Thoughts on Lane Splitting?

[Elk]

Sorry, you asked for opinions and thoughts.

Interestingly, the CA DMV recommends against splitting as unsafe. 

Shoulder driven buses is not a valid analogy; they are big, have explicit right away, and driving on the shoulder is illegal for a car.  A lane splitting bike does not have right of way, it is legal for a car to drive on the lane divider lines while switching lanes or to hug the line, and bikes always lose in an accident - regardless of who is at fault. 

Legally, a rider can only lane split when prudent to do so.  A jury will treat an accident as prima facie evidence it was imprudent unless one can explicitly demonstrate the driver was at fault, a significant hurdle. 

As I acknowledged, it may ultimately be safer.  We do not know. 

I do not trust drivers and ride as if they are all out to kill me.  Driving between them appears to provide them with yet another opportunity.  I know what it is like trying to maneuver around cars on a racing bicycle.  Many drivers resent when you are between them at turn lanes, etc. even when it is perfect legal and is keeping them from being stuck behind a bicycle. 

Again, I like the concept.  I'm just not convinced it is a wise option here.  In heavily congested urban areas with small vehicles (Thailand, etc.) it makes great sense for scooters and small bikes to filter through traffic. 

I would not oppose a change in law here and would happily let others break in Minnesota drivers to the concept.

YMMV.  I am completely comfortable with this.

[Vander]

Absolutely no reason to apologize, sir.  You are precisely right... I am engaging in an argument in pursuit of a truth (and possibly unrealized on my part).

I have more for you to pick apart (and please do) but it is a busy day for me today.

Thank you for contributing. 

[Deplorable, thank you!]

 Too many dumbs in the world, and a whole slew of them ride 2 wheels when the weather permits.

It has already been stated, motorcyclists have a bad image- why make it worse.
MN riding season is short, and MN drivers are going to what.....have to get used to it every spring like they have to get used to even seeing bikes now.......We all see that barley works....

I do not believe for a single second any/many in a car will ever buy the concept that by having the motorcycles drive on by that somehow they themselves get anywhere faster.... If the bike is behind- it surely isn't holding you up---if it is in front one could easily deduce now it is part of the problem ahead of you..

You know how many fucktards ride motorcycles--far too many, even with it being illegal they do this shit and far worse, imagine if it were legal, they would zoom by at mach speed and not obey the laws they already break-why obey some new law saying what.... a 10mph passing speed difference when splitting and only if traffic is moving what sub 30mph.......... you know that won't happen by enough of them that every joe in a car will see numerous idiots abusing it and will be calling for changes etc...

The whole bicycle thing--yeah they should not be on any roadway period unless and until they can go the speed limit, have lights and signals, a license plate large enough to read and call in when they blow every stop sign and break every rule of the road other licensed vehicles have to obey...and then the drivers (riders) of said bicycles should also have to pass written and driving tests like every other driver on the road and have equipment checks and test renewals etc.......(and I hate adding more government bullshit).......sans all that- they need to stick to the billions of dollars worth of bicycle trails and sidewalks already designed for them specifically or ride off road.

And where specifically would this proposal supposedly even benefit traffic? Because I do not see it benefitting the masses, it may the few-the very few- but certainly not the masses.

And it also is not like every motorcyclists of the road storms away from every light, or rides in a manner that is not holding up some other traffic, how many times have we come across motorcycles that are holding up traffic.....nearly every ride! Nearly every time I go to the grocery store or run for parts! So what these people are going to likewise feel entitled to barge to the front of the line and then what accelerate slow enough grandpa Fred with his walker can keep up from the sidewalk....gee already too many idiots on bicycles do that

It is a stupid idea IMO, and one that will never fly in MN---all it would/could do is turn yet even more 4/6/12/18 wheeled vehicles against the 2 wheeled ones even more than they already are.......and I could easily see the accident rates sky rocketing as a result

You asked for thoughts..............there you go---it is stupid IMO

[Vander]

So is it just driving habits of Minnesotans that makes it stupid? Am I understand that correctly?  And don't bad motorcyclist give us a bad rep anyway?  The "bad" ones lane-split already.

And again... it sounds like a position taken to not ride a motorcycle on the streets of Minnesota... ever.  If people in Minnesota are such bad drivers, wouldn't it make US stupid for driving our vulnerable motorcycle on the streets?

