Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 80

Thread: FRAP is CRAP

  1. #1
    High Roller
    Guest

    FRAP is CRAP

    Regardless of whether you are a vehicular cycling ideologue, a segregated cycling ideologue, or a naked cycling with a cowboy hat ideologue, "Far Right As Practicable" is not an effective law. It is an ineffective law because it is not enforceable. "Ride at the far right edge of the roadway, except when you decide not to" is not an enforceable law and is doomed to failure in accomplishing its intended purpose, whatever that may be.

  2. #2
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,016
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't know how states could more clearly define and codify the operating position of bicycles on their roadways.

    i think the onus is on the bicycling community, municipalities and law enforcement to more clearly communicate what the means for bicyclists and the motorists encountering them.
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  3. #3
    Former Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dropmachine.com
    Posts
    4,061
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by High Roller
    FRAP is CRAP
    I think we need jerseys that say this.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    My Bikes
    xtracycle, electric recumbent, downtube folder and more
    Posts
    982
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by High Roller View Post
    Regardless of whether you are a vehicular cycling ideologue, a segregated cycling ideologue, or a naked cycling with a cowboy hat ideologue, "Far Right As Practicable" is not an effective law. It is an ineffective law because it is not enforceable. "Ride at the far right edge of the roadway, except when you decide not to" is not an enforceable law and is doomed to failure in accomplishing its intended purpose, whatever that may be.
    What state has the law worded like this?

  5. #5
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ghettocruiser View Post
    I think we need jerseys that say this.
    +100

    along with more 'Cyclists Allowed Full Lane' T-shirts.


  6. #6
    uke
    uke is offline
    it's easy if you let it. uke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    indoors and out.
    Posts
    4,125
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think we need a new way of thinking about bicycles and cars altogether.


    JesseDuncan:I just love how "cars will be forced to cross the double yellow lines on dangerous limited visibility roads".

    I don't want to have a head on but oh god, I HAVE to fling myself into oncoming traffic to pass, theres no alternative!!!

  7. #7
    Conservative Hippie
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Wakulla Co. FL
    Posts
    4,271
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What wording would you put in it's place?

    "Cyclists have full use of any lane that serves their purpose."?

    With FRAP and the exceptions to it FL and other states have that now. The option of where to ride is up to the cyclist, according to the cyclist's call as to their safest lane position.

    The laws that are total garbage are laws that restrict cyclists from the road. Particularly if bike lanes or other "infrastructure" is present.
    Last edited by CommuterRun; 04-07-09 at 02:21 AM.

  8. #8
    -=Barry=- The Human Car's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
    Posts
    4,077
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CommuterRun View Post
    What wording would you put in it's place?

    "Cyclists have full use of any lane that serves their purpose."?

    With FRAP and the exceptions to it FL and other states have that now. The option of where to ride is up to the cyclist, according to the cyclist's call as to their safest lane position.

    The laws that are total garbage are laws that restrict cyclists from the road. Particularly if bike lanes or other "infrastructure" is present.
    IMHO the problem with FRAP is that the onus is on the cyclists to prove that their lane position is as far right as practical and safe and if they get hit by a car in that lane position that basically negates the cyclists position as safe so at best you have an accident with both parties at fault and worst the cyclist at fault even though the motorist is doing 50mph on a 25mph road and made no attempt to cross the double yellow to pass the cyclists. At least that how it seems to work here in a contributory negligence state.
    Cycling Advocate
    http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
    . . . o
    . . /L
    =()>()

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,013
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by High Roller View Post
    It is an ineffective law because it is not enforceable. "Ride at the far right edge of the roadway, except when you decide not to" is not an enforceable law and is doomed to failure in accomplishing its intended purpose, whatever that may be.
    Sure it's enforcable, it's easy. Cop decides he doesn't like the look of you and thinks you don't belong out in the road. He pulls you over, tells you that you aren't "close enough" to the curb, he gives you a ticket. He doesn't bother stating a measurement of how far over you were, just threatens you if you try to complain; its your word against his and he has authority.
    There you go, enforced, and it fulfilled its intended purpose of letting cops tell you what to do without any solid backing other than their own opinion. Very effective.


    Vague wording of a law makes it easier to enforce(abuse), not harder.
    Yes, it is crap.

  10. #10
    Former Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dropmachine.com
    Posts
    4,061
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    IT'S A FRAP!

  11. #11
    rwp
    rwp is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    400
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The alternative to FRAP is is to ban bikes from the road entirely if the city, county or state deems that a route cannot accomodate slow moving vehicles that are incapable of sharing a lane. I'd prefer that the road network be open and available to me and if that means I have to move over to let faster traffic by, that's OK with me.

  12. #12
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by xenologer View Post
    Sure it's enforcable, it's easy. Cop decides he doesn't like the look of you and thinks you don't belong out in the road. He pulls you over, tells you that you aren't "close enough" to the curb, he gives you a ticket. He doesn't bother stating a measurement of how far over you were, just threatens you if you try to complain; its your word against his and he has authority.
    There you go, enforced, and it fulfilled its intended purpose of letting cops tell you what to do without any solid backing other than their own opinion. Very effective.


