• 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?

Great comments so far, please keep them coming.

I'm on my Iphone at the IMS show, so no long comments from me for now.

To clarify, the committee is talking about all this in the focus of " increasing motorcycle safety in the state of California."

There is no push from the legislature, there is no attempt to increase revenues, there is no effort to get someone elected/re-elected. The sole purpose of the committe is to find ways to reduce motorcycle collisions in the state. Lane sharing is just one of many many topics we have been examining and acting on. As an example, two posters mentioned getting a question regarding lane sharing on the DMV drivers license test. That is already in the works and is a direct output of the committee's work.

In regard to lane sharing here is the difficulty I have with the current situation. Since there is no specific lane sharing law it creates confusion. This confusion leads to animosity between motorists and motorcyclists. It leads to animosity between LEOs and motorcylists, and it leaves the entire situation up to personal opinion and interpretation.

What I feel is a safe lane sharing practice may or may not be supported by others. So how can I give someone advice on how to do so? How can we as a committee make a "suggestion" on the safe practice of and enforcement of lane sharing?

Don't get me wrong and think I want legislation, I'm more interested in trying to clarify the practice and create a consistent message. But legislation may be the only way to do so.
 
silversvs said:
Don't get me wrong and think I want legislation, I'm more interested in trying to clarify the practice and create a consistent message. But legislation may be the only way to do so.
Click to expand...


The problem with this is it will no doubtingly become restrictive, fee based, corrupt, and the funds pilfered towards other issues. Sad. But such is the nature of the beast we call government... :|


:loco Mark :loco
 
I figured since this was out I would let you guys know where I stand on it.. as I believe I am your representative in ways since I am the only one on the committee that is really just there to be motorcyclists voice. (in otherwords I am not affiliated with the Gov't or really a person who makes a living in the moto biz world). I basically pay my own way to be part of this committee.

There are some outstanding things that are coming out of this committee, which BTW have to go up the ladder before anything happens because of our recommendations.

On the lane sharing issue

1st. I oppose any legislation at this point for sure.

2nd. I believe lane sharing to be valuable to motorcyclist and car drivers alike.

3rd. I don't think there is enough factual data on the subject to make very many determinations despite my own experiences. I realize mine are not enough and there are so many things (variables) that affect the practice.

4th. Any lane sharing legislation will/ should receive the full attention of motorcyclist and I have already seen that in this thread.

The only thing I believe should be done at this point is educate both motorists and motorcyclist and data collection

The education part is the most important part as that can have an immediate affect.

Data collection is great, but it must be filtered out to have it be useful by people who understand what they are looking at and to me that means include riders in the mix.

Even riders disagree on the what's and where's and will likely continue to do so.

There are several negative practices that "we" as riders do to hurt ourselves on this issue. These cause the general public to have negative feelings about us.

High Speed carving.
* Speed differential that is to great to safely make a corrective action.
* Annoying loud pipes that just piss off the cagers regardless of how safe the pass/share is.
* Dangerously aggressive manuevers.

All of these can be addressed with current law ~ However these are open to interpretation and that leaves the LEO's questioning whether to take action or not.

The problem I really see with identifying restrictions is there is always a situation where it can be safer or just as safe to do it that the law could preclude.

Examples:

If 35 was the max speed you can do it.

* Traffic flow is still sketchy going up to 45 and down to 15. Now you force the motorcyclist to use some of his attention on the speedo rather than traffic thus losing some of the mental resources available to do it safely.

* The Laguna Syndrome : Cars are moving at 20 to 50 and thousand of bikes are moving thru the vehicles. With that sort of dominance on the roadway where lines of bikes are sharing then the motorists are generally aware of our presence and will stay more lane locked and start to really pay attention before making lane changes.

If you could only do it between lane 1 and 2
* This could in cases put you in harm due to road conditions. If pavement is not level between 1 and 2, but is between 2 and 3 then it would be illegal to move to a safer condition.

* You lose the safety factor (not being rear ended) as you move to the right lanes to exit the freeway.

The list goes on and on.. and actually those examples need to be flushed out in more detail as this will continue to be a subject moving forward.

One of the good aspects of this committee is that many are riders and that includes Silversvs of course, folks within the CHP and OTS and I think the MSF folks ride too :p

I strongly feel lane sharing is valuable and as long as I am around I will fight to keep it legal... sound like I am running for office now.. :laughing

Discussions like this are great as pieces of info get added to my brain that help with further meetings on the subject.

