Originally Posted by JRA

It's a paradox.

The existance of a WOL may mean that is illegal for a bicyclist to take the lane. This may set a precedent that could be applied to all lanes.

WOL's support the notion that bicyclists should be treated by different rules from the rules that apply to drivers of other vehicles.

Drivers of other vehicles are generally not required to share a lane while bicyclists, in any state that has a "ride right" law with a "lane too narrow to share" exception, are required to share a WOL.

It's discrimination, I tell ya. Why do VC-ists support something that encourages discrimination against bicyclists? It's a puzzlement.

It could be argued that, on a laned roadway, lane sharing is not vehicular (based on the special legal definition of "vehicular").