I guess don't see how adding the CHOICE to lane-split or not to lane split will affect how dangerous it is to ride in Minnesota.  It will offer a legal (if changed) option to riders to navigate a safe passage through congested traffic on their own terms.  I personally don't want to wait for an inattentive driver to rear end me while I sit behind another car (right in the impact zone).

Currently, doesn't the MSF teach us to take a lane position in congested traffic to increase visibility?  And isn't that lane position on the EDGE of the lane closer to MOVING traffic?  But maybe I don't have that correct...

And where specifically would this proposal supposedly even benefit traffic? Because I do not see it benefitting the masses, it may the few-the very few- but certainly not the masses.

My vision? Even though the safety benefits are disputed; lane splitting is indisputably advantageous to the conveniences of a motorcyclist.  I think more people would ride in rush hour if it was legal, which means one less car on the road for each rider in rush hour. 
And as they lane split, the road is being used more efficiently... more lanes of traffic without any new construction.  So the motorcycle that was occupying a full car lane would no longer be contributing to the congestion.

You asked for thoughts..............there you go---it is stupid IMO

You are a gem, Lloyd. 

[Jam-Bro]

Great idea... I've seen how it works in Europe during rush hour. I will post a filtering video I shot in Paris. Never saw an accident in the 20+ times I've been there. I believe it will make car(drivers) more aware of other bikes sharing the lane. I only see pluses, no minuses. Having less laws is better! Here is hoping the restriction is lifted in MN and the entire US for that manner.

[Elk]

I personally don't want to wait for an inattentive driver to rear end me while I sit behind another car (right in the impact zone).

Any time there is an emergency you are well within your legal rights to take whatever evasive action you deem appropriate: lane split, pass on the shoulder, exceed the speed limit, whatever.

(As an aside, people often mention this as a huge risk to motorcycles but at least in Minnesota this is a rare accident.  Motorcycle accidents typically are caused by the rider (failure to negotiate a curve, loss of control, etc.) or a car makes a left turn in front of the bike.)

As you noted, lane splitting is not necessarily any safer.  It is merely different - with its own set of risks.

[allonm]

Minnesotans are the most obedient people I know when it comes to driving. (Or anything else for that matter) Majority of the drivers go the speed limit +/- 5mph. This is not the case in the east coast west coast or Europe.
You make lane splitting legal and make the driving public aware of it, they will accept it. (Just like non smoking in restaurants was accepted not too long ago)
I do believe lane splitting is advantageous for motorcycling when practiced safely. Some would choose not to do it, others will abuse it, but it should be given as an option for motorcyclist.

[Vander]

As you noted, lane splitting is not necessarily any safer.  It is merely different - with its own set of risks.

To clarify (and as you have eluded to) I feel it will take an adjustment period to make the practice a safer option than what is currently available.

The AMA seems to think so too:
http://americanmotorcyclist.com/rights/positionstatements/lanesplitting.aspx

How would you feel it the law stated:
At 25 MPH (and only when overtaking another vehicle and/or to travel to the front of the intersection) a motorcycle can lane-split?

[Elk]

I do not know what other states/countries have as their laws, nor what works best.  There is probably some great language out there to copy. 

As I wrote earlier: I would not oppose a change in law here, but would happily let others break in Minnesota drivers to the concept.

[Deplorable, thank you!]

So is it just driving habits of Minnesotans that makes it stupid? Am I understand that correctly?  And don't bad motorcyclist give us a bad rep anyway?  The "bad" ones lane-split already.

And again... it sounds like a position taken to not ride a motorcycle on the streets of Minnesota... ever.  If people in Minnesota are such bad drivers, wouldn't it make US stupid for driving our vulnerable motorcycle on the streets?

I guess don't see how adding the CHOICE to lane-split or not to lane split will affect how dangerous it is to ride in Minnesota.  It will offer a legal (if changed) option to riders to navigate a safe passage through congested traffic on their own terms.  I personally don't want to wait for an inattentive driver to rear end me while I sit behind another car (right in the impact zone).

Currently, doesn't the MSF teach us to take a lane position in congested traffic to increase visibility?  And isn't that lane position on the EDGE of the lane closer to MOVING traffic?  But maybe I don't have that correct...

