Advocacy & Safety - Interesting Chat with a Police Officer During my Commute

Re: Taking the Lane

On my ride home from work tonight I was taking the right lane, riding between the tire tracks, on a 5 lane (2 lane each way with center turn lane) road in a 30mph zone. The right lane is slightly wider than the left lane, but definitely not a WOL. If you want to look it up I was heading north on Broadway (CA-135) near Morrison Ave in Santa Maria, CA. It was a little after midnight, so traffic was very light, and the few vehicles approaching me from behind in the right lane moved over to the left lane well before getting up to me.

In my mirror I eventually noticed a car coming up behind me kind of slow, staying in the right lane. I could tell from the headlights it was a Crown Victoria, and since the vast majority of Crown Victorias driving around this town in the middle of the night are police vehicles assumed it was a police officer. As the vehicle got up to me it moved halfway into the left lane, then slowed down to my pace (about 16-17mph), on a path that would result in a close pass if I held my line. I decided to hold my line and see what the driver decided to do. He moved completely over into the left lane and pulled up alongside. As he came up alongside I looked and confirmed it was a police vehicle, and since I had the advantage of shining my helmet light at the driver I recognized him as one I've met before (he's responded to my calls for street racers near my work in the past).

The officer rolled down his passenger's side window and motioned at the curb, which I took as an old fashioned "pull over" gesture. I started slowing down, then heard him say "you should be riding closer to the curb." I continued riding at that point since he didn't seem to want to detain me, and explained as we were cruising down the road at about 12-13mph blocking both lanes (but with no vehicles approaching) that it was safer for me to be in the center of the lane so motorists know they need to move over to the left lane to pass. I then mentioned where I knew him from; he remembered me. I don't know if that had any impact on his actions from that point. He again said I should ride closer to the curb, and I again explained to him it would be unsafe for me to do so. After a brief pause where it was obvious we were at an impasse and I was thinking of asking him if he wanted to pull over to discuss the issue, he just said "whatever," sped up, and made a left turn a couple of streets down.

I guess I'm hoping he'll look up the laws regarding operating a bicycle on the roadway and learn something new. FWIW it had recently stopped raining, the roads were still wet, and there were several large puddles further down the road that would have forced any cyclist to move out to the position I was riding in anyway, and I had already seen a puddle of the same size prior to chatting with the officer. I forgot to mention the puddles as another reason to take the lane during our conversation.

I have his business card with name and work extension from our previous positive contact. Anybody think I should call him and follow up on our conversation? :)

Oh boy.......here we go again. :rolleyes:
If you want to follow up with a phone call to the officer you can come here and get great legal advice, too. :rolleyes:

Extreme VCealotism. Making the world hate us, 50 drivers at a time.

Really though.....Respectfully I say, if the extremist VCers need that much room in which
to conduct your affairs maybe they should think of different, easier and less intimidating routes.

That's a situation where adaptive riding would seem to favor center of the lane and constant mirror checking for drunks. The edges of wet roads can be pretty dang dangerous at night.

Oh boy.......here we go again. :rolleyes:
If you want to follow up with a phone call to the officer you can come here and get great legal advice, too. :rolleyes:

Extreme VCealotism. Making the world hate us, 50 drivers at a time.

Really though.....Respectfully I say, if the extremist VCers need that much room in which
to conduct your affairs maybe they should think of different, easier and less intimidating routes.

Hey really with virtually no one else on the road (remember there was plenty of room for the officer in the car and the cyclist both to have a lane and move at 12MPH) what is wrong with riding in the center of the entire right lane... it's not as if the cyclist (OP) had to actually share the lane with anyone.

By being that far out, and hopefully very well lit, the cyclist should be quite visible to anyone approaching from behind.

Taking a lane in fast heavy traffic is one thing; riding along alone... take all the darn road you want.

Especially after rain the right tire track is the best place to ride - and it (and the left one) are usually the only dry (or less wet) areas on the roadway.

(This is a new 'discovery' for me ;) , the first 11 months of 2007 there was 2.6" of rain. December 2007 has had over 5". I have had more rain rides this December than in the past three years combined!)

Al

VC Riding down the middle of a lane at night, in the rain: People usually don't do this. Anomaly. Cop pauses to check the situation out. Might be a drunk rider.

