Lane-splitting redux

[hbelkins]

It's still a bad idea, dangerous and reckless and MFFY selfish behavior, and should be illegal.

[jeffandnicole]

Hook and ladder a bit much there at the end???

[jakeroot]

It's still a bad idea, dangerous and reckless and MFFY selfish behavior, and should be illegal.

You're just jealous that lane splitters get where they're going faster than you do.

Also, MFFY? How are you inconvenienced by lane splitting? The fact that you have to look before you change lanes?

[AsphaltPlanet]

I agree.  Lane splitting is dangerous and should be illegal.  I recall being stuck in traffic in California, and being caught off guard a couple of times with motorcycles coming up between the lanes unexpectedly.  It makes changing lanes difficult, because it can be hard to anticipate lane changes where you are waiting for gaps in slowly moving traffic.

[empirestate]

Just to be clear, we're talking about the lane splitting that was being done by the car in that video? Or the motorcycles? Or both?


iPhone

[jakeroot]

I agree.  Lane splitting is dangerous and should be illegal.  I recall being stuck in traffic in California, and being caught off guard a couple of times with motorcycles coming up between the lanes unexpectedly.  It makes changing lanes difficult, because it can be hard to anticipate lane changes where you are waiting for gaps in slowly moving traffic.

It's either (A) have them line up with other cars, or (B) have them ride between the lanes.

The problem is that (A) has been shown to be more dangerous, even though the perceived danger of (B) is as-high or higher than (A).

As for lane changing, just watch your mirror. Even if you do hit a motorcyclist, you'll probably be fine. The only one in any peril here is the motorcyclist.

[jakeroot]

Just to be clear, we're talking about the lane splitting that was being done by the car in that video? Or the motorcycles? Or both?

As far as I know, HB is talking about the lane splitting being performed by the motorcycle (the car isn't lane splitting so much as they're just changing lanes illegally).

[AlexandriaVA]

I fully support lane-splitting. Even though I don't own a motorbike, I support more people riding them because they are much more space-efficient than a full-sized car or truck carrying a single person.

I find it unfortunate that hbelkins takes satisfactions in other people's road accidents, but I guess to each their own. I would strongly advise you not to visit Southern Europe or Southeast Asia, as you would be overwhelmed by motorbikes and their "dangerous and reckless and MFFY selfish behavior".

[empirestate]

Just to be clear, we're talking about the lane splitting that was being done by the car in that video? Or the motorcycles? Or both?

As far as I know, HB is talking about the lane splitting being performed by the motorcycle (the car isn't lane splitting so much as they're just changing lanes illegally).

Right; point essentially being that both vehicles were occupying part of the roadway they shouldn't have been, because the double yellow line prohibits it.

[jakeroot]

Just to be clear, we're talking about the lane splitting that was being done by the car in that video? Or the motorcycles? Or both?

As far as I know, HB is talking about the lane splitting being performed by the motorcycle (the car isn't lane splitting so much as they're just changing lanes illegally).

Right; point essentially being that both vehicles were occupying part of the roadway they shouldn't have been, because the double yellow line prohibits it.

Riding along the double yellows is accepted practice in California (as is lane sharing, hence why lane splitting is legal there). You'll see police riding along the double yellows all the time. In theory, it's the safest spot because cars can't change lanes (though they do, it's still far less common than between other lanes).

[empirestate]

Just to be clear, we're talking about the lane splitting that was being done by the car in that video? Or the motorcycles? Or both?

As far as I know, HB is talking about the lane splitting being performed by the motorcycle (the car isn't lane splitting so much as they're just changing lanes illegally).

Right; point essentially being that both vehicles were occupying part of the roadway they shouldn't have been, because the double yellow line prohibits it.

Riding along the double yellows is accepted practice in California (as is lane sharing, hence why lane splitting is legal there). You'll see police riding along the double yellows all the time. In theory, it's the safest spot because cars can't change lanes (though they do, it's still far less common than between other lanes).

Accepted, yes. But when we've discussed this before, it wasn't conclusively shown to be legal (mainly because CA law is silent on lane-splitting but not in double yellow markings). And since this video very obviously shows a car where it isn't supposed to be, the question really arises whether this is about lane splitting at all.



iPhone

[jakeroot]

Accepted, yes. But when we've discussed this before, it wasn't conclusively shown to be legal (mainly because CA law is silent on lane-splitting but not in double yellow markings). And since this video very obviously shows a car where it isn't supposed to be, the question really arises whether this is about lane splitting at all.

I'm still not completely sure what you're getting at here, but the law [that permits lane sharing] is so vague, it would be exceedingly difficult to enforce. In theory, the only way a motorcyclist breaks the law here is if he or she entirely crosses over the double yellow. Simply riding upon the yellow may not constitute crossing it.

