I actually think they have a place and given their speed limitations should definitely NOT require insurance. Usain Bolt can run at 44km/h, should his shoes require insurance?
All jokes aside, I firmly believe they are the vehicle of last resort for dui offenders, but the offenders need to get to work in the morning somehow. Better on an ebike than at home on social assistance. Can they damage your car if the potentially drunk rider hits it? Sure can, at 32 km/h, you're not just going to buff that out. Would a drunk on a bicycle do damage, you bet they will. Obviously not as much because the mass is much lower, but you're potentially not buffing that out either. Would I rather a drunk hit me doing 32 on an ebike than 60 in the car they're driving illegally and uninsured? Damn straight. Not to mention, on an ebike the drunk is much more likely to get injured than in a car. We'll refer to that as poetic justice.
Furthermore, a friend of mine had a stroke a little while back, and although his wasn't horrifically bad like some, he did end up with tunnel vision and lost all his peripheral vision. Thus, at the age of 55 he now has to depend on his wife to drive him everywhere as he was stripped of his licence (was a motorcycle rider too). I think he's a prime candidate for someone that should get an ebike. It's slow enough that he can spend more time turning his head to make up for his lost vision, but fast enough to get him around his small town conveniently.
Lastly, insurance....really? Everyone on this site is overpaying for insurance, and does complain about it and start threads asking where to get cheaper insurance. Then to turn around and try to force it on others is pretty f*****g hypocritical.