Cop pulls up next to VC: Checking out rider, identifies that rider is able to converse and travel safely at the same time, recognizes rider, comes to conclusion that rider is not drunk, suggests what cop personally believes to be the safest place on the road for the bicyclist, given conditions at the time.

Bicyclist refuses with reason because he personally believes he is riding in the safest place on the road, given conditions at the time. Bicyclist is not breaking the law. Cop moves along.

Truly well-meaning cop goes and tells the rest of his buddies about the stupid bicyclist riding in the dark in the middle of the road after it's rained. Well intentioned VC posts about jack booted thug on BF.

I don't think a claim can be made that the cop did not know the law if he didn't *order* the cyclist to ride on the side of the road or pull over.

You can argue that being in the middle of the lane means you are more visible, but if you're biking on a fast road after dark (more drunks out, less vision), after the rain (with any amount of glare being reflected up), in the middle of the lane, you might give the cop the benefit of the doubt that he was merely concerned more about your safety than hassling you as a VC.

VC Riding down the middle of a lane at night, in the rain: People usually don't do this. Anomaly. Cop pauses to check the situation out. Might be a drunk rider.

Cop pulls up next to VC: Checking out rider, identifies that rider is able to converse and travel safely at the same time, recognizes rider, comes to conclusion that rider is not drunk, suggests what cop personally believes to be the safest place on the road for the bicyclist, given conditions at the time.

Bicyclist refuses with reason because he personally believes he is riding in the safest place on the road, given conditions at the time. Bicyclist is not breaking the law. Cop moves along.

Truly well-meaning cop goes and tells the rest of his buddies about the stupid bicyclist riding in the dark in the middle of the road after it's rained. Well intentioned VC posts about jack booted thug on BF.

I don't think a claim can be made that the cop did not know the law if he didn't *order* the cyclist to ride on the side of the road or pull over.

You can argue that being in the middle of the lane means you are more visible, but if you're biking on a fast road after dark (more drunks out, less vision), after the rain (with any amount of glare being reflected up), in the middle of the lane, you might give the cop the benefit of the doubt that he was merely concerned more about your safety than hassling you as a VC.

Sounds fair and reasonable... along with the comment that indeed few people do ride bikes in the middle of the lane... which gives rise to the question of how safe riding centerish really is... especially at that time of night (with the drunks out). But on the other hand, the OP mentioned that there was little traffic... and indeed visibility is better when riding further left. And no one was blocked.

Not to mention how idiotic drivers are in rain in these parts. Not totally sure about Santa Maria but in Santa Barbara drivers lose a few IQ points when a little water falls from the sky.

Re: Taking the Lane

...He again said I should ride closer to the curb, and I again explained to him it would be unsafe for me to do so. After a brief pause where it was obvious we were at an impasse and I was thinking of asking him if he wanted to pull over to discuss the issue, he just said "whatever," sped up, and made a left turn a couple of streets down....

Anybody think I should call him and follow up on our conversation? :)
I just think he was looking out for you. When he realized you were looking out for yourself, he left it up to you.

The first job of police is to protect. After that, they usually have too many other more important things to do than to hassle intelligent people.

. . . Truly well-meaning cop goes and tells the rest of his buddies about the stupid bicyclist riding in the dark in the middle of the road after it's rained. Well intentioned VC posts about jack booted thug on BF. . . .

Actually, as the story was told, both rider and cop acted like mature and reasonable humans.

I think it might be useful to send the cop a brief note thanking him for his attention, providing a few points on the legal and practical basis of VC, and then thanking him again. Good cops are hard to find.

I'm not sure how VC-ish riding toward the center of the lane is.

It seems more like a basic safety thing to me.

Also, I don't think "jack-booted"ness was implied/mentioned, just that - based on the interaction - the OP concluded that the officer (like most) was unaware of the codes pertaining to bicycle use.

However, I wouldn't make the call on this specific incident.

I think it would be better to try & arrange a friendly, pastry-in-hand (along with like-minded cycylists) meeting/seminar type thing to advocate for (y)our views.

Sounds fair and reasonable... along with the comment that indeed few people do ride bikes in the middle of the lane... which gives rise to the question of how safe riding centerish really is... especially at that time of night (with the drunks out). But on the other hand, the OP mentioned that there was little traffic... and indeed visibility is better when riding further left. And no one was blocked.

