Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-06-09, 07:43 AM   #1
High Roller
Guest
 
Bikes:
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Quoted: Post(s)
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.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-09, 09:12 AM   #2
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-09, 10:16 AM   #3
ghettocruiser
Former Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: dropmachine.com
Bikes:
Posts: 4,062
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by High Roller
FRAP is CRAP
I think we need jerseys that say this.
ghettocruiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-09, 09:29 PM   #4
crackerdog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Port Townsend, WA
Bikes: xtracycle, electric recumbent, downtube folder and more
Posts: 982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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?
crackerdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-09, 10:15 PM   #5
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.

randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-09, 10:51 PM   #6
uke
it's easy if you let it.
 
uke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: indoors and out.
Bikes:
Posts: 4,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think we need a new way of thinking about bicycles and cars altogether.

uke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 02:11 AM   #7
CommuterRun
Conservative Hippie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wakulla Co. FL
Bikes:
Posts: 4,271
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
CommuterRun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 06:28 AM   #8
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Bikes:
Posts: 4,077
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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
=()>()
The Human Car is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 06:48 AM   #9
xenologer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 2,089
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(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.
xenologer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 08:21 AM   #10
ghettocruiser
Former Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: dropmachine.com
Bikes:
Posts: 4,062
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


IT'S A FRAP!
ghettocruiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 08:30 AM   #11
rwp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Reno, NV
Bikes:
Posts: 400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
rwp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 08:52 AM   #12
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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'.
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 09:04 AM   #13
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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?
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 09:09 AM   #14
chipcom 
Infamous Member
 
chipcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Posts: 24,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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
chipcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 09:15 AM   #15
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 09:15 AM   #16
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 09:22 AM   #17
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 09:31 AM   #18
wheel
Senior Member
 
wheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Crystal MN
Bikes:
Posts: 2,147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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
wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 09:44 AM   #19
subverita
Member
 
subverita's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Bikes: Vision R40, Sun Tandem, Giant Rincon SE, Cannondale recumbent, Surly LHT
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
subverita is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 09:49 AM   #20
noisebeam
Al
 
noisebeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Posts: 14,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 439 Post(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
noisebeam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 10:02 AM   #21
RobertHurst
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Denver
Bikes:
Posts: 1,621
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
RobertHurst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 10:09 AM   #22
cudak888 
www.theheadbadge.com
 
cudak888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Southern Florida
Bikes: http://www.theheadbadge.com
Posts: 22,746
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(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.
cudak888 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 10:17 AM   #23
zac
Just ride
 
zac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Lowell, MA
Bikes: I just ride them, they own me.
Posts: 874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
zac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 11:06 AM   #24
High Roller
Guest
 
Bikes:
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Quoted: Post(s)
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?
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-09, 11:18 AM   #25
ChipSeal
www.chipsea.blogspot.com
 
ChipSeal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South of Dallas, Texas
Bikes: Giant OCR C0 road
Posts: 1,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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:

Quote:
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:

Quote:
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!
ChipSeal is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:05 AM.