[Christine]

http://on.wsj.com/1KFWfcR

 

[Tobacco Road]

wjs requires you to be a subscriber to read it. I haven't the time..

 

[Luvs2Play]

Can't read it either, but at my age, I am sure I can use donated organs before long. Hope they pass the law soon!

 

[distantThunder]

we overlook the obvious.

the CORRECT solution is to SEPARATE cars and motorcycles. all that they need to do is to build a special motorcycle lane on the freeways. it doesn't even need to be the width of a full lane. it could be just a half-lane - that would be fine. A half-lane on either side, dedicated tm motorcycle traffic. Case closed, problem solved!!

OK, we can't go back and modify old freeways. But when major new roads and freeways are being built now - WHY aren't they doing this??????

dT

 

[Luvs2Play]

Because it costs a lot of money and motorcyclists aren't going to want to pay for it.

 

[Tobacco Road]

Seperate lanes for motorcycles is a bad idea. What happens when a car or truck wants to make a right turn and finds a motorcycle in that right lane that is going straight. Seems like a dangerous situation to me. And the extra cost would be prohibitive. Let everyone ride/drive by the same rules, that makes the most sense.

 

[Christine]

wjs requires you to be a subscriber to read it. I haven't the time..

Strange. I don't have a subscription, but I can read the article....

 

[Christine]

try typing "wsj california lane splitting" in google. I get the same link as I posted here, and I can read it.

 

[Luvs2Play]

Legal or not, you will find me either not pissing off cages or taking a route that doesn't make me sit in traffic. Of course, here in the middle of nowhere, there is no need for such foolishness. I'll just take my time and enjoy the ride.

I will also find it hard to feel bad for anyone in such a hurry that they find themselves laying in the middle of the road not getting to their destination because they didn't care enough about their own safety to realize that they can not read the minds and control the actions of the cagers that are in a hurry too.

 

[NordicMan]

If lane splitting was such a good idea, why is only ONE state/province currently allowing it?

 

[Christine]

If lane splitting was such a good idea, why is only ONE state/province currently allowing it?

In the US, that is. In Europe, most countries allow lane splitting, afaik. Germany doesn't.

 

[Tobacco Road]

While I'm not a proponent of lane-splitting, I do think it should be legal in every state. It should be a choice, hell, we don't have to do it. And we should not be forced to wear a helmet. Thankfully they overturned that law here a few years ago and it is now a choice in this state.

 

[Meter Reader]

Anyone who lives in Southern California understands why lane splitting makes sense and is more safe than not. Because without it, you'd either be sitting there for hours baking in the sun or finding yourself sandwiched between two cars that just had a rear end collision after you'd been sitting there for hours baking in the sun.

 

[Kiwi Steve]

I'd like to define terms, lane filtering has been introduced here in NSW and Queensland Australia and they differentiate between lane filtering and lane splitting (which is still illegal).

Lane splitting is passing between moving lanes of traffic (usually someone on a sports bike wearing flip flops, shorts and a tee shirt, hair blowing in the wind) at 60 or more mph.

Lane filtering is passing between stopped or slow moving lanes of traffic at a maximum of 30 km/hr (20 mph) under certain conditions (ie. not in school zones).

I'm in favour of lane filtering. A trial in Sydney, New South Wales, showed an overall improvement in traffic flow of 4% in the lane filtering trial area. That came from each motorbike which filtered to the front of the queue letting a car move up one space in the queue. traffic engineers spend hundreds of thousands on intersection modifications to get 1% improvement, and that's just for one intersection. Here, at no added cost, they've gained a 4% improvement across the city.

I'm not in favour of lane splitting!

 

[Meter Reader]

The law in California is that it's "not illegal" to go between lanes at a speed no greater than 10 mph above the flow of traffic. Cars must give bikes the right to do so and may not intentionally impede the path of a motorcycle. So while it's not exactly "legal" it is "not illegal".

 

[Tobacco Road]

Whether it's called lane splitting or lane filtering, I still see it as semantics. It's the same thing differentiated by allowable speed.

Lane splitting involves higher speeds, which increases the risk for rider, pedestrians and other road users. Lane filtering seeks to maximize safety by demanding a slower speed and only allowing it in designated areas.

Unless California just passed a new law, there is no law regarding lane splitting or lane filtering, either for or against. What Meter Reader may be referring to are CHP Guidelines, and guidelines are not laws.
I stand by what I said in an earlier post, I think it should be legal in all states, let the people choose. Just not something I would care to do.

 

[Eye_m_no_angel]

If I lived in a place where traffic was so congested that I'd sit in traffic daily for hours on end, I'd move.

(And I did. Several times.)

 

[Tobacco Road]

If I lived in a place where traffic was so congested that I'd sit in traffic daily for hours on end, I'd move.

(And I did. Several times.)

+ 1

 

[joejinky]

If I lived in a place where traffic was so congested that I'd sit in traffic daily for hours on end, I'd move.

(And I did. Several times.)

and that is just one of the reasons I now live in Kentucky, after 40 years in COMMIEfornia!

There is a whole long story about lane splitting that I could share, if I wanted to type it all out. Suffice it to say, it was fantastic, before Grey Davis (who HATES motorcycles) decided to screw the motorcycling community by reducing the width of freeway traffic lanes from 14 feet to 11, and sometimes 10 feet in width, forcing motorcycles to ride mirror-to-mirror with cars.

 

[RobMoore]

If you don't think it's safe (despite evidence to the contrary), if you don't think it's for you, the solution is easy. Don't do it.