• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Lane Sharing is it time to legislate it?

Let's be very clear here. In the absence of a prohibition under the law, lanesharing is legal. Just like eating a hamburger is legal, or peeing in your own toilet is legal, or singing badly is legal. There is no prohibition, so all of these activities are equally legal. There is no grey area, there is no ambiguity. Legal, lawful, not prohibited.

With that point made clear, asking for legislation to specifically sanction the practice would be a mistake, since it is more likely that after the lobbyists and politicians grind up the very clear and reasonable draft bill we submit, it will resemble vomit on a plate.

The only reason I see to even consider legislation would be where law enforcement does not have sufficient tools in their legal toolbelt to deal with unsafe riding practices by lanesplittters. That is not the situation. You can easily ticket an unsafe rider for a grand list of offenses without any change in existing law.

If you touch the third rail, you may be electrocuted.

If you seek a new law, you may cause death to lanesharing.
 
I like to see an absolute clear law for riders and LEO's to follow.

My last lane-splitting ticket was for tailgating.
 
I have lived in other states and was overjoyed when I returned to California and was able to return to legal lane sharing. When I started riding, the DMV Motorcycle Handbook at that time listed a few suggestions for 'safe and prudent' lanesharing:

Do no laneshare when traffic is moving at speeds in excess of 35 MPH.
Lane sharing is commented for the #1 and #2 lanes, but can be done anywhere there is space to safely pass.
Lane sharing should not be done at speed differentials above 5 MPH.

I still try to observe these 'rule of thumb' which are no longer in the DMV Motorcycle Handbook. I personally believe that they would good points at which to attempt to legislate a legal standard for lane sharing. Personally, I have always had a hard time keeping in a delta of 5 mph, so I am quite a fan of setting that to 10 mph as your first post said. That would allow the bikes to travel at 45mph with traffic at 35 mph. I believe lane sharing at speeds in excess of 45 mph is asking for trouble.

My main concern about trying to legislate the legality of lane sharing is the 'at fault' components of accidents involving lane sharing. Right now, if you are in an accident while lane sharing you are almost guaranteed to be deemed 'at fault' since the accident would most likely not have happened if you where not lane sharing, therefore your decision to lane share was 'unsafe'. I believe a huge hurdle to legislating the legality of lane sharing will be in the grey zone that will potentially be created regarding lane sharing accidents. Given that hurdle, I suspect that any attempt to legislate the legality of lane sharing may fail.

Thanks for posting this up, and soliciting our feedback, Silversvs!
 
Last edited:
yeh... +5mph when traffic is stop and go... sorry, that's retarded...
 
silversvs said:
So where do we go from here? Is it time to push for some type of legislation?
No lane sharing at speeds in excess of 55 MPH?
Lane sharing only allowed between the #1 and #2 lanes?
No speed differential greater than 10 MPH?
Click to expand...
I'm not opposed to the first.

The second could be a serious issue at certain merge points - such at the entrances to the Caldecott Tunnel in the direction opposing commute. In that situation, I believe that the safest place to share lanes is between the two RIGHTmost lanes - because otherwise, you encounter people trying to merge right. On bridges without shoulders (Bay Bridge for example), I also often don't feel that it is the best place to share lanes. There's also the issue of coming up to vehicles that you cannot share past there, and therefore being forced to sit in traffic.

The third? I think 10mph is an awfully small difference. It's also awfully difficult for riders to do - after all, there's no easy way of figuring out exactly what the differential is. If you're sharing the lane with someone who is moving at 15mph, and you are doing 25mph, and they slam on their brakes while you are beside them, does that mean that you have to do so as well in order to avoid passing them at a differential of more than 10mph?


I would like it if lanesharing was explicitly legal, but I don't see it happening.
 
Personally I believe lane sharing should be legal, but my experience is limited as I tend to not do it unless traffic is stopped and I feel extremely safe to do so. But I will answer your questions to the best of my ability:


So where do we go from here? Is it time to push for some type of legislation?: I'm opposed to legislation that would ban lane sharing or that would limit it to certain circumstances. Circumstances just make it way harder to educate both sides.

No lane sharing at speeds in excess of 55 MPH?: This is something that should be looked into. Although it opposes my first answer, setting a specific speed might give officers a better way to police the situation, and if an education campaign happens motorists might not complain as much seeing that there are rules and boundaries. If anything the law should just say "above 55 is illegal to lane share" but not tons of stipulations and bullet points that make the law confusing.

Lane sharing only allowed between the #1 and #2 lanes?: See my answer to question 1. I think this would just start the argument to ban lane sharing.

No speed differential greater than 10 MPH?: This is another I'm opposed too because its hard to really regulate. Yes a CHP officer could catch someone doing this, but this is just gonna make it harder to educate the caged drivers on the rules.

I would much rather see the state/CHP/caltrans do some serious studies. I'm not sure how they would do it but much smarter people then me could figure that out. Figure out what lane size might help or hinder lane sharing and adjust road construction/lane painting accordingly. Maybe have the CHP compile accident reports and see if we can get some serious statistics on lane sharing since it seems none, if any exist. And as always education is key, but as you posted how to do so might be difficult.
 
