of the controversy. It shows how New Jersey is considering (or advancing) requirements like licensing, registration, or insurance without clearly distinguishing Class 1 e-bikes from higher-powered electric vehicles.
🔗 hhttps://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2024/S4834/bill-text?f=S5000&n=4834_I1
🔗 hhttps://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2024/A6235/bill-text?f=A6500&n=6235_I1
New Jersey’s approach highlights a growing national problem: laws written without a clear understanding of the federally recognized e-bike class system.
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy
Link title: How E-Bikes Expand Trail Access Without Increasing Risk
Why it matters: Trusted national trail authority; supports access + education angle.
🔗 https://www.railstotrails.org/trail-building-toolbox/e-bikes/
National Park Service (NPS) – E-Bike Policy
Link title: How the National Park Service Defines and Regulates Class 1 E-Bikes
Why it matters: Shows that even conservative land managers allow Class 1 e-bikes.
🔗 https://www.nps.gov/subjects/biking/e-bikes.htm
PeopleForBikes (E-Bike Class System)
Link title: The Three-Class E-Bike System Explained
Why it matters: This is the gold standard for e-bike classification in the U.S.
🔗 https://www.peopleforbikes.org/electric-bikes/e-bike-laws
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)
Link title: Federal Definition of Low-Speed Electric Bicycles
Why it matters: Confirms 750W / 20mph pedal-assist definition at the federal level.
🔗 https://www.cpsc.gov/safety-education/safety-guides/bicycles/low-speed-electric-bicycles
PubMed Central – Health Study
Link title: E-Bikes Provide Meaningful Cardiovascular Health Benefits
Why it matters: Peer-reviewed medical data kills the “lazy rider” myth.
🔗 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6293244/
UCLA Transportation Research
Link title: Why E-Bike Riders Travel Farther and Ride More Often
Why it matters: Shows behavioral benefits vs analog cycling.
🔗 https://transportation.ucla.edu/blog/benefits-riding-e-bike
Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI)
Link title: How E-Bikes Reduce Car Trips and Emissions
Why it matters: Positions e-bikes as legitimate transportation, not recreation toys.
🔗 https://rmi.org/helping-cities-accelerate-e-bike-adoption/
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition & Physical Activity
Link title: Comparing Physical Activity Levels of E-Bike and Bicycle Riders
Why it matters: Confirms real exercise happens on e-bikes.
🔗 https://ijbnpa.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12966-017-0589-x
Wikipedia (Road Cycling Speed Context)
Link title: Typical Speeds of Pedal-Only Road Cyclists
Why it matters: Supports your “pedal bikes exceed 20 mph” argument plainly.
🔗 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_cycling
(Wikipedia is OK here because it’s contextual, not authoritative — Yoast accepts it when paired with stronger sources.)
State DOT Example (Colorado – Pro-E-Bike Model)
Link title: How Colorado Regulates E-Bikes Without Overreach
Why it matters: Shows smart regulation exists and works.
🔗 https://cdot.colorado.gov/safety/road-safety-programs/e-bike-safety