All of us probably have an idea or 10 on what a law should look like if there was to be one.. and many think we need to maintain the status quo. Like I said before.. I think the status quo needs to be maintained until the affects of education and a realistic view of data collection can be done.

Even then.. for me.. I don't really want a law to restrict what I feel I can do safely.
 
Wow, I had no idea this was going on. I sure wouldn't want to have lane sharing disappear in California. If it's come to this, then some sort of legislation that legitimizes lane sharing (not just there's nothing on the books to prohibit it) might be in order. I can see a max traffic speed where lane sharing is illegal being a good idea. And a speed differential limit as well. As for limiting it to between the #1 and #2 lanes, I'm not so sure. That's where I do 99% of my sharing, but........

Sure hope we don't loose lane sharing.

And, of course, we all know who we have to blame for this. Those of you who recognize yourselves take note of what you've wrought. (Mods: Feel free to delete this last bit if you'd like.)
 
RcrBoy said:
The problem with this is it will no doubtingly become restrictive, fee based, corrupt, and the funds pilfered towards other issues. Sad. But such is the nature of the beast we call government.
Click to expand...
budman said:
Even then.. for me.. I don't really want a law to restrict what I feel I can do safely.
Click to expand...
I don't want any more laws, actually. However, I have already stated my interest in having an alternative to an outright prohibition of lane sharing. We, as the antagonistic, should be prepared to respond with a reasonable mitigation to any legislative action. Better to nip-it-in-the-bud (pun intended) than to find ourselves fighting the elimination of lane sharing, altogether.
 
AndyM said:
We have enough laws on the books. I am against legislating lane sharing or splitting. I will vote against any politician that supports it.
Click to expand...

That's my view as well. I don't see a problem that needs fixing with legislating rules.

Sure could help to have a lane sharing school...I'm under the impression, the roaring majority of riders that are overwhelmed and having hard times, entered the splitting act, with a jump in, and hope for the best, approach.

Not sure how a school could be done...maybe like a flight trainer set-up for pilots?
 
Splitting/Sharing is a high, high profile behavior. You do it and LOADS of people see it. The very act requires a large, mostly static audience. So, when done recklessly, Splitting can get a lot of attention--most of it probably negative.

Right now the NHTSA is all atwitter with wanting helmet laws for the rest of the country. Why? 'Cause people are dying AND it's really easy to point at and say: "Look, we can end this stupidity RIGHT NOW!" Easy answers are what politicians love.

To me, THE REAL PROBLEM isn't legislative or statutory, it's a PR problem. One chucklehead doing 70 and splitting 55mph heavy traffic leaves a wake of ill will and animosity behind them--ding a mirror and run and you've become the stuff of urban legend. Once you open Splitting/Sharing to the legislative process for codification of ANY kind, you open the process to ALL who have an axe to grind. The trick becomes not getting cut with your own knife.

Imagine: the "People Everywhere Against Bikers Riding Aggressively/Inattentively National Syndicate" (PEABRAINS) finds out (thank you baby Jesus) that there's this Motorcycle Safety Committee looking at Lane Sharing in California with an eye to changing existing lane sharing law. (Turns out that it's not legal...nor illegal...just "permissible"). They immediately partner with the NHTSA, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, and the CDC to lobby this committee to ABOLISH lane splitting and sharing. Why? Because there's really no guaranteed 'safe' way to do it.

Now this becomes a hot topic. Turns out if you're a rider and under 50, you're probably a fan of sharing! If you're NOT a rider and you're over 50? Probably NOT a fan. Suddenly FoxNews gets a whiff of a story...Shep Smith is interviewing maimed riders, widows and orphans...CHP under pressure FOLDS and considers ALL lane sharing/splitting to be "reckless disregard for your own safety or the safety of others". 20 appeals later? Turns out that riding a bike through a 36 inch opening between 2 other moving users IS reckless.

Thankfully, no legislation was passed. The largest law enforcement agency in the land just decided that, yeah, that is reckless.

My 2 cents? Unless a shocking number of riders are dying splitting lanes? Don't poke the bear. The Committee should find the #1 killer (most likely single vehicle crashes) and see what it can do to solve that.
 
