View Single Post
Old 09-27-12 | 10:10 PM
  #29  
Doohickie's Avatar
Doohickie
You gonna eat that?
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 14,917
Likes: 543
From: Fort Worth, Texas Church of Hopeful Uncertainty

Bikes: 1966 Raleigh DL-1 Tourist, 1973 Schwinn Varsity, 1983 Raleigh Marathon, 1994 Nishiki Sport XRS

Originally Posted by DntWorryB.Happy
I don't know about that. In my city bike lanes arent common. So people wouldnt check for a lane there while turning.
It doesn't matter. When executing a left turn across traffic, it is incumbent on the vehicle making the turn to ensure that ALL TRAFFIC LANES are clear before making the turn, because the people in their traffic lanes (including the bike lane) have the RIGHT OF WAY. You violate someone else's right of way, you're at fault. Period.

And just because a driver is ignorant of the presence of a bike lane does NOT excuse them of liability.

Put into a slightly different context, if, instead of a bike lane, that was an additional motor traffic lane, and all the other lanes had stopped due to traffic, but that lane was clear, the person in that last traffic lane wouldn't be at fault for a collision, the driver left turning across their lane would be. Same principle applies here.
__________________
I stop for people / whose right of way I honor / but not for no one.


Originally Posted by bragi "However, it's never a good idea to overgeneralize."

Last edited by Doohickie; 09-27-12 at 10:13 PM.
Doohickie is offline  
Reply