More importantly the OP mentioned and implied a few times that there were very aware of what was going on behind them on a continuous basis. They knew that faster vehicles in the same lane were moving left well before they got to them. They knew the make of vehicle that didn't and could tell they were going slowly. They didn't say, but I'd bet they were using a mirror.

This kind of situational awareness along with the assumption that if there was no sign that a faster same lane driver reacted to the OP cyclist (slowed, merged left, honked, etc.) that OP would either move far right or fully bail if needed, makes the 'issue' of lane positioning irrelevant from the lack of data point of view of 'so few cyclist ride in the center, then how do we know if it is safer or not.'

With the vigilance/situational awareness of rear then it has to be safer than riding far right as one will be better able to pick out the drunks, the inattentive, etc. and respond to them vs. just staying far right and knowing even less about the awareness and state of soon to be passing drivers.

Al

If the lane's narrow, I just don't get the point of keeping to the right. The driver will have to veer into the left lane anyway to pass even if you're in the right wheel track. Who are you helping by staying to the right?

If there's a rideable shoulder or something, that would be different.

Note I don't subscribe to any 'theory' of cycling, but if a car and I can't both fit into a lane, we can't share it. If we can't share it, then that means we need two lanes. If we need two lanes, why wouldn't I want a full one?

That's not meant to incite or anything, I'm honestly curious.

Also, I don't think "jack-booted"ness was implied/mentioned, just that - based on the interaction - the OP concluded that the officer (like most) was unaware of the codes pertaining to bicycle use.

However, I wouldn't make the call on this specific incident.

Well, I doubt the officer told his buddies, either, much less called the OP stupid. Grant me some hyperbole.

Point being that OP shows a (not completely unwarranted) bias in assuming cop doesn't know the law, where I don't see anything in the reportage indicating this. If OP had been pulled over, ticketed, or detained, OK, but this really seems like a no harm, no foul situation. If OP decides to follow up with cop, just helpfully suggesting that they shouldn't go in there assuming that the cop does not know the letter of the law.

Also, I don't think "jack-booted"ness was implied/mentioned, just that - based on the interaction - the OP concluded that the officer (like most) was unaware of the codes pertaining to bicycle use.

If that was true, it would suggest the cop would have pulled him over, not made a suggestion.

If the lane's narrow, I just don't get the point of keeping to the right. The driver will have to veer into the left lane anyway to pass even if you're in the right wheel track. Who are you helping by staying to the right?

If there's a rideable shoulder or something, that would be different.

Note I don't subscribe to any 'theory' of cycling, but if a car and I can't both fit into a lane, we can't share it. If we can't share it, then that means we need two lanes. If we need two lanes, why wouldn't I want a full one?

That's not meant to incite or anything, I'm honestly curious.
The issue is about whether cyclists should right as far right as practicable in lanes that are too narrow to safely share side-by-side with a car, with both car and bike fully within the lane side-by-side.

You might not like to acknowledge that you subscribe to any one theory or another, but if you believe that in the situation described in the OP the cyclist is better off in a more conspicuous lane position near the center, rather than further right, or if you believe that he is still better off further right, then you do subscribe to a theory. You just don't realize it.

Anyway, kudos to the OP, Jeff! :beer: That's why I call true bicycling advocacy, tossing out the superstitions and helping one person at a time understand what bicycling safety is really about.

JeffB: below is a copy/paste of the relevant California Vehicle Code for bicycles on a roadway. The full link is: http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21202.htm

I live an Atascadero and know Santa Maria well. I don't know if Broadway is considered a "roadway" as it applies in this section of the VC. At any rate, the whole bicycle VC makes interesting reading.

DON
_________________________________

Operation on Roadway
21202. (a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations:

(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.

(2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.

(3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section 21656. For purposes of this section, a "substandard width lane" is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.

(4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.

(b) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway of a highway, which highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near the left-hand curb or edge of that roadway as practicable.

Amended Sec. 4, Ch. 674, Stats. 1996. Effective January 1, 1997

If the lane's narrow, I just don't get the point of keeping to the right. The driver will have to veer into the left lane anyway to pass even if you're in the right wheel track. Who are you helping by staying to the right?

If there's a rideable shoulder or something, that would be different.

