Lane splitting should be legal

[66shinobi]

There are some pretty good points here, and i agree with a lot of them. ive noticed there is deffinately a difference between what the guys over the pond call lane-splitting, and filtering.

vloggers ive seen from various states where its legal, seem to hurtle through freeway traffic regardless of the levels of traffic and without consideration for the cagers. guys in my area on the other hand only really filter through traffic which is at (or very close to ) a standstill. ive only ever seen one person 'lane splitting' along a three lane road when the speed of traffic was above 15mph- so i followed him and i have to say it was thrilling yet completely terrifying at the same time. i most deffinately wouldnt do it on my own unless following other bikes as i felt after seeing him pass them, theyd me more aware of me following. i would say if it was to be legalised throughout the US, there should be a clause to it that it is only acceptible below a certain speed. by which i mean the actual speed of the traffic, not a percentage/ amount over that of the traffic.

 

[Trinith]

However, it's unlikely to happen due to the consequences.
For instance, if there's no helmet law and you die because you crashed your bike and hit your head then SOMEONE will pick it up and blame someone else for it.
Maybe a family member for example. They'll blame everyone but you for your death. They'll blame all kinds of people, like the guys in charge for not ensuring that there is a helmet law in place to protect your head. They might even sue these people. All of a sudden, it's in their best interests to insure no one goes without a helmet again. Thus, helmet law.

Helmet laws are actually one of the few places where that kind of thing doesn't happen, believe it or not. The people in this country are VERY sue-happy, but that usually isn't an issue. The state I grew up in had a helmet law that was so stupid it wasn't ever enforced, so it may as well not have existed. Only time it was ever mentioned was when someone died and wasn't wearing one. The people telling you about the wreck, be it the police or the news, simply mentioned that the guy wasn't wearing a helmet. The only people that actively bitched about the idea whenever it would come up are the morons who think helmets are unsafe. Most of us wear our helmets all the time and just said "Eh, I don't like helmet laws, but if they pass one then so be it." A bit over a year ago I moved to a state that does have a helmet law. I don't really mind all that much as I wear mine all the time, and I no longer smoke (so I don't have a reason for the 1 block ride to the gas station.) I still wish it didn't exist though. The only difference I noticed that could possibly be applicable is that my insurance went down $150 a year, which is almost nothing. Most of the problem is that there's too many ways to get around it. Cops won't stop you to make sure your helmet meets the standards (and frankly we don't want them to, it costs too much for no real return,) and a lot of people buy those pvc skull cap things that aren't going to do anything in the event of a wreck. It makes the whole concept pretty pointless.

But would it all work over the pond?
Not with under taking allowed in all lanes as it is in most states I have been.
Also a lot of riders will die quickly before the gentlemans agreement starts to exist between car and bikers and that probably why it may never be introduced and there will be far too many bikers riding GTA style between the traffic to begin with adding to a causality rate.

Eh, the undertaking thing kinda bugs me. I don't see why it's any less safe than overtaking assuming the driver actually checks their blind spots and mirrors before changing lanes. I know it's unsafe in Europe, but I think it's because of a bit of circular reasoning. They say it's unsafe -> no one expects it to happen -> no one checks that side before moving -> it becomes unsafe -> they say it's unsafe. Follow? I've actually had more people change lanes into me while I was overtaking them than when I was undertaking them. It's harder to check the drivers side blind spot, I guess. That's the only reason I can come up with.

The casualty rate you mentioned doesn't seem to be true either. California legalized lane sharing a while back, and I don't believe there was a spike in wrecks. If there was I'm sure they would have repealed the law. The big problem with what goes on over there is exactly what you mentioned. People ride fast as hell between the cars, even though there are strict limits on how it should be done. No one seems to care and the police generally can't stop it. So you get people zooming through traffic like douchebags and then saying things like "I love this state, that was totally legal!" Meanwhile the rest of the country sees it in some way or another and collectively says "Fuck that, you people are trying to get yourselves killed and fuck up my car in the process." I don't blame them for that one either, there's far too many vigilante/vindictive bikers out here who think vandalizing a car is ok if the driver did something the rider perceives to be a mistake. Thus it never becomes legal anywhere else.

 

[Zoomie MD]

This is why I love California. Yes there are a myriad of angry and incompetent drivers out there trying to smear me on a daily basis... But splitting is legal. The best part is most drivers don't seem to know that so I regularly have get cutoff by drivers actively blocking my path. Every once in a while people will actually give way and make more room to which I always wave but by and large they are oblivious to me or they try to block. So much fun.

 

[thunderous71]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNGD9AAIfFU[/youtube]

 

[Rogentx]

I agree it should be legal in every state. True, it has it's danger but to me anyway, it is about the same amount of danger getting hit from behind like this poor guy did (which he appeared not to be hurt badly so that is good). I think this particular incident was the lady was either on her phone or just not paying attention.

 

[Chris033081]

I would settle for lane filtering. Here in WA there is a ballet measure to remove the helmet law. I wear a full face and always will. Unfortunately I know filtering and splitting will not make it in WA because the geniuses at the Department of Tansportation thought it would be an excellent idea to put the colored "turtles" between the lanes. You would have a hell of a time splitting on several mini speed bumps.

Washington does allow two motorcycles to occupy the same space in a lane.

I would be very skeptical about the drivers in my neck of the woods and the tolerance to allow a motorcylce to zip by while they sit in idle traffic.


I know California is the only state where lane splitting is not illegal. It is not written as legal, just not written as illegal.

 

[adiknaim]

yes i totally agree with this. its legal here in Singapore (well not illegal, but you will still be prosecuted for reckless driving if you have a crash whilst lanesplitting), and I can't imagine how the traffic would be if it was illegal. roads will be all clogged up and accidents will be more frequent considering the attitude of the drivers over here.

lanesplitting puts you in charge of the safe space. not worried about a driver driving up your ass. and the fact that you can have a longer braking area compared to sitting behind a car and end up slamming into it.

 

[Trinith]

I would settle for lane filtering. Here in WA there is a ballet measure to remove the helmet law. I wear a full face and always will. Unfortunately I know filtering and splitting will not make it in WA because the geniuses at the Department of Tansportation thought it would be an excellent idea to put the colored "turtles" between the lanes. You would have a hell of a time splitting on several mini speed bumps.

There's a bill somewhere in the Tn House to repeal the helmet law as well. I have no idea how much traction it has though. Hopefully it will pass.

I know California is the only state where lane splitting is not illegal. It is not written as legal, just not written as illegal.

I believe they're changing that. I read somewhere that the CHP has put out information on how they're going to enforce some new law, or an existing law in a new way, that pertains to splitting. I think they're getting tired of the idiots that want to split lanes on the interstate at ridiculous speed, but I have no idea how they intend to actually enforce it.