Lane Sharing is it time to legislate it?

[Underdog]

I fail to see the point. As already noted- we have so many specific laws that serve no purpose: the phone usage one is a prime example.

You should be able to drive/ride your vehicle safely. Whether you chew on a hamburger, talk on the phone, powder your nose or turn around to shout at the kids in the rear or grab the wheel with your thighs- your control over the vehicle should not be compromised. If you exhibit failure to comply with this simple requirement, you should be punished accordingly, and I believe there's a specific code this applies to.

Lane sharing is legal, as long as it is done safely, in lanes 1, 2, 3 and while riding under the speed limit. You could be sharing your lane erratically at 5mph, and execute it smoothly at 70mph.

Should sharing be made "Legal" ? It already is. Just as applying lip gloss.

 

[metlchip]

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.

I'm with ya , But i can understand the concerns of the caged when bikes split past at 80mph, hell I'll be riding 80 already and they split past me crap how fast do we gotta go??? this just fuels the arguments of the ones who would legislate.

 

[Z3n]

I am very interested to hear what folks have to say.

My question is:

Why were the previous guidelines removed? The previous guidelines, IIRC, were no faster than 45 mph, no more than 15mph over the flow of traffic, and not between traffic and the double yellow line.

All of which are perfectly reasonable, good ways to "legislate" something that doesn't need legislation. If someone is being reckless, you have a clear point of violation: In normal situations, you shouldn't be splitting over these speeds. You have guidelines for normal riders, you have something to salve the wounded pride of those who get strafed by motorcyclists at 65mph on clear roads, and it's a very reasonable set of guidelines.

Make a law that clearly legalizes lane sharing, reinstate the guidelines in the DMV handbook, and you're good to go.

This isn't difficult. 45mph is more than quick enough for lane sharing (remember, diminishing returns on the gains from lanesharing the faster you go), 15mph is the fastest that I'd say you can prudently split, and not splitting next to the oncoming lane of traffic is common sense. No need for laws, just reinstate the pre-existing guidelines. Leave the rest of it to the judgment of the police and the courts, you can be safe at +15 at 45, and you can be unsafe splitting through stopped traffic at 10mph.

I highly doubt that you're going to be able to find conclusive evidence on splitting, thanks to the police oftentimes being just as ignorant of the laws as the public and oftentimes applying fault to motorcyclists when they didn't deserve it.

I say this having gotten pulled over multiple times for lane sharing, not in a reckless or endangering fashion, but simply because I was lane sharing. The police would pull me over, say they pulled me over for lane sharing, I'd pull out my DMV handbook that showed where it was legal and that I was well within the recommended guidelines, and they'd let me go. Now I have to convince them of the legality of it, establish that I wasn't being unsafe, or risk a ticket and going to court. It's a pain in the ass that could be fixed by simply clearly defining lane sharing. If those police officers believe sharing is illegal, then of course they'd find the motorcyclists at fault if they were involved in a lanesharing accident.

 

[pandy]

If those police officers believe sharing is illegal, then of course they'd find the motorcyclists at fault if they were involved in a lanesharing accident.

I've been in this situation.

Education, education, education. NONE of my non-riding friends knew that lanesharing is legal. After finding out it's legal (and knowing someone who rides helps...makes it more personal to them), they actually ARE on the lookout for bikes now, and they do move over to give room. They simply didn't know that what the "crazy bikers" are doing is actually legal (in a safe and prudent manner, of course).

It would be nice to see LEOs educated (if even ONE doesn't know that lanesharing is legal, then that's one too many.....no offense intended to our beloved LEOs). It would be nice to see the whole idea of sharing the road as a major part of driver training and testing.

I agree with those who believe that legislation is the start of a slippery slope leading to banning of lanesharing. There are zillions more drivers on the road, and of COURSE they're going to vote to make sure us crazy bikers can't do our "crazy things" on the road. I think if we START with an excellent educational campaign, we'd see a drop in incidents between cages and lanesharers.

*I* am occasionally surprised by a lanesharer when I'm driving my cage, too. Does that mean that lanesharing is bad? No. It means that I wasn't paying enough attention!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[horsepower]

I noticed that Experienced City riders often share the RIGHT lanes only on (bay) Bridges...great example of a practical safety first issue that may not fit in a tight fit law.

 

[wellbredred]

I do not see any need to legislate lanesharing. I think drivers should be educated that it is legal. I don't think educating everyone that it is legal will encourage riders that don't currently share lanes to do so. I'm sure they already know, but choose to not do so.