Note I don't subscribe to any 'theory' of cycling, but if a car and I can't both fit into a lane, we can't share it. If we can't share it, then that means we need two lanes. If we need two lanes, why wouldn't I want a full one?

That's not meant to incite or anything, I'm honestly curious.

Great way to think about it... honestly... now how do you get motorists to buy into it. If I am moving down the lane of a 4 lane road at 12MPH... and motorists are having to move out of my lane, I guarantee that they are not going to be happy about it.

JeffB: below is a copy/paste of the relevant California Vehicle Code for bicycles on a roadway. The full link is: http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21202.htm

I live an Atascadero and know Santa Maria well. I don't know if Broadway is considered a "roadway" as it applies in this section of the VC. At any rate, the whole bicycle VC makes interesting reading.

DON


Here's the definition of roadway from www.leginfo.ca.gov

530. A "roadway" is that portion of a highway improved, designed,
or ordinarily used for vehicular travel.

So I would think a roadway is pretty much everything except a sidewalk, shoulder, "safety zone," etc.

On a side note, here's the definition of sidewalk, which some people like to yell at me to ride on while I'm riding on Broadway.

555. "Sidewalk" is that portion of a highway, other than the
roadway, set apart by curbs, barriers, markings or other delineation
for pedestrian travel.

It used to be a misdemeanor (arrestable offense) to ride a bicycle on a sidewalk in a commercial or residential district in Santa Maria; they just recently dropped that down to an infraction (ticket only).

I know VC21202 well, and knew at the time I spoke with the officer I was not required to ride as close as practicable to the right edge of the roadway due to surface hazards and substandard width lanes. Even if road conditions were perfect, I would not be required to ride as close as practicable to the right on many sections of Broadway (including the section mentioned in the op) due to substandard width lanes. It's safer for me to ride in the middle of the right lane so people know well in advance they have to get into the left lane to safely pass. It's easier for the motorists in the right lane to find a place to merge into the left lane as they're moving with the flow of traffic, and they may not even have to slow down.

If I rode in the gutter, a motorist may think they have room to squeeze between me and the dotted white line, and either complete their squeeze maneuver (causing a dangerous situation for me, and probably scaring the motorist in the left lane while drifting towards the lane line) or decide there's not room and brake at the last second. If the motorist decided to brake, they would then have to wait for a larger gap to merge since they're now traveling slower than the vehicles in the left lane, and the last second braking could put them at risk of being rear ended by somebody not paying attention.

In our brief interaction I explained to the officer I was thinking about my own safety, but another thing I forgot to mention to him was that I always have the safety of other road users and the smooth flow of traffic in mind.

On a local tangent Don, have you ever noticed that it's ok to ride a bicycle on US101 on the bridge over the Santa Maria River? I just noticed that when I started cycling regularly. On the on-ramp from Broadway to go north, the sign only says "pedestrians prohibited." At the off ramp for 166 east, there is a sign that says "bicycles must exit." It's true going the other way as well. Of all the stretches of 101 on the central coast, I think that bridge would be one of my last choices to ride a bike on.

Here's the definition of roadway from www.leginfo.ca.gov

On a local tangent Don, have you ever noticed that it's ok to ride a bicycle on US101 on the bridge over the Santa Maria River? I just noticed that when I started cycling regularly. On the on-ramp from Broadway to go north, the sign only says "pedestrians prohibited." At the off ramp for 166 east, there is a sign that says "bicycles must exit." It's true going the other way as well. Of all the stretches of 101 on the central coast, I think that bridge would be one of my last choices to ride a bike on.

You are right about that bridge. I've never ridden a bike across it . . . never plan to. I even find it spooky when traffic is heavy and I'm in a truck. It always seems that many of the cars/trucks' drivers are not paying attention to lane divisions. Can't even imagine the horror of biking there.

DON

Great way to think about it... honestly... now how do you get motorists to buy into it. If I am moving down the lane of a 4 lane road at 12MPH... and motorists are having to move out of my lane, I guarantee that they are not going to be happy about it.

I can guarantee you that most won't care as long as you don't give them any other choice but to change lanes. If the mailman can come to a complete stop in the right lane of a 45mph 4 lane road and not cause any traffic delay behind him (as I witnessed this past weekend), surely a 10mph cyclist can use the same road with ease.

not according to the motorists, joe.

