Note: In bold face, I've added the numbers and underlining in the quote below to help distinguish specific parts of the quote from one another.
Originally Posted by
John Forester
1. (snip) ... Yes, indeed, I recommend that cyclists obey the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles while ignoring the discriminatory rules that keep cyclists at the edge of the roadway for the convenience of motorists. ...(snip).
2. (snip)...That is, that hand signals are very important because use of a hand signal gave the cyclist the right of way to make a turn in front of a motorist. That was never the law, but the motoring establishment had to write its instructions for cyclists in that way because it assumed that cyclists were incapable of judging gaps in traffic. The actual law has always been that the driver, be he motorist or cyclist, may not turn or move laterally in traffic until he has seen that he can make the movement without upsetting the movement of any other driver. That's the important point. (snip)... hullaballoo about hand signals appears very strong to those who had been misled by the violation of law instructed by the "bike safety" pamphlets.(snip)
Number 1., underlined: This statement is vague. If it refers to bike lane use laws some states have implemented across the U.S.; the case in Oregon and it seems New York state as well, is that the law in those states...maybe other states as well...does not keep or confine people that bike, exclusively to the edge of the roadway. The text of Oregon's law acknowledges a wide range of situations in which cyclists are legally entitled to utilize main lanes of the road for travel by bike. The title of Oregon's bike lane use law may trip up some people's understanding of what it specifies, but in a reading of the body of the law, it's plain that cyclists are recognized as having the right to ride the main lane of the road as needed, at the discretion of the person riding.
Link to text of Oregon's law: http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/814.420
Number 2.: My feeling, which I tend to think is widely shared by many people, is that it's very important for people that bike to know how to use hand signals to communicate intention to make directional turns, and also for slowing and stopping. It's not a matter of securing 'legal right', but 'communication' that's the function of these types of hand signal. Haven't been to Europe, so while I don't have first hand knowledge, to me it seems likely that even with the bike infrastructure Denmark and Netherlands have designed specifically to reduce conflicts between people driving motor vehicles and people riding bikes, it continues to be important for cyclists using roadways there, to have knowledge of and ability to effectively use hand signals to communicate directional, stopping and slowing intention to other road users.