And where specifically would this proposal supposedly even benefit traffic? Because I do not see it benefitting the masses, it may the few-the very few- but certainly not the masses.

My vision? Even though the safety benefits are disputed; lane splitting is indisputably advantageous to the conveniences of a motorcyclist.  I think more people would ride in rush hour if it was legal, which means one less car on the road for each rider in rush hour. 
And as they lane split, the road is being used more efficiently... more lanes of traffic without any new construction.  So the motorcycle that was occupying a full car lane would no longer be contributing to the congestion.

You asked for thoughts..............there you go---it is stupid IMO

You are a gem, Lloyd. 

you must somehow believe that if this were legal that what.. .miraculously tens of thousands of people would start riding a motorcycle to and from work and there would be tens of thousands less 4 wheeled vehicles on the road.........because I do not see that happening with our weather and anything short of that won't make enough impact to warrant anyone believing for one ioda that it is benefitting the masses...since you are still looking for opinions..........

this may well benefit the few, very few IMO..but make the cagers commute faster, that is nonsense and lies told just to try and pass the bill IMO

[Deplorable, thank you!]

As you noted, lane splitting is not necessarily any safer.  It is merely different - with its own set of risks.

To clarify (and as you have eluded to) I feel it will take an adjustment period to make the practice a safer option than what is currently available.

The AMA seems to think so too:
http://americanmotorcyclist.com/rights/positionstatements/lanesplitting.aspx

How would you feel it the law stated:
At 25 MPH (and only when overtaking another vehicle and/or to travel to the front of the intersection) a motorcycle can lane-split?

 speeds under 25mph---maximum 10mph overtaking speed and no they cannot lane split simply to move to the front of the line at an intersection

[Stinger]

Since I just returned from Italy and rented a bike and watched the traffic 'filter' to the front of the row at intersections. It works very well

• I felt that the drivers over seas actually drive and are aware of there surroundings
• Mostly scooters cruising the streets in Florence
• Basic driving courtesy, like if you're in front you have right away
• If you don't start moving at a green light right away, I will go around you and the person lets the driver in front. No horns, no fingers let's just go
• I must have passed a hundred car backup from a lane closed and construction. All the scooters and motorcycles just rode around it all not holding anybody up and actually making that line shorter
• I was in full gear and it was about 100 degrees. Had I needed to wait in that LONG line of traffic in the city I would have passed out

On the ride in this morning I got caught up in traffic on N494 before 394. When stopped all I seen was a big lane for me to pass all these cars and trucks.

[Elk]

. . . and no they cannot lane split simply to move to the front of the line at an intersection

This is hard to justify as anything other than a gift and special treatment for M/Cs, especially as it slows down the trip for those passed.   This would cause a lot of resentment.

[Stinger]

How does it cause the trip to be prolonged if you are passed?

If you're the first in line at a intersection on your bike. How many times have you slowed down the guy behind you? Like never.
How many times are you waiting for the guy in front of you to get up to speed? Like always.

Not once did I see a scooter or motorcycle hold up the first car behind all the bikes that filtered forward.

I found the traffic patterns in Italy fascinating, how everything just moved along and how no matter your mode of transportation, walking, bicycle, scooter, motorcycle, car, truck it just seemed like the smaller mode had the right of way.

AND WAS SEEN!

[Elk]

How does it cause the trip to be prolonged if you are passed?

Simple.  Each vehicle occupies X feet of space.  If ten vehicles are allowed to pass me, I am 10X feet further from my destination.  It is exactly the same if these same vehicles were able to merge ahead from another lane as I wait.  I am not as far forward as I would be had the vehicles not passed me. 

It is also the reason the bikes like it.  They are now ahead of vehicles which previously occupied X feet of space in front of them.  The bikes will now get to their destination more quickly.  That saved space had to come from somewhere.   It is a zero sum game.

It is not a question of acceleration.  Cars catch up very quickly, especially on city streets.  The car is now behind where it would be if the vehicles had not passed.  If the vehicle(s) was not there, he would be that much further ahead.

Many drivers will resent one group getting special treatment.  People would be angry if fast accelerating sports cars were allowed to pass on the shoulder to get in front of more pedestrian cars at intersections.  Consider the uproar when the DOT began to sell HOV access to single drivers.