good grief.
no one has 'proven me wrong', my point of view is sound and backed by interpretations of traffic law from the UVC, our state vehicle code (dan arnold, have you found even a shred of any credible evidence to support your POV about bicyclists responsibilities in WA state yet? Hint: there is none!)
and general considerations of bicyclists as road users, in court cases back to Swift V the cityof Topeka,
bicyclists rights to travel the roads, free of onerous restrictions, shall not be infringed. Subjecting bicyclists to variations of SMV-pull off roadway laws would be tantamount to a prohibition of our travel on two lane highways.
A SMV-I-POR requirement on bicyclists should not be the case in any state in the union due its de facto prohibitive nature against bicyclists use of two lane narrow highways.
A requirement bicyclists leave the highway for following traffics' convenience is much more onerous than a law that bicyclists be required to operate only as far right as is safe.
In considerations of this, bicyclists need to realize that cycling 'advocates' who suggest bicyclists should be subject to pull off the road for other traffic, this clamoring for 'greater equality', are lobbying for a significant diminishment of bicyclists road rights.
Last edited by Bekologist; 12-13-09 at 10:13 AM.