Originally Posted by
danarnold
As I predicted Bek, you have started three separate threads dedicated to your incorrect view of the law. In Washington, the RCW's and SDOT, which has spoken specifically to this issue, clearly state the rules of the road apply to bicycles, including the SMV law about impeding 5 or more vehicles on a 2 lane highway, if and only if, there is a turnout that is safe to use.
you need to lighten up,
francis. three different issues. this one, there are bicyclists willingly marginalizing our rights to misconstrue bicyclists have a requirement to leave the highway for following traffic. Even if it were true, bicyclists should not be required to pull off the roadway for following traffic.
simple, basic issue of bicycling advocacy. goes back to the 1880's.
the RCW's and SDOT have not clarified this issue to my satisfaction. there is no specific speaking to the issue, there's an unsubstantiated quote from a newspaper article.
the RCWs declare my duties in the presence of overtaking traffic to operate FRAP.
In addition, bicyclists operate at a 'normal speed' for bicyclists, so a road with a bicycle on it has traffic, a bicycle, travelling at the normal speed upon it while the bicycle rides there. this is echoed in the selz v trotwood decision from a persuasive authority:
bicyclists operate at normal speed for bicyclists and cannot be considered to be impeding a line of traffic just because the bicyclist is not traveling at the speed limit!
for me to be required to leave the road for following traffic i would have to be travelling slower than a bicycle would normally be expected to travel.
danarnold, i suspect I'll see you out there someday, standing on the side of two lane roads while i bicycle by, waving at you!
i suspect the second class opinions about bicyclists is pretty close to home for dan.