    Vague wording of a law makes it easier to enforce(abuse), not harder.
    Yes, it is crap.


    exactly!

    Cops are basically motorists who are not going to be sympathetic to cyclists reasonings as to why farthest right position was 'impracticable'.

  13. #13
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,016
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How do you guys recommend states codify a legal cycling position on a gravel road? how about an unstriped neighborhood road? and how about a road with 18 foot lanes?

    any suggestions on clarifying the legal language for bicyclists, aside from your uninformed biatching?
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  14. #14
    your nightmare gal chipcom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    The Cracker Factory
    Posts
    24,352
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you think FRAP means "Ride at the far right edge of the roadway", then the problem is with your understanding of the term, rather than the term itself. Is "Far right as is SAFE" easier to understand?
    "Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey

  15. #15
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
    How do you guys recommend states codify a legal cycling position on a gravel road? how about an unstriped neighborhood road? and how about a road with 18 foot lanes?

    any suggestions on clarifying the legal language for bicyclists, aside from your uninformed biatching?
    1. slow moving traffic keep right.

    2. if I'm in front of you I have the right of way.

    there's absolutely no need for a special rule for bicyclists at all.

  16. #16
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by chipcom View Post
    If you think FRAP means "Ride at the far right edge of the roadway", then the problem is with your understanding of the term, rather than the term itself. Is "Far right as is SAFE" easier to understand?
    see post #12

  17. #17
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,016
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    randya,

    how far right? your proposed 'clarification' would open cyclists up to even more discriminatory enforcement, if this is what you are griping about.

    slow movings vehicles keep right? do you think that is clear enough for legal statute? It's actually much LESS clear. how far right?

    again, how far right? keep right? hmm, sounds like codified curbhugging.

    how about....


    slow moving vehicles keep as far right as is safely able to be put into practice at the time?

    states clarifying and codifying bicyclists' legal position would duplicate this common-sense road positioning in bike specific statutes.
    Last edited by Bekologist; 04-07-09 at 09:31 AM.
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  18. #18
    Senior Member wheel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Crystal MN
    Posts
    2,147
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
    How do you guys recommend states codify a legal cycling position on a gravel road? how about an unstriped neighborhood road? and how about a road with 18 foot lanes?

    any suggestions on clarifying the legal language for bicyclists, aside from your uninformed biatching?

    HA! funny

  19. #19
    Member subverita's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    My Bikes
    Vision R40, Sun Tandem, Giant Rincon SE, Cannondale recumbent, Surly LHT
    Posts
    25
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    kewl Vids Bekologist. Love that Surly.
    The law is written so it can be enforced when it has to. It's for the police to use when a cyclist is being a nuisance without cause.
    It's a guide for the beginners who have no idea how to ride safely. Although I doubt most of those people would even bother with what the law says.
    Hell, I don't know what the purpose is.

  20. #20
    Al noisebeam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    AZ
    My Bikes
    Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
    Posts
    13,893
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
    r

    slow moving vehicles keep as far right as is safely able to be put into practice at the time?

    states clarifying and codifying bicyclists' legal position would duplicate this common-sense road positioning in bike specific statutes.
    For what reason? If bicyclists are granted the rights/resp of vehicle drivers why is a bike specific FRAP needed?

    Al

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,621
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by randya View Post
    1. slow moving traffic keep right.

    ...
    How far right?

    EDIT: Oh sorry, I see Bek already went there.

  22. #22
    www.theheadbadge.com cudak888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Southern Florida
    My Bikes
    http://www.theheadbadge.com
    Posts
    22,730
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by subverita View Post
    The law is written so it can be enforced when it has to.
    If it was enforced properly...

    Quote Originally Posted by subverita View Post
    It's for the police to use when a cyclist is being a nuisance without cause.
    Except that scofflaw cyclists are rarely the individuals targeted...


    Quote Originally Posted by subverita View Post
    It's a guide for the beginners who have no idea how to ride safely.
    Come to sunny Miami, and I'll show you hundreds of folk on their Trek hybrids, saddle at the lowest setting, bounding from the sidewalk, to the street, back onto the sidewalk, then cutting over to the sidewalk on the opposite side of the road.

    Those people never get tickets. Why? They comprise the stereotype of Mr. & Ms. Blissfully Ignorant Occasional Cyclist, of which most people are, including your local LEO's. On the flip side, you will see bias against anyone that doesn't fit this perception - which can encompasses anything from riding with your saddle at the proper height, riding in team kit, or maybe even using a "fast-looking bike."

    Two out of the three listed will be enough for Mr. John Q. Public to (needlessly) dislike you, or view you as an outsider. The funny thing is though, if you swapped one of these stereotypical characteristics with leisure riders (e.g.: leisure cyclists in team kit with saddles raised, road riders in sweatpants, baggy shirts, with saddles set as low as possible), then the so-called leisure cyclists would be more likely to be perceived as the weird folk by John Q., and thereby, subject to a higher degree of (bull) scrutiny.