[ET21]

It's still a bad idea, dangerous and reckless and MFFY selfish behavior, and should be illegal.

You're just jealous that lane splitters get where they're going faster than you do.

Not really, not my fault if they crash and either seriously injure themselves/others or worse.

[empirestate]

Accepted, yes. But when we've discussed this before, it wasn't conclusively shown to be legal (mainly because CA law is silent on lane-splitting but not in double yellow markings). And since this video very obviously shows a car where it isn't supposed to be, the question really arises whether this is about lane splitting at all.

I'm still not completely sure what you're getting at here, but the law [that permits lane sharing] is so vague, it would be exceedingly difficult to enforce. In theory, the only way a motorcyclist breaks the law here is if he or she entirely crosses over the double yellow. Simply riding upon the yellow may not constitute crossing it.

That pretty much is what I'm getting at. As I recall, the law that allows lane splitting in CA is actually merely the absence of any law; i.e., lane splitting is implicitly legal because it isn't prohibited. So, point 1 is that lane splitting should be discarded altogether as an issue here (and I was probably misleading by using the term in my original comment) since there's no language about it in the law. So that leaves us with the law regarding the double yellow marking. However vaguely worded that law may be, there's no question that both vehicles here are occupying space near, on or across the double yellow marking, so that would be the first place I'd examine in finding fault, were that my job. I wouldn't even consider lane splitting, since there's no legal language for that in CA.

Point 2 would be the phrase "both vehicles". The OP didn't mention which vehicle he had in mind as the lane splitter, but customary usage assumes it's the motorcycle. Obviously, the car is also very complicit in this accident, so I wanted to clarify that he was referring to that vehicle also.


iPhone

[jakeroot]

Not really, not my fault if they crash and either seriously injure themselves/others or worse.

Well that's kind of the point. We are so obsessed with not letting them "get ahead" (because, lets face it, we're jealous), that we insist they ride where they don't feel comfortable, and/or where it's been proven to be, in many cases, much more dangerous (that is, sitting between a car's trunk and another car's hood).

There's no denying that motorcyclists are the one's who are at greater risk for injury, right? In that case, let them ride where they feel safe (be it behind a car, or next to one). That's it.

[Roadrunner75]

...we insist they ride where they don't feel comfortable...

...let them ride where they feel safe (be it behind a car, or next to one....)

If I feel more comfortable and safe barreling down the shoulder so I'm not in the traffic stream, should I be allowed to go ahead and do that?

I don't really care if they feel safer riding the lane striping - They are driving a motor vehicle and should be subject to the same traffic laws as everyone else.  I don't feel 'safe and comfortable' with some idiot zooming in between cars.  This kind of behavior is beyond dangerous and California should ban it outright.  You're placing a vehicle where nobody could reasonably expect it to be and where it is illegal in most of the country.  The motorcyclist in the video was doing something incredibly stupid and was lucky they weren't killed.

[noelbotevera]

I've seen so many instances whenever I go to New York City...it is so dangerous. Demented I am, I actually laugh at their pain, cause they deserve it for being a-holes. Though I still feel sorry for them...

It should be illegal. I actually prefer HOT/HOV/carpool/express/local lanes to be separated by concrete, which would discourage lane splitting and instead motorcycles are forced to pick one or the other instead of weaving in and out of double solid lines/lane splitting. This also stops cars from hitting motorcycles because those dedicated lanes aren't separated by double solid yellow lines, but instead a nice fluffy concrete barricade.

[hbelkins]

I find it unfortunate that hbelkins takes satisfactions in other people's road accidents, but I guess to each their own.

I did not say that, and if you infer that from my comment, then you're delusional.

[ET21]

Not really, not my fault if they crash and either seriously injure themselves/others or worse.

Well that's kind of the point. We are so obsessed with not letting them "get ahead" (because, lets face it, we're jealous), that we insist they ride where they don't feel comfortable, and/or where it's been proven to be, in many cases, much more dangerous (that is, sitting between a car's trunk and another car's hood).

It's not jealousy, it's common sense. I don't feel jealous if someone whizzes by me weaving at 110 or cuts through a jam. That's their choice and in some awful cases their funeral.

[jakeroot]

This kind of behavior is beyond dangerous

..it is so dangerous.

in some awful cases their funeral.

All three of you are completely delusional. There are no stats, and I mean none, that show lane splitting to be dangerous. Your perceptions are worthless if you can't back them up with facts.

Lane splitting at roughly 10-20 mph above the speed of surrounding traffic poses little, to no danger to either the motorcyclists or drivers.

All of you are used to seeing the dangerous motorcyclists, who purposely flout the law, riding between vehicles and along the shoulder at speeds well over the limit, and you've translated their behaviour to be representative of all motorcyclists. I also don't like those motorcyclists, but this is not at all fair to the thousands of motorcyclists in California, and hell, many other countries, who commute everyday to work, splitting lanes, causing danger to no one, hardly even themselves, so long as they're paying attention.