Last edited:
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 like the idea of less legislation, not more. But if it's going to happen, let's make sure it stays legal. :thumbup

Here's what I'd suggest

-No lane sharing at traffic speeds in excess of 35 MPH
-Prolonged lane sharing only allowed between the #1 and #2 lanes; Other lanes may be used for short distances if necessary
-No speed differential greater than 15 MPH
 
Great topic. Lots of informed opinions here, and I would add this: 20 years ago a guy named Rich Hamstra presided over a ticket class I took at COM Kentfield before I became a street rider. He asked the class what the number one thing they felt annoyed by on the road and the majority (out of 30+) said motos splitting.

I'll never forget that or his retort that air cooled engines would melt and we reduce congestion and generally don't wipe out other road users, only ourselves. He was direct and correct. The audience begrudgingly agreed that we weren't the worst things on the road.

I've never had much trouble splitting. I have slapped a couple of mirrors with no hope of stopping, and had my truck mirrors slapped by others. :|

I'd vote for tiered licensing before anything. Asshats on any bike, especially novice GSXR 1000/Hardley/Whatever riders can only be reigned in through qualification. We know that deaths went up when all the 30-45s came back to bikes when they became uber cool (again). You want better moto safety? Don't give out unrestricted licenses to untested riders. :x
 
I’m with the “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” crowd.

If we must involve law makers (a huge risk) then why not test the waters first? The DMV, MSF and many cops agree with the notion that motorcycles should move through traffic. This is also a bit of a grey area like lane splitting. How can you move through traffic that is already travelling at the speed limit?

Propose that the speed limit for motorcycles on the freeway should be 5 mph faster than cars and trucks. This would surely get a lot of attention and provide the opportunity to educate the public on the excellent safety reasons for motorcycles moving through traffic. There is little to lose if it fails. If it succeeds then the law will recognize the unique safety hazards faced by motorcyclists, which will make it easier to tackle lane splitting.
 
Oh yeah, and a statewide sign campaign (I know a guy ;)) to alert drivers that legal lanesharing may be going on around them!
 

Attachments

  • Graphic1.jpg
    Graphic1.jpg
    121.8 KB · Views: 29
SuperMike said:
Oh yeah, and a statewide sign campaign (I know a guy ;)) to alert drivers that legal lanesharing may be going on around them!
Click to expand...

That is a great sign.

Education is central to this discussion: both the education of drivers that lane-sharing is legal and education of drivers that the reason lane-sharing might seem dangerous is because they drive in a dangerous manner.

As Sasquatch stated on like page 2 of this topic, lane-sharing isn't a gray area, it is absolutely legal. Creating a law to say that something is legal is like telling someone to un-jump.
 
I go away for a few weeks and come back to an intelligent, respectful, well-thought-out discussion on BARF. WTF!? :wow

Ok..ok...what I really mean is..... Keep up the good work!!!!! :party :teeth

It sounds as though this committee that silversys and bud are on is doing very good work...this motorcyclist appreciates it tremendously!!! :thumbup



:ride
 
As a motorcyclist, most don't see an issue with the basic premise. That's because we can see how it can be done safely.
Folks (most) that don't ride, can't see that. What they ultimately end up with is, "I don't like it." But, you can't do much about that alone. "Must be unsafe". Now that's an ideal that can be used. Seldom do you have to prove something is unsafe; more often than not the other side has to prove that it is safe.

I think the best solution is education, too. It's a kinder, gentler way to accomplish convincing the majority of road users that it's really ok.

Legislation allowing it to be used as a last resort, and include requiring all vehicles to use a turn signal for a lane change as part of the "compromise". (From everything I've checked on, making a lane change w/o a turn signal isn't illegal - Rel, help me out here. :teeth)

One other suggestion, on a local level, is if we could get the LEO's on BARF to provide what guidelines they would use with lane sharing. They're the ones that see the effects in the commute, and what they'd write riders up for. Something along the lines of "The BARF recommended practices for lane-sharing". Or, the best way to not attract attention ...
 
Yeah, I'm Verbose...

My initial response:


"Is it time to legislate it?"

Maybe.

Really, this is a political question.

Right now in California, I think we've got it pretty good. It's not illegal as long as we're being prudent about it and we don't happen to run across the very few LEOs or judges or municipalities that have a problem with it. I'd say we do avoid them more than 99% of the time. If we're not being prudent about it I'd say chances are really good that the riding behavior in question is dangerous for those inolved and makes the rest of riders look bad which I then suppose make riding more dangerous for all.