"most won't care as long as you don't give them any choice..." what type of faulty clairvoyance is THAT, joe. the motorists by and large, DO get irritated by slower bicyclists in the middle of the travel lanes.

you knew that though, didn't you??

I always like when motorists tell where a cyclist should be ridding. You would think they would know no where to ride to be safe.

@NB you should move to Portland :)
Yes love avoiding road canals/puddles.

I can guarantee you that most won't care as long as you don't give them any other choice but to change lanes. If the mailman can come to a complete stop in the right lane of a 45mph 4 lane road and not cause any traffic delay behind him (as I witnessed this past weekend), surely a 10mph cyclist can use the same road with ease.

You'd think so, and that mentality should be there... but somehow the difference in the number of wheels and the motor seem to create a whole different mindset.

Remember in the minds of many motorists, we cyclists are using "their" road.

If the concept of OUR ROAD ever sunk into the minds of ALL the road users, that would be a great thing.

not according to the motorists, joe.

"most won't care as long as you don't give them any choice..." what type of faulty clairvoyance is THAT, joe. the motorists by and large, DO get irritated by slower bicyclists in the middle of the travel lanes.

you knew that though, didn't you??

If you are irritating most motorists, you have a pretty big problem. I have never had an experience where most motorists were annoyed at my using a full travel lane even on a high speed road where there was no chance of me keeping pace with traffic. I have had a few out of many motorists get annoyed but far from "most." So no, I didn't know that. Your experience must be nothing like mine and I find that hard to believe.

You'd think so, and that mentality should be there... but somehow the difference in the number of wheels and the motor seem to create a whole different mindset.

Remember in the minds of many motorists, we cyclists are using "their" road.

If the concept of OUR ROAD ever sunk into the minds of ALL the road users, that would be a great thing.

Sure "many" motorists think were are using their roads but it's only "many" because there is a huge number of total motorists. On any given ride, I'm not likely to encounter any motorist who thinks I'm using their roads. I'm barely likely to encounter any motorist who thinks I'm going too slow or riding too far left.

Sure "many" motorists think were are using their roads but it's only "many" because there is a huge number of total motorists. On any given ride, I'm not likely to encounter any motorist who thinks I'm using their roads. I'm barely likely to encounter any motorist who thinks I'm going too slow or riding too far left.

You are lucky in that. Your experience is not shared by many cyclists in the US.

And BTW it is also because "many" motorists are unaware of the true legal status of cyclists on the road.

... I'm barely likely to encounter any motorist who thinks I'm going too slow or riding too far left.

BWOOP BWOOP BWOOP! Delusion alert, delusion alert!

Sure "many" motorists think were are using their roads but it's only "many" because there is a huge number of total motorists. On any given ride, I'm not likely to encounter any motorist who thinks I'm using their roads. I'm barely likely to encounter any motorist who thinks I'm going too slow or riding too far left.

Hmmmm, I think that you rarely encounter a driver that communicates his or her thoughts. That is, most drivers probably think you are riding too slow and/or too far to your left but just drive around you.

-G

This was the headline in today's Seattle Press-Intelligencer:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/344924_bicyclelicense26.html

That's right--the headline on the front page.

East Hill

BWOOP BWOOP BWOOP! Delusion alert, delusion alert!

No really, I doubt it is a delusion, there are areas in the US where bike riding may be more accepted. Heck, on some local 25MPH roads, a bicycle might be well accepted.

But on narrow 45+MPH arterials... or taking a lane on a 35MPH arterial lined with parked cars, I doubt the driver reaction would be so gracious.

I just happen to think we can do far far more in improving the acceptance of cyclists, everywhere.

This was the headline in today's Seattle Press-Intelligencer:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/344924_bicyclelicense26.html

That's right--the headline on the front page.

East Hill

A key sign of the lack of acceptance and understanding by "the many."

Hmmmm, I think that you rarely encounter a driver that communicates his or her thoughts. That is, most drivers probably think you are riding too slow and/or too far to your left but just drive around you.

-G

That may be the case. But do you really expect every driver to have happy thoughts about you being in their way regardless of what type of vehicle you are in/on? That's a delusion.

@NB you should move to Portland :)
Yes love avoiding road canals/puddles.

wheel-
Here are two videos from the same commute home in a heavy rainstorm earlier in December:
http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=5800850&postcount=22330

Al

This was the headline in today's Seattle Press-Intelligencer:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/344924_bicyclelicense26.html

That's right--the headline on the front page.