If it were to be legislated, I'm sure I'll give the law the same respect/regard that drivers are giving to the hands free cell phone law. None.

Edit: Forgot to thank you and Budman for your time serving on the committee (regardless of your position on the issue)

 

[TrueFader]

Personally i like lane sharing and believe when done right can be safer than riding in your spot in your lane. effectively eliminating the opportunity of a car merging into you without looking and such. I have amy own peronal guidelines that are pretty in line with what legislation ideas you suggested, but i also think that there are definite times i feel safe breaking them, as they are guidlines not rules. An attempt to legislate lane sharing will probably get a negative attitude from most motorcyclists, i personally think most new legislation is more of an attemt to collect revenue than for public safety. At the moment the lane sharing is at the choice of the rider and ultimately is the rider's obligation to do so wisely. From your commitee i believe the idea to educate the public is the way to go, both to the motorsists that lane sharing is legal to end any aggression on their part, and to the riders how they can do so safely to cut down on risk. Like lane position, speed relative to traffic, trafic speed in relation to the speed limit. And i believe it's been proven with the speed laws that people are going to do what they want whether there's legislation against it or not. Oh and if legislation suggesting lane sharing be banned or anything of the sort, it's really unfair becasue there are a lot more ignorant car drivers who think getting on a motorcycle period is a deathwish and they heavily outnumber us. if there's a vote on it allowed the total number of non motorcyclists voting shouldn't be allowed to outnumber the people the law is affecting.... Motorcycle riders. yes cars are on the same freeways, but does splitting past them really have any effect on them?
P.S. i know my grammar and spelling both are horrible.

 

[DataDan]

I believe there is a problem with lane splitting. It is seen in the many crashes reported here on BARF and elsewhere. And sooner or later, it's going to be addressed by state government. Better for that to be on our terms than someone else's.

In the Bay Area I would say there are as many lane-splitting crashes as there are left-turner crashes. The number of BARF lane-splitting crash threads I've collected since 2004 is now over 25, and the number of Bay Area deaths I'm aware of is up to 13. I'm sure that a lot of crashes have been prevented by lane splitting too, but what the public and the official opponents see are crashes that did happen, not the ones that didn't.

My preference would be to address the problem by indoctrinating riders with good lane-splitting practices. No laws, just awareness of specific risks and exercise of good judgment. But that's unlikely to be effective. When I read about riders splitting at high speed just for the fun of it or see videos of truly insane lane splitting, I know that, collectively, California riders lack the good sense to reduce lane-splitting crashes. A majority of riders splitting sensibly will not overcome the effect of a minority who either don't care or intentionally put themselves at risk.

I don't see any point in educating drivers, except to let them know it's legal and to learn to deal with it. Pleading with them to look for lane splitters and putting responsiblity on them for safer lane splitting will have a negative effect. The 20 million California drivers who don't ride motorcycles gain next to nothing from lane splitting. A few million of them may enjoy commuting with marginally better traffic flow thanks to the 1% who commute on motorcycles rather than in cars. But if drivers are burdened with the responsibility to watch for motorcycles in places where they don't have to look for cars, or if they're held legally or financially responsible for crashes, lane splitting is all lose to them. The sensible reaction is just to support a ban it because it isn't worth the trouble.

If laws are the solution, here's what I would propose:

• Lane splitting is permitted only between two thru lanes moving in the same direction. It is NOT permitted between a thru lane and: the centerline or median; the fogline, a bicycle lane, or a merge lane; a right or left turn lane.
  
  The relative safety of lane splitting comes from riding between two lanes of traffic. Vehicles tend to stay in their own lanes and out of the lane-splitting space because of the presence of cars in the opposite lane. Riders should already understand this and comply with this proposed law, but they don't.
  
  
• Lane splitting is not permitted in construction zones, or in areas with narrower than standard lanes specifically posted to prohibit splitting.
  
  The worst hazard in these areas is large trucks in narrow lanes. Four riders lost their lives at the 238/580 junction in lane-splitting crashes with big rigs when lanes were narrow and construction was in progress.
  
  
• A lane-splitting motorcycle must yield to a vehicle changing lanes. If a collision occurs between a lane-splitting motorcycle and a vehicle legally changing lanes, it's the rider's fault.
  
  The most frequent lane-splitting crash I'm aware of is when the motorcycle hits a car changing lanes. This proposed law puts responsibility for preventing these crashes on the rider. It's the lane-splitter who has the best view to the developing situation and is in the best position to avert it.
  