We need no new laws. NONE. We have plenty.



It all boils down to this: our driver education sucks. Everything else done after that is a knee jerk band-aid to cover the problem of poor driver/rider training.

Ultimately, it is the education that would be cheapest and most effective for society as a whole.
 
Thank you and Budman for being part of our voices, and THANK YOU for helping to keep lane sharing possible. Keep it as it is, please!
How to improve public awareness?
1) Start at the DMV.
Awareness of lane sharing should be incorporated into the DMV manual.
Signs should be posted at DMV..stating rules of the road so that while waiting for LONG LINES, we can read and be educated. Videos even better!!! Videos could point out the benefits to alleviating traffic, congestion, smog and other traffic hassles!
2.MSF and Driving Courses should also address it. Beginners should be warned of the potential hazards and made aware that it is a skill that should be Cautiously and Carefully developed over time. Start at dead stop traffic only/mirrors, use of mirrors and eyes!
3. Statewide ROAD SIGNS:: something like ALLOW (or Watch) FOR MOTORCYCLISTS WHO MAY BE SHARING LANES!!
At LEAST this gives motorists the understanding that we are out there, we are sharing and to have some consideration...whether they like it or not.
I bet that the moto communities in each town would be willing to even pitch in for signs and help to educate.
 
Last edited:
I like the law as it is and hope it doe's not change. I do regret that so many motorcyclist lane share in an unsafe manor. I try to follow the guidlines in the book proficient motorcycling. It would be a real shame to lose this privlidge. I also believe that when traffic is at a stadstill it's much safer to lane share than risk being rear ended by an inattentive driver. Maybe one of these studies that are gonna take place will prove this.
 
It was my understanding that CA's "right turn on red lights" is one of the reasons lane sharing is allowed. You know how everyone likes to pass on the right to get to the corner so they can turn on the red? If lane sharing were made entirely illegal, would drivers lose that ability as well? If so I doubt they'd go for it.
 
I appplaud silversvs for taking the lead on this. I totally support this effort to push for an explicit law.

I can't understand all the negative attitudes I see here "It's not going to work, we can't win, they'll never let us have it, they control everything... etc".

Politics is not about numbers. It's about who cares about something more intensely than others. Regular car drivers don't like lane splitting. But on the list of 'things they don't like', it probably ranks about #151, between toilet water splashing their ass, and seeing Conan O'Brien with a beard. It's just not that important to them either way. Whereas it's hugely important to bikers that we could lane-split. There's fewer of us, but the intensity of feelings is far stronger. That's what lawmakers look at. Not how many people have an opinion, but how many people intensely care about a certain issue.
 
Nice - My thoughts on this topic.

1. I believe we should legislate to make a precedent in favor of lane sharing.
2. I believe a law limiting it between lane #1 and #2 is fine. I personally never split any other lanes.
3. No more than 10 miles above the speed of the traffic split I can agree. I would never go any faster myself.
4. Putting a question about Lane Sharing and it's legality on every single drivers test is important to educate drivers.
5. Don't forget splitting to red lights - That needs to be addressed as legal as well and necessary for safety of riders.

I split every day and commute almost 100miles a day. I see no problem with the above suggestions. I also agree that educating auto drivers is important and putting a question about lane sharing on every license test is a great way to educate drivers in a very simple cheap manner.

I don't agree putting a speed limit on splitting as bumper to bumper traffic can happen at any speed. I would leave that part out.
 
silversvs said:
So where do we go from here? Is it time to push for some type of legislation?
No lane sharing at speeds in excess of 55 MPH?
Lane sharing only allowed between the #1 and #2 lanes?
No speed differential greater than 10 MPH?
Click to expand...

I am of the mind that the "limit" should be slower than that. Probably something like 35 mph. We all know this: the faster traffic is moving, the faster holes open up, and the faster someone can/will swerve into those holes, sometimes right in your path. Yet I continually see people proclaim "I'm skilled enough that I can split in traffic that is flowing at the limit". Yeah, sure, any of us can... right up until the moment someone does something really unexpected and takes you out. At that speed, things happen very fast. You may think you are skilled enough to be safe, but you are NOT. Up until now, you have been lucky to not get taken out. Keep it up and your luck will run out.

The other two points, I totally agree with: designate where we can split (between #1 & #2); and designate the speed differential, of which I think 10 to 15 mph is a good number. Any faster than that, and I believe you are asking for trouble.

Now, I want to bring up another point: WHY do we lane-share? WHY do we filter to the front at traffic lights? Some try to make us believe it's about personal safety: "At a traffic light, I don't want to be at the back and have an inattentive driver slam into me". OK, fine, we'll go with that. So you filter to the front at one red light, between two cars. Light turns green, and due to your superior acceleration, you get ahead of the cars you were between. Now the next light is red. There's no cars ahead of you, because you've gotten ahead of them all. So now you come to a red light, and you're completely exposed. Just the EXACT situation you said you were avoiding by filtering at the light.