East Hill

Why isn't this a good and fair idea?

Why shouldn't cyclists have to register to use the road like any other vehicular road users? Or be licensed? Maybe if there was licensing, along with requisite training/education, you'd get less cyclists breaking various laws.

Why isn't this a good and fair idea?

Why shouldn't cyclists have to register to use the road like any other vehicular road users? Or be licensed? Maybe if there was licensing, along with requisite training/education, you'd get less cyclists breaking various laws.

In theory you are right... but it would have to be adopted at the state level like auto licensing to really work. On the flip side, the reality is that most adult cyclists are licensed anyway...

That may be the case. But do you really expect every driver to have happy thoughts about you being in their way regardless of what type of vehicle you are in/on? That's a delusion.

No. But based on my own wild conjecture and conversations with non-cyclists, I think that the proportion is much higher than with an ordinary slow driver.

No. But based on my own wild conjecture and conversations with non-cyclists, I think that the proportion is much higher than with an ordinary slow driver.

How slow is an ordinary slow driver going? Around here, if I drive at the speed limit, I am one of the slowest vehicles on the road.

The last time I drove to work (a while ago) I was given the finger by a guy who passed me on the left after I had moved into a right turn lane and proceeded to turn right in front of me from the straight lane (where he also ran a stop sign). I was in front of him for the past mile doing about 28-30mph on 25mph roads.

I just got back from Florida for a work trip. I drove about 180 miles on I95. I had a tractor trailer driver flash his lights then honk his horn at me while I was doing 70 in a 65 in the middle lane on a stretch where the road was 5 lanes wide. On the way back to the airport doing about 75 in a 65 (late for my flight) in the third lane from the left on a 4 lane wide section, I had a guy in a pickup truck freakout behind me and start slamming his fist on his steering wheel when he had to brake for me.

Now imagine that I'm doing 40mph on I95 (the minimum legal speed) and guess at how many honks or angry reactions I would have received.

I honestly believe that motorists treat cyclists way better than other slow moving vehicle drivers, especially given the general confusion about how cyclists should behave on the roadways thanks to misinformation and the abundance of blatantly-law-breaking cyclists.

Whoop Whoop! Delusion alert 2!

You SERIOUSLY believe that motorists treat bicyclists BETTER than slow moving motorized vehicles?


:roflmao:

Wow, joe.

I had a tractor trailer driver flash his lights then honk his horn at me while I was doing 70 in a 65 in the middle lane on a stretch where the road was 5 lanes wide. On the way back to the airport doing about 75 in a 65 (late for my flight) in the third lane from the left on a 4 lane wide section, I had a guy in a pickup truck freakout behind me and start slamming his fist on his steering wheel when he had to brake for me.

Stop breaking the law. Slower traffic keep right.

The 2007 Florida Statutes

316.081 Driving on right side of roadway; exceptions.--

(2) Upon all roadways, any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.

Whoop Whoop! Delusion alert 2!

You SERIOUSLY believe that motorists treat bicyclists BETTER than slow moving motorized vehicles?


:roflmao:

Wow, joe.

IMHO: At least a bicyclist is usually at their best speed, where as a car doing 10mph isn't exactly limited at 10mph.

However, I doubt many people come to this conclusion.

Stop breaking the law. Slower traffic keep right.

The 2007 Florida Statutes

316.081 Driving on right side of roadway; exceptions.--

(2) Upon all roadways, any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.

So if I'm keeping up with the rest of traffic but there's one tractor trailer driver who decides he doesn't want to change lanes to pass, I'm breaking the law? Give me a break.

By your logic, any time one single vehicle is driving above the speed of all other traffic, EVERYONE but the faster driver must move into the right lane. The law would never be so ridiculous as to require that.

Whoop Whoop! Delusion alert 2!

You SERIOUSLY believe that motorists treat bicyclists BETTER than slow moving motorized vehicles?


:roflmao:

Wow, joe.

Yes. You admittedly don't drive much. How would you know?

I'm in traffic everyday..... :)

I'm in traffic everyday..... :)

How often do you drive a motor vehicle at less than the normal speed of traffic?