  
• If a vehicle in any lane must stop so as not to block an intersection (as required by the anti-gridlock law, 22526 VC), a lane-splitting motorcycle must yield to crossing traffic, notwithstanding any other right-of-way consideration.
  
  I know of a few crashes that occurred when a motorcycle split through stopped traffic into a intersection being kept clear in compliance with 22526 VC, only to slam into a crossing vehicle.
  

 

[pandy]

[*]A lane-splitting motorcycle must yield to a vehicle changing lanes. If a collision occurs between a lane-splitting motorcycle and a vehicle legally changing lanes, it's the rider's fault.

Unfortunately, this is already the de facto way many accidents of this nature are handled. I think that legislating the blame to rest on motorcyclists just by virtue of the fact that they're motorcyclists is a VERY bad precedent to set.

EACH vehicle should be responsible for its own space. Each individual should be responsible for paying attention, following the laws of the road, and keeping their metal off of mine.

Edit: In regards to the "legally" included in the above legislative suggestion, any legal lane change is already covered in existing code, no? (Also, is slamming on your brakes while you're doing 75 in the carpool lane to jump into the next lane so as not to miss your exit...giving any traffic behind you microseconds to respond.....legal or not? I saw this every day on my commute, and even someone who left plenty of space has difficulty dealing with THESE...idiots...)

 

[DataDan]

Unfortunately, this is already the de facto way many accidents of this nature are handled. I think that legislating the blame to rest on motorcyclists just by virtue of the fact that they're motorcyclists is a VERY bad precedent to set.

I think it's essential. These crashes are the vast majority of the ones reported in BARF threads, and too many riders simply don't understand this risk. Making the responsibility explicit will prevent crashes.

 

[TrueFader]

I'm not sure who to side with on the lane changing responsibility. Part of me wants to have the rider responsible and aware of an empty space a car wants to occupy while splitting. But even the most vigilant of riders cannot predict a no signal no look lane change by an oblivious motorist. It's not that uncommon to see one with an open novel on their steering wheel during commute hours. It would be horrible to put the blame on a rider that was merged into while haveing half their bike alongside the car simply because the driver failed yet again to check their blind spot.

 

[pandy]

I think it's essential. These crashes are the vast majority of the ones reported in BARF threads, and too many riders simply don't understand this risk. Making the responsibility explicit will prevent crashes.

Dan, I love your data threads, and I respect your opinion, but I vehemently and respectfully disagree with you. If you have a cager who legally changes lanes and a biker who's legally sharing lanes, WHY do you believe that the biker should automatically be blamed?

Outlawing bikes would prevent crashes, too, but there has to be a limit somewhere. I agree with you that too many riders don't understand the risks; however, blaming riders isn't the answer. We're blamed enough for things that aren't our fault (crazy bikers riding between cars like they own the road!!!).

Blaming bikers simply due to the fact that we're bikers, we're a smaller population, and perhaps we're easier to legislate against because we're the minority....not a good thing. This simply confirms in the minds of cagers that we're bad and need to be punished (whether we're riding legally or not).

I'm not sure who to side with on the lane changing responsibility. Part of me wants to have the rider responsible and aware of an empty space a car wants to occupy while splitting. But even the most vigilant of riders cannot predict a no signal no look lane change by an oblivious motorist. It's not that uncommon to see one with an open novel on their steering wheel during commute hours. It would be horrible to put the blame on a rider that was merged into while haveing half their bike alongside the car simply because the driver failed yet again to check their blind spot.

This is *exactly* what happened to me...no signal, no look, micro-second to respond. Even with a witness, I was blamed. We bikers are blamed enough for things that aren't within our control...why should it be LEGISLATED that others' bad/endangering behavior is our fault? :|

 

[davidji]

Dan, I love your data threads, and I respect your opinion, but I vehemently and respectfully disagree with you.

+1

 

[Skidmarx]

Legislate it. Codify it. Keep it legal.

 

[Charles R]

If you have a cager who legally changes lanes and a biker who's legally sharing lanes, WHY do you believe that the biker should automatically be blamed?

For me, this is answered just like it would be on a race track... "The overtaking vehicle is responsible for making a safe pass."

While lane sharing, it is WE who are overtaking. And since they are in front and (should be) clearly in our sight, we have the advantage. The cars on the other hand, must pick our smaller vehicle out of the melee they can see in their 2x3 inch rear view mirrors, and a possible quick look over a shoulder.

This is nothing more than simply dealing with the physical limitations of each vehicle. Also realize that a car making a legal lane change, would also be using his signal. If a rider STILL hits them, why WOULDN'T it be his fault?