So, why can't we all agree that the REAL reason we lane-share is because WE CAN, and because we're IMPATIENT. It's obvious. Due to our small size, it's very easy to get ahead of all the poor saps who have to sit in line, waiting for traffic to start moving again. But we don't. Our "lane" is wherever we can fit. So while they're sitting there, we can keep moving. And if the traffic is bad enough, we can conceivably knock 15 to 30 minutes off our commute if we were sitting in the traffic ourselves. And since there's the loophole that allows it, we are free to do so. Nothing wrong with that. It's legal by omission.

But, don't try to tell me that it is about safety, because I just don't buy that. If it were about safety, these same rider would NOT continue to split when traffic is flowing at or near the limit. There is NOTHING safe about that.

So I think it's high time we DO have specific legislation to tell us in no uncertain terms under what condition we can legally lane-share. Because the more people ride like ass-hats, splitting at 90 mph through traffic that is going 60, the sooner it's going to ruin it for the rest of us. And, yeah, a law will likely not stop those kinds of morons from doing what they do, but at least then it will give law enforcement teeth to stop them when they do that, rather some ambiguous wording about when it's "safe" to do so.
 
oldapeman said:
If you seek a new law, you may cause death to lanesharing.
Click to expand...
Just the opposite, I believe. That is why some motorcyclists want to preempt the exclusion of "lane-sharing". There is not ONE state that has written a law that allows it in any way. All the laws specifically prohibit it. I truly think that we had better get on top of a compromise or it will disappear, here, too.
sanjuro said:
I like to see an absolute clear law for riders and LEO's to follow.

My last lane-splitting ticket was for tailgating.
Click to expand...
I agree, completely. I was written for reckless driving, twice in one week, by the same CHP moto, for just splitting in downtown L.A. It was obvious that the po-po was suffering from that time of month. Clearer rules, might have kept his emotions in check.
 
There cannot be any public policy that legislates that which is misunderstood.

We, as moto riders, cannot even reach a consensus on what is proper lane sharing, or the justification for it. Until that happens, and data is gathered to set the boundaries a bit, then we have a long way to go before legislation.

Lane sharing is not to keep your engine cool or to relieve traffic congestion. The real reason for lane sharing is to keep your bike in motion and not become a fixed target. Even when you are moving along with traffic, you become a fixed target when you are cruising at the same exact speed as the traffic around you. Maintaining a speed differential at all times reduces complacency, keeps a constant flow of escape routes coming, nearly eliminates the possibility of being rear ended, puts the rider in alert status, and makes the rider less dependent on his/her own visibility. Regardless of speed, I do not feel comfortable traveling the same speed between traffic.

Answer this question: What is the difference riding between two cars longitudinal to each other or lateral to each other if there is no speed differential among you?
 
I'm all for setting some guidelines for the practice of lane sharing, but banning outright is going to be a big issue.
 
I like to see an absolute clear law for riders and LEO's to follow.

My last lane-splitting ticket was for tailgating.
 
DaveT319 said:
Some try to make us believe it's about personal safety: "At a traffic light, I don't want to be at the back and have an inattentive driver slam into me". OK, fine, we'll go with that. So you filter to the front at one red light, between two cars. Light turns green, and due to your superior acceleration, you get ahead of the cars you were between. Now the next light is red. There's no cars ahead of you, because you've gotten ahead of them all. So now you come to a red light, and you're completely exposed. Just the EXACT situation you said you were avoiding by filtering at the light.
Click to expand...

Good point about being in the front "may" get you caught at the next light and exposed, except:

- Often there are other cars waiting at the next light, so you filter to the front, again got your rear protected.

- Even if there's no car at the next light and you're the first one there, exposed, it's no worse than not being able to filter in the first place. Yet you still get the benefit of the clear path, and not get boxed in and get lost among the bigger vehicles.

Either way, I still see a safety advantage.
 
Gary856 said:
Good point about being in the front "may" get you caught at the next light and exposed, except:

- Often there are other cars waiting at the next light, so you filter to the front, again got your rear protected.

- Even if there's no car at the next light and you're the first one there, exposed, it's no worse than not being able to filter in the first place. Yet you still get the benefit of the clear path, and not get boxed in and get lost among the bigger vehicles.

Either way, I still see a safety advantage.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but there ARE times when you are just at the front at the next light, completely exposed. And the "benefit" of the clear path? So that you can take off ahead of the cars behind you? That to me sounds like impatience. And that's the reason I filter: I'm not thinking about keeping from getting rear-ended, I'm thinking about being able to get out in front. I just think we need to own up to it that as a community, that it's less about safety and more about being able to get out in front of the "evil cagers".
 
If lanesharing is legislated motorcyclists will end up losing, data or no data. Lanesharing isn't a numbers game to people who get scared when you ride by- its an emotional issue and those people will have a much louder voice in Sacramento then motorcyclists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top