For the politics, are there brewing political movements to codify the parameters of lane sharing? If not, then I say leave it alone. If there are, the driving forces would prolly fall into one of two categories: 1) promotion of rider safety and security or 2) protection of society from the two-wheeled menace or the assuagement of some hurt butts. If those needs can be satisfied without legislation then again I say leave it alone.

If it does require legislation then what is the gain for motorcyclists? Specifying the parameters would protect riders who are not asshats in that < 1% of cases and *may* provide some benefit by giving a better legal standing when having to fight insurance companies post-accident. Could it result in enough education to all riders and all drivers to net a safety gain? (Presumably, that would be from fewer asshat motos and fewer vindictive cages.) Could it be parlayed into legal lane sharing in other states? (I.e. after implementation and data collection in CA, could other states say, "See, millions of Californians deal with this and it's an improvement?")

FWIW, an interesting thought I just had is that if it were to be presented to CA as a ballot initiative, it could be a win-win situation for riders: Either CA makes it explicitly legal in particular manners or CA leaves it alone in it current state as not illegal. In either case everyone that votes winds up being told that it's legal. (This, of course, could be blown out of the water if someone responds with another initiative that would make it patently illegal.)

Most of the potential gains for everyone on the road could be had without legislation. The problem with creating legislation is that it then makes it easier to extend to making it completely illegal.

Really, I don't know what to suggest from just the OP because I don't know the rest of the related politics. It could be good, but the gains have to be with the risks that come from legally specifying it.

--------

After some further mulling and possibly a little more on point:


If the committee does agree with something like this,

"The current lane sharing situation is more dangerous than we'd like and we'd like to improve it somehow"

then what are the problems with the current situation? Does it boil down to "there are asshat / inattentive riders" and "there are vindictive / inattentive cagers"? For all of the inattention, making it tougher to get and retain a license and education related to that (and years' time) may do it. Additional driving laws probably aren't necessary.

For the asshattery and vindictiveness I think it's a bit tougher. This is another set of issues that are embedded in our culture of driving / riding. People feel entitled to 'have their way' and I don't think lane sharing specificiations as "Rules of the Road" would quite do it. I think many people consider most of the "Rules of the Road" as a set of imperatives that they are to avoid getting caught transgressing: it would be a lot like the speed limits where people know "they can get dinged" for it but take their chances when they think they can get away with it, rather than it being a set of morality & responsibility issues.

I really don't think we can legislate morality or responsibility, but laws can be created to encourage it. The best sort of relevant example -- even though it may not be true -- is one I heard about the autobahn: it's not illegal to drive on it at 250 mph, but at some speed (124 mph / 200 kmph ?) insurance stops being effective.

If under certain conditions -- speed, speed differential, lane location, collision fault, <whatever might be specified> -- moto insurance stopped most riders would quit being asshats.

Likewise, if auto insurance stopped being effective for the vindictive cases, we'd prolly have a decrease from that direction too.

--

I'm not really advocating that but it may be a direction to look at if it is determined that some legislation is required before there can be improved education (because of the various education issued pointed out in the OP).

And really we do need data collected for some years before doing something like that so we can objectively compare the impact.
 
You asked:
"What do we do?

Having practiced the fine art of staying alive over one million miles of riding, in the state of California...I feel I have a simple view that has been developed over the years/

Leave the laws on the books as they are; without reference or specifics regarding lane sharing, but embark on a comprehensive and ongoing campaign of education on this subject, both for riders, and for others who share the road.

Enacting laws to specify what can and can't be done in regards to this issue will not result in a well conceived outcome. Look at some of the stuff that has been suggested in the past;
Seat belts required for motorcycle riders (Jackie Spier thought this was a good idea! I like Ms Spier, but this is how legislators look at things)

Let's just educate the riders/public and not fix what isn't broken.

By the way, I can understand some of the angst that drivers have about bikes splitting lans at high speed without any regard for the conditions. I, too think that there are practices that are not anything close to what lane sharing is supposed to be, but those practices can be dealt with using existing traffic laws, without bringing in more complicated laws to make things cloudier.
 
Do nothing at all.

Its not a perfect world and the law (none) and practice that is currently in place works fine. There's always going to be some have v. havenots, there's always going to be some obscure law that not everyone knows about- whatever the circumstance or situation.

The last thing we need is more regulation about, well, anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top