So if I'm keeping up with the rest of traffic but there's one tractor trailer driver who decides he doesn't want to change lanes to pass, I'm breaking the law? Give me a break.

By your logic, any time one single vehicle is driving above the speed of all other traffic, EVERYONE but the faster driver must move into the right lane. The law would never be so ridiculous as to require that.


In Europe, that's pretty much the case. You can only drive in the inner lanes when overtaking. If you are not overtaking, you should be in the RH lane. You can be ticketed if there is space to move in, and you do not (the law allows you to stay in an overtaking lane to pass a number of slower vehicles).

I have experience of driving in Europe, Australia and the US, and I like the European way better. It's more predictable, you can't be overtaken on the 'wrong' side (doing this is also a ticketable offence) and the traffic flows more freely as the centre lanes aren't blocked by traffic moving at the same speed as traffic in the RH lane.

I honestly believe that motorists treat cyclists way better than other slow moving vehicle drivers, especially given the general confusion about how cyclists should behave on the roadways thanks to misinformation and the abundance of blatantly-law-breaking cyclists.

Slow is relative ... so 25 mph over the speed limit on the run from LA to Vegas is a slowpoke. :D

I guess it might depend on the road. I find that cyclists are tolerated much less on arterials than other less trafficked roads. And from conversations here on bikeforums and with some riding buds in a few different parts of the country, it seems that driver attitudes with respect to cyclists do vary. So I imagine that our individual perceptions could vary by these and other parameters that we are failing to control for in our discussion.

In Europe, that's pretty much the case. You can only drive in the inner lanes when overtaking. If you are not overtaking, you should be in the RH lane. You can be ticketed if there is space to move in, and you do not (the law allows you to stay in an overtaking lane to pass a number of slower vehicles).

I have experience of driving in Europe, Australia and the US, and I like the European way better. It's more predictable, you can't be overtaken on the 'wrong' side (doing this is also a ticketable offence) and the traffic flows more freely as the centre lanes aren't blocked by traffic moving at the same speed as traffic in the RH lane.

In my experience with freeway driving, if you are going with the flow of traffic, you are overtaking a few vehicles in the right hand lane at almost any time. To constantly go back and forth between lanes to make sure that you were always overtaking someone if in the inner lanes would be really annoying. I've never seen anyone do this. My time on the freeway in Florida was no exception to my previous experience.

In my short time on the Autobahn in Germany, only the really slow traffic used the right lane, most traffic stuck to the inner lanes, and the left lane was used only momentarily for passing by most vehicles and for longer periods by the 130+mph club.

In either situation, traffic is never being blocked by vehicles in the inner lanes going the same speed as traffic in the RH lane. The only times someone gets "blocked" (like my truck driver) is when they don't feel like going one lane further left in order to be overtaking someone who is overtaking someone else.

Slow is relative ... so 25 mph over the speed limit on the run from LA to Vegas is a slowpoke. :D

This is true. Outside of DC on I95, 80-85mph (in a 55 zone) is the normal speed of traffic.


I guess it might depend on the road. I find that cyclists are tolerated much less on arterials than other less trafficked roads. And from conversations here on bikeforums and with some riding buds in a few different parts of the country, it seems that driver attitudes with respect to cyclists do vary. So I imagine that our individual perceptions could vary by these and other parameters that we are failing to control for in our discussion.

My opinion is that the difference in individuals perception of motorists' attitudes has more to do with an individual's riding style than anything else. Using the same riding style, I receive similar treatment no matter where I've been cycling (DE, PA [Philly to Harrisburg], MD, southern NJ, upstate NY, and NC).

In terms of really obnoxious motorists, I have found many more on backroads than on arterials. Motorists on arterials may be more likely to honk but that's about it. People on backroads seem to have a lot more time on their hands to complain though :)

No really, I doubt it is a delusion, there are areas in the US where bike riding may be more accepted. Heck, on some local 25MPH roads, a bicycle might be well accepted.

But on narrow 45+MPH arterials... or taking a lane on a 35MPH arterial lined with parked cars, I doubt the driver reaction would be so gracious.

I just happen to think we can do far far more in improving the acceptance of cyclists, everywhere.

I'm trying to imagine if bicyclists were completely accepted by everyone without exception, and how much that would differ from the current reality. I doubt the difference would be noticeable on most rides. So I'd get 0 honks per year instead of six. Big deal.