Originally Posted by BassNotBass

What it boils down to is that bikes are required by law (at least here in the USA) to ride on the streets because cyclist are considered vehicle operators... that means that whether you're riding a bike, motorcycle or driving a car, you're entitled to an entire lane... whether there's a sharrow or not (IMHO sharrows and bike lanes are a convenient and meaningless attempt to address a miniscule aspect of traffic problems that ultimately has a negative effect on a small portion of tax paying citizens... that's why they were chosen as a "solution"). The addendum or stipulation of having to move to the right portion of a lane, if holding up traffic to allow others to pass, is strictly on a judgmental basis... basically a consideration. Legally the cop would have to prove that the OP was impeding traffic... not unlike a slow moving dump truck, road construction vehicle or farm tractor is apt to do yet is never (from my experience) cited when failing to comply. In fact in the OP's case the motorcycle cop was breaking the law and endangering the OP's safety by riding in the same lane with him... the cop was creating a dangerous traffic situation by encroaching on the OP's lane and not keeping a +3 ft distance as required by law.

What the OP did is no different than if I decided to drive my car or ride my motorcycle at <15 mph, I am not breaking the law