Back to the topic though.

I think the best ideas I've seen so far are putting the now missing guidlines back into the handbooks, for both moto and cars, and putting the question on the written tests. Again, for both cars and moto's. (although, you could omit the question on the test for the moto's if you want to placate the comissioners who don't want to encourage sharing)

But any legislation that leads to a public vote will end poorly for the moto community.
A comment above pointed out that it's the most vocal that tends to get thier way. That is a case... to a point. For this type of thing, there's just WAYY too many non-riders out there. All they will see is some voter handbook summation, make an opinion right then and there, and mark the box. We just won't have the numbers to overcome the simply indifferent masses, who would just think, "yeah, that doesn't sound safe" and strike it down.

 

[Traq]

As soon as the proponents for legislation or out right banning produce a single solitary scientifically valid study that indicates lane sharing is dangerous, then they may deserve to be listened to. But on so long as to tell them to get more valid evidence since one study means nothing.

Fact of the matter is it is a perceived problem by self righteous people that think "hey *I* can't do that so why should they be able to??"

First step would be to have CHP collect data on accidents that includes noting whether lane sharing was a potential factor or not. After a brief period of such data collection, say 10 years or so, then there'd be *something* to actually talk about. Until then the proponents should just be laughed at.

Incidentally, why is anyone at DMV involved with a traffic safety issue? What expertise do they bring to the table in that field?

 

[boney]

The only reason I see to legislate it is to provide some measure of liability to both driver and rider for insurance purposes. Since there is no real data out there, insurance companies can't lobby it. However, I would love to know how much insurance companies have paid out on lane sharing mishaps for either side? My guess is not much since there hasn't been a stink raised like there was before helmet laws.

I'm jumping in without having read the whole thread just so my thoughts can be put down somewhere. If I'm duplicating info, then you're reading this before I've had a chance to edit it.

Since there is no law, can we deduce that for whatever reasons a collision's cause is determined, it is not "lane sharing." There are numerous other violations, of course, but I wonder how often lane sharing is recorded as a cause or contributing factor.

My question is: is better to keep it un-legislated and hope no politician gets the idea and juice to legislate lane sharing, or is it better for the motorcycling community to start the process and have input?

It is always in our best interest to take control of the situation rather than let someone else who is ignorant of motorcycling handle it. The next question I have is, "is anti-lane-sharing legislation imminent?" If the answer is "yes" then, yes. If "no," then no.

Can motorcyclists as a community keep themselves under control to keep from having this privelege taking away from us?

If history is any indication...

For me, this is answered just like it would be on a race track... "The overtaking vehicle is responsible for making a safe pass."

And just like the ski-slope traffic: it's your responsibility to avoid the skier downhill from you.


Allow me to suggest the first ad campaign tag line. It's self explanatory and the cagers will get it as much as we do.
Show with a picture of a motorcycle between two cars:
Lane Sharing is Okay. Riding like an idiot is not.

 

[davidji]

By the time the cager changes lanes into the motorcycle, the motorcycle may already be occupying the adjacent lane. It could be a simple "changed lanes without looking and caused a crash". And we should make that legal because the bike lane-shared?

Giving drivers carte blanche to take out motorcycles is the worst possible thing we could do. Though they nearly have it already. Furthermore some do it deliberately. And more would if they knew they were legally absolved from responsibility. Seriously that's one of the worst suggestions I've ever seen here. And from one of the best contributors to this forum.

Drivers need to understand their obligation to check that it's safe before they change lanes, swerve, open their door in stopped traffic etc.

As far as assigning liability, I expect we could learn something from how it's done in countries with similar legal systems.

Something to consider when trying to define legal responsibilities here is what should people reasonably expected to do? In cases where contact between the car & bike wasn't deliberate (e.g., driver trying to block or squeeze out bike), I'd expect it could go one of 3 ways:
Motorcycle responsible: For example, too fast, too close
Driver responsible: For example, darted sharply without checking that it was clear
Shared responsibility: Both motorists seem to have been operating reasonably, but contact was made.

 

[sasquatch]

[*]A lane-splitting motorcycle must yield to a vehicle changing lanes. If a collision occurs between a lane-splitting motorcycle and a vehicle legally changing lanes, it's the rider's fault.

This would open up motorcycles to be liable for ALL accidents.
Every car would say, I did not see him he must have been lane splitting.

 

[davidji]

This would open up motorcycles to be liable for ALL accidents.
Every car would say, I did not see him he must have been lane splitting.

Yup. And it wouldn't be the first time an incredibly ill-conceived idea became law.