But, no, you insist that a two wheeled contraption be treated like a four-wheeled contraption, even though the two have absolutely nothing in common. Bikes and cars have been treated the same for decades, but that doesn't mean that they are the same. Anyone with a brain knows that the safest way to get from A to B is by car (well, unless we include trains or planes). It is a well known fact that riding a motorcycle poses a much greater inherent threat to the operator of the motorcycle, than to the operator of a vehicle. Thus, perhaps we need to bend the laws to more accurately reflect the situation at hand: namely, that motorcycles are not cars, and though they should be limited to roughly the same rules as vehicles, there are areas for improvement.

If I feel more comfortable and safe barreling down the shoulder so I'm not in the traffic stream, should I be allowed to go ahead and do that?

Sure, as long as you can prove that doing so is safer. After all, that's all I'm doing.

[ET21]

Sorry that I dont trust bikes on interstates. You can call me delusional, but I will not be accountable for some jackass who decides to take a chance in-between lanes and gets me involved in some sort of accident.

We're delusional if we think it's dangerous???  It IS dangerous.

I really don't know why this scab of a topic was reborn, we all know what happened to the last one  . It's those against vs those for.

[jeffandnicole]

Sorry that I dont trust bikes on interstates. You can call me delusional, but I will not be accountable for some jackass who decides to take a chance in-between lanes and gets me involved in some sort of accident.

We're delusional if we think it's dangerous???  It IS dangerous.

I really don't know why this scab of a topic was reborn, we all know what happened to the last one  . It's those against vs those for.

You don't have to accept responsibility.  They'll just apply it to you if you're found to be in the wrong.  You can talk to a judge about it and let him make the final ruling.

[empirestate]

I still think we're getting confused by the applicability of lane splitting to the video in the OP. (Understandably so, since the OP draws this connection to the video and, indeed, the entire thread is named for it...)

For a parallel example, consider a line of traffic stopped for a red light; the approach is just a single lane with no auxiliary turn lanes. A couple of people want to turn right at this light and decide they don't want to wait for the green, since they can make a right on red. One driver sees the long line of traffic ahead before he reaches it, and so he moves immediately to the shoulder, bypassing the entire line. Another driver, already in the queue and close to the front of it, decides to pull out onto the shoulder to do likewise. The first driver, already using the shoulder, comes upon the second as he pulls out and can't stop in time to avoid hitting him. Who's at fault?

[kphoger]

There are no stats, and I mean none, that show lane splitting to be dangerous. Your perceptions are worthless if you can't back them up with facts.

I am not all that interested in who's right on this topic, and I've never ridden a motorcycle.  But the quote above is, to me, the hinge-point of the debate.  There has been a call for statistics to back up the assertion that lane-splitting is dangerous, and so far no one has presented any.  Until someone puts forth some stats, I'll remain unconvinced.

I will not be accountable for some jackass who decides to take a chance in-between lanes and gets me involved in some sort of accident.

You don't have to accept responsibility.  They'll just apply it to you if you're found to be in the wrong.  You can talk to a judge about it and let him make the final ruling.

Unless you're dead, in which case it's impossible to appeal to the judge.  Again, I don't particularly care who's right or wrong; I just want to point out that legal fault is not the only form of consequence when it comes to traffic accidents.

For a parallel example, consider a line of traffic stopped for a red light; the approach is just a single lane with no auxiliary turn lanes. A couple of people want to turn right at this light and decide they don't want to wait for the green, since they can make a right on red. One driver sees the long line of traffic ahead before he reaches it, and so he moves immediately to the shoulder, bypassing the entire line. Another driver, already in the queue and close to the front of it, decides to pull out onto the shoulder to do likewise. The first driver, already using the shoulder, comes upon the second as he pulls out and can't stop in time to avoid hitting him. Who's at fault?

There are other similar parallel scenarios.  Roads that are wide enough for four lanes of traffic but only striped for two, traffic driving side-by-side.  Where a 2-way left-turn lane becomes a left-only lane and through traffic is backed up for a half-mile so traffic rides the TWLTL.  When traffic is backed up for two blocks at a stoplight and a cyclist rides along in the gutter to get to the head of the line.

[Roadrunner75]

There are no stats, and I mean none, that show lane splitting to be dangerous. Your perceptions are worthless if you can't back them up with facts.

I am not all that interested in who's right on this topic, and I've never ridden a motorcycle.  But the quote above is, to me, the hinge-point of the debate.  There has been a call for statistics to back up the assertion that lane-splitting is dangerous, and so far no one has presented any.  Until someone puts forth some stats, I'll remain unconvinced.

After exhaustive research, I submit the following as factual evidence of the danger of lane splitting: