Originally Posted by
paulypro
I still think the OP cyclist is abusing the existence of a sharrow, which should mean that it's a shared lane, not a lane available for cyclists to take over..
Really ?. The presence as well as LOCATION of the sharrow means that somebody in the friggin government determined that this is where it is safe as well as appropriate for a cyclist to ride. Else why paint it where they did ?. Why not paint it over on the extreme side of the lane if that's where you want the cyclist to ride ?. This particular stretch of road has no shoulder and as such the folks planning for this sharrow to be painted were entirely aware that a cyclist is going to take the lane, right on top of where they painted it.
End of story. The cop was an ill informed moron (as is often typical).