    -Kurt
    Last edited by cudak888; 04-07-09 at 10:23 AM.

  23. #23
    zac
    zac is offline
    Just ride zac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lowell, MA
    My Bikes
    I just ride them, they own me.
    Posts
    874
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noisebeam View Post
    For what reason? If bicyclists are granted the rights/resp of vehicle drivers why is a bike specific FRAP needed?

    Al
    How does this fit in? Please note, a bicycle is a "vehicle."

    " Except as herein otherwise provided, the driver of a vehicle passing another vehicle traveling in the same direction shall drive a safe distance to the left of such other vehicle and shall not return to the right until safely clear of the overtaken vehicle; and, if the way is of sufficient width for the two vehicles to pass, the driver of the leading one shall not unnecessarily obstruct the other. If it is not possible to overtake a bicycle or other vehicle at a safe distance in the same lane, the overtaking vehicle shall use all or part of an adjacent lane if it is safe to do so or wait for a safe opportunity to overtake. Except when overtaking and passing on the right is permitted, the driver of an overtaken vehicle shall give way to the right in favor of the overtaking vehicle on visible signal and shall not increase the speed of his vehicle until completely passed by the overtaking vehicle.

    " The driver of a vehicle may, if the roadway is free from obstruction and of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving vehicles, overtake and pass upon the right of another vehicle when the vehicle overtaken is (a) making or about to make a left turn, (b) upon a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which traffic is restricted to one direction of movement."

    There is no requirement for FRAP, just not to unnecessarily obstruct the other.
    Last edited by zac; 04-07-09 at 10:21 AM.

  24. #24
    High Roller
    Guest
    Thank you all for your replies to the original post.

    A cyclist must consider multiple conditions to determine his/her optimal lateral position on the roadway: their destination (turning left, going straight, turning right), speed differential with other vehicles, traffic density, lane width/sharability, sightlines to other vehicles whose paths may conflict, vehicles parked on the side of the road, and surface hazards that accumulate along the edge of the roadway.

    Only one individual possesses the requisite knowledge of all these conditions to decide what is “as far right as practicable”. That individual is the cyclist.

    Observers such as overtaking motorists or law enforcement officers cannot possibly have all this information, and are therefore incapable of determining if the statute has been violated. If the state cannot objectively determine if a law has been broken, what is the justification for having that law on the books?

    Do some of you truly believe that the existence of this irrational law is the only thing preventing cyclists being banned from public roadways?

  25. #25
    www.chipsea.blogspot.com ChipSeal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    South of Dallas, Texas
    My Bikes
    Giant OCR C0 road
    Posts
    1,026
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post


    Slow movings vehicles keep right? Do you think that is clear enough for legal statute? It's actually much LESS clear.

    How far right? Keep right? Hmm, sounds like codified curb-hugging.

    How about....


    Slow moving vehicles keep as far right as is safely able to be put into practice at the time?

    States clarifying and codifying bicyclists' legal position would duplicate this common-sense road positioning in bike specific statutes.
    In Texas, motor vehicles are required to obey this law:

    OPERATION AND MOVEMENT OF VEHICLES

    Sec. 545.051. DRIVING ON RIGHT SIDE OF ROADWAY.

    (a) An operator on a roadway of sufficient width shall drive on the right half of the roadway, unless:

    (1) the operator is passing another vehicle;
    (2) an obstruction necessitates moving the vehicle left of the center of the roadway and the operator yields the right-of-way to a vehicle that:

    (A) is moving in the proper direction on the unobstructed portion of the roadway; and
    (B) is an immediate hazard;

    (3) the operator is on a roadway divided into three marked lanes for traffic; or
    (4) the operator is on a roadway restricted to one-way traffic.

    (b) An operator of a vehicle on a roadway moving more slowly than the normal speed of other vehicles at the time and place under the existing conditions shall drive in the right-hand lane available for vehicles, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, unless the operator is:

    (1) passing another vehicle; or
    (2) preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
    Secondly, in Texas cyclists enjoy all the rights and duties of operators of motor vehicles:

    Sec 551.101 RIGHTS AND DUTIES.

    (a) A person operating a bicycle has the rights and duties applicable to a driver operating a vehicle under this subtitle, unless:

    (1) a provision of this chapter alters a right or duty; or
    (2) a right or duty applicable to a driver operating a vehicle cannot by its nature apply to a person operating a bicycle.
    So in Texas, on a road that has no lane markings, a cyclist has no obligation to travel any further to the right than where the left tire of motor vehicles practicably travel. He has the same duty as a slow moving motorist, but not a greater obligation. Get it?

    In that light, how about this for a rule?


    Cyclists may occupy the space in a lane to the extent as any other slow moving vehicle would.

    Equal treatment under the law and plenty of space for everyone! Woo Hoo!
    Vehicular cycling techniques have not been tried and found difficult. They have been presumed difficult and not tried.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •