Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Frazzled wrote:

yellowfever wrote:
Na he did it intentionally. I've been riding almost 20 years. I can't count how many times people have tried to block when I split lanes in California.

maybe you shouldn't split lanes.

It is legal in California. Why shouldn't he do it?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I get pissed off by renegade cyclists partly for safety but also because they give car drivers who have a chip on their shoulder a supposedly legitimate excuse to treat everyone badly.

You see cyclists obeying the laws too, and you see cars disobeying road laws.

When I biked (pedal) to work, I got annoyed at other cyclists. Red lights are there for a reason. So are cycle lanes.
You don't need a 'driving' license to use a bike on the road, so anyone can do it. But AFAIK, if you have one, you can get points on it for cycling offences.

Drivers shouting at cyclists that their road tax means they own the road... lots of cyclists drive and pay road taxes, too

 welshhoppo wrote:
You really need to get rid of plea bargains America.

No, we don't.

I expect they'll plead it down. Can't imagine it going to trial. They did at least give him charges that could stick in court; they were never going to find something more serious, as posters here were convinced they would.

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

yellowfever wrote:
Na he did it intentionally. I've been riding almost 20 years. I can't count how many times people have tried to block when I split lanes in California.

maybe you shouldn't split lanes.

It is legal in California. Why shouldn't he do it?

because its one of the more stupid things one can do in life. Its an excellent way to die.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Skinnereal wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I get pissed off by renegade cyclists partly for safety but also because they give car drivers who have a chip on their shoulder a supposedly legitimate excuse to treat everyone badly.

You see cyclists obeying the laws too, and you see cars disobeying road laws.

When I biked (pedal) to work, I got annoyed at other cyclists. Red lights are there for a reason. So are cycle lanes.
You don't need a 'driving' license to use a bike on the road, so anyone can do it. But AFAIK, if you have one, you can get points on it for cycling offences.

Drivers shouting at cyclists that their road tax means they own the road... lots of cyclists drive and pay road taxes, too

We're talking bikes here. Get your people powered machine off this thread or we'll sdie swipe that puppy faster than you can "I don't care!"

(now for those who listen to it, thats a genuine Texas redneck accent).

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

yellowfever wrote:
Na he did it intentionally. I've been riding almost 20 years. I can't count how many times people have tried to block when I split lanes in California.

maybe you shouldn't split lanes.

It is legal in California. Why shouldn't he do it?

In stopped traffic? Sure. Knock yourself out.

When everyone is going 65+ MPH? It's also legal to drink Bud Light, but that doesn't mean it's a smart choice...

 Frazzled wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

yellowfever wrote:
Na he did it intentionally. I've been riding almost 20 years. I can't count how many times people have tried to block when I split lanes in California.

maybe you shouldn't split lanes.

It is legal in California. Why shouldn't he do it?

because its one of the more stupid things one can do in life. Its an excellent way to die.

If it is legal, and folks in cars are illegally trying to prevent it, it is not on the biker. Smart or not, only one side is breaking the law in that case.

Wait its legal to drink Bud Lite? Talk about a crime.

 Frazzled wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

yellowfever wrote:
Na he did it intentionally. I've been riding almost 20 years. I can't count how many times people have tried to block when I split lanes in California.

maybe you shouldn't split lanes.

It is legal in California. Why shouldn't he do it?

because its one of the more stupid things one can do in life. Its an excellent way to die.

No its not. The only reason filtering (what we call lane splitting) is dangerous is because drivers don't look before changing lane, like they are supposed to. Thats not the motorcyclists fault. Nothing at all unsafe about filtering in itself, as long as, like anything else on the road, it is done as sensible speed.

 kronk wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

yellowfever wrote:
Na he did it intentionally. I've been riding almost 20 years. I can't count how many times people have tried to block when I split lanes in California.

maybe you shouldn't split lanes.

It is legal in California. Why shouldn't he do it?

In stopped traffic? Sure. Knock yourself out.

When everyone is going 65+ MPH? It's also legal to drink Bud Light, but that doesn't mean it's a smart choice...

And that's usually the only time it's legal but I've found people still don't want to let you in after you've moved up and the light changes.

There are more dangerous things like terminal road construction in my state, Oklahoma; you get 1 sign about 100 yards before it begins and then 30 miles of road have been scraped to resemble a cheese grater...that's saying you can dodge the 20 foot deep potholes that never get filled or the shoddy job that some politicians cousin did when they resurfaced the road and it's full of bumps.

We don't have plea bargains.


And filtering traffic is both safe and legal. You're just jealous you can't two wheel your car up the middle of the road.

 agnosto wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

yellowfever wrote:
Na he did it intentionally. I've been riding almost 20 years. I can't count how many times people have tried to block when I split lanes in California.

maybe you shouldn't split lanes.

It is legal in California. Why shouldn't he do it?

In stopped traffic? Sure. Knock yourself out.

When everyone is going 65+ MPH? It's also legal to drink Bud Light, but that doesn't mean it's a smart choice...

And that's usually the only time it's legal but I've found people still don't want to let you in after you've moved up and the light changes.

Those are dicks, yes. Watch your ass out there.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

yellowfever wrote:
Na he did it intentionally. I've been riding almost 20 years. I can't count how many times people have tried to block when I split lanes in California.

maybe you shouldn't split lanes.

It is legal in California. Why shouldn't he do it?

because its one of the more stupid things one can do in life. Its an excellent way to die.

No its not. The only reason filtering (what we call lane splitting) is dangerous is because drivers don't look before changing lane, like they are supposed to. Thats not the motorcyclists fault. Nothing at all unsafe about filtering in itself, as long as, like anything else on the road, it is done as sensible speed.

Nonsense. You're literally passing through vehicles BETWEEN Lanes, when the traffic is congested. Its stupid and anyone who does it is a California moron. Other states will bust your ass for doing that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 welshhoppo wrote:
We don't have plea bargains.


And filtering traffic is both safe and legal. You're just jealous you can't two wheel your car up the middle of the road.

Sure you do.

Berkley says lane splitting is safe.

UC Berkeley? Seriously?

Hey do what you want. Doesn't mean gak to me if you die or not. More organ donation volunteers baby.

 welshhoppo wrote:
You really need to get rid of plea bargains America.

Nope. They save a lot of time and money by allowing us to bypass stupid trials. As long as the prosecutor doesn't cave too easily or too much they as very useful. Often if there is a trial, someone didn't do things right. Either defense won't accept reality or prosecution is pushing too hard.

They also create the hazard that prosecutors will call for very heavy penalty charges so that defendants are put under pressure to plead guilty to lesser charges and make prosecution easier.

 Frazzled wrote:
UC Berkeley? Seriously?

Hey do what you want. Doesn't mean gak to me if you die or not. More organ donation volunteers baby.

It's not terribly safe in lanes for bikes in heavy traffic. They can get smashed between two cars if a car doesn't stop in time for example. Minor fender bender for cars could be serious injury for biker without protection. There are trade offs.

*snip* - Redundant

 Frazzled wrote:

 Skinnereal wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I get pissed off by renegade cyclists partly for safety but also because they give car drivers who have a chip on their shoulder a supposedly legitimate excuse to treat everyone badly.

You see cyclists obeying the laws too, and you see cars disobeying road laws.

When I biked (pedal) to work, ....

We're talking bikes here. Get your people powered machine off this thread or we'll side swipe that puppy faster than you can "I don't care!"

(now for those who listen to it, thats a genuine Texas redneck accent).

Bikes is bikes.
And, he started it

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
UC Berkeley? Seriously?

Hey do what you want. Doesn't mean gak to me if you die or not. More organ donation volunteers baby.

It's not terribly safe in lanes for bikes in heavy traffic. They can get smashed between two cars if a car doesn't stop in time for example. Minor fender bender for cars could be serious injury for biker without protection. There are trade offs.

Not to mention, in places like AZ and SoCal where temperatures get quite well into the "swamp-ass" territory, having an air cooled vehicle sitting in traffic becomes a liability to create still MORE stalled traffic when the motorcycle overheats

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
Berkley says lane splitting is safe.

Berkley says a lot of things.

Intelligent people ignore most of it

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:
You really need to get rid of plea bargains America.

Nope. They save a lot of time and money by allowing us to bypass stupid trials. As long as the prosecutor doesn't cave too easily or too much they as very useful. Often if there is a trial, someone didn't do things right. Either defense won't accept reality or prosecution is pushing too hard.

See, our system just has admission of guilt. Admit you did wrong and you get a reduced sentence. But plea bargaining is very much a rich persons game.

Damn frazzled now your name calling. Should I start calling you a Texas inbred. Do you even ride a motorcycle. When something is legal people will do it. The CHP has guide lines for splitting lanes. Yes the ones that don't follow them are taking more risk. TRUST ME there's plenty of morons coming out Texas. So let's try to keep the name calling out.

The only time I had a problem lane splitting was when some dick head decided he wanted to stop me. At least they tried to stop me

 welshhoppo wrote:

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:
You really need to get rid of plea bargains America.

Nope. They save a lot of time and money by allowing us to bypass stupid trials. As long as the prosecutor doesn't cave too easily or too much they as very useful. Often if there is a trial, someone didn't do things right. Either defense won't accept reality or prosecution is pushing too hard.

See, our system just has admission of guilt. Admit you did wrong and you get a reduced sentence. But plea bargaining is very much a rich persons game.

Thats The Same Thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

yellowfever wrote:
Damn frazzled now your name calling. Should I start calling you a Texas inbred.

Half Texas inbred, half Louisiana swamp rat (techically Slav/Germanic French roots). I wore a footlong belt bucklet before footlong belt buckles were cool.

Do you even ride a motorcycle.

incriminating black and whites will support that yep, I've had bikes in the past. Many of my memories were motor pits when dad raced, or he in mine when I did as a kid. Here's one for you dad, leaning a hairpin with TBone standing astride your tank.

When something is legal people will do it.

in California its legal. In other, smarter states, its not. California also gave us such epic things as: Palimony, non-marriage live in support, the Black Panthers, the Crips, and a water system dominated by growers at the expense of 18mm people. Only young idiots did it when I was there.

The CHP has guide lines for splitting lanes. Yes the ones that don't follow them are taking more risk. TRUST ME there's plenty of morons coming out Texas. So let's try to keep the name calling out.

The Austin, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington population trends show its Californians coming here.

The only time I had a problem lane splitting was when some dick head decided he wanted to stop me. At least they tried to stop me

And right there is the problem. Testosterone.

 cincydooley wrote:

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
Berkley says lane splitting is safe.

Berkley says a lot of things.

Intelligent people ignore most of it

Do you have a critique of their methodology or a study that shows theirs is wrong because just attacking the authors isn't a convincing argument. The article I linked to has a link to another study by a different outfit that came to the same conclusion.

By the way, a key caveat to the idea that lane splitting is safe is that you not be going more than 10-15 MPH faster than traffic and that traffic is going less than 50 MPH. Certainly some will split in an unsafe way, but that is a problem with the rider not the practice.

Personally, I appreciate the South Park take on motorcycle riders. It feels appropriate.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
Berkley says lane splitting is safe.

That's not at all what the study says.

It says you are less likely to be hit from behind if you are lane splitting, which duh is because a car can't be behind you if one is beside you on most likely both sides. This article In no ways shows lane splitting is safe. It show's you are less likely to suffer a head injury when lane splitting, which is because of how the impact is going to be as opposed to be rear ended or ramming a vehicle in the rear. Also important to that result is the test was done mostly during traffic time when people were driving slower, including motorcycles, due to heavy traffic (vehicles were moving 15mph or less...)and they found motorcyclists in this time were 33% more likely to wear helmets. Which of course is a factor in reduced head injuries. It shows that 17% of accidents happened during lane splitting, which was 1000 for the year they looked at in that area. Considering often during heavy traffic the cars are moving very slow, that there are accidents at all under such conditions shows its not safe.

The study also showed that there was no reduction in injuries for people lane splitting if they went more than 15mph faster than a car, or when traffic was moving more than 30mph.

Also the OP has nothing to do with lane splitting, even if it did lane splitting is illegal in Texas.

Also lane splitting is not actually legal in California, its currently under legislative review in its third incarnation and has not been approved yet. It is however not illegal. Yes that statement is dumb but true.

The problem is not with the article by Berkeley, the problem is with the poorly written cycle world article which cherry picked things out of that to make a statement, and then the person who claimed that "berkeley says lane splitting is safe" when that is not what the article is about.

Lane splitting is aslo needed to reduce traffic. sometime by up to 10%
Its unsafe if drivers are not paying attention(Which even in Gridlock traffic they should, accidents can happen there.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Lane splitting is aslo needed to reduce traffic. sometime by up to 10%
Its unsafe if drivers are not paying attention(Which even in Gridlock traffic they should, accidents can happen there.

Even if they are paying attention. Someone coming up within the legally defined space at a high rate of speed is hard to see. Frankly if they hit you in that context its your fault.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
Berkley says lane splitting is safe.

Berkley says a lot of things.

Intelligent people ignore most of it

Do you have a critique of their methodology or a study that shows theirs is wrong because just attacking the authors isn't a convincing argument. The article I linked to has a link to another study by a different outfit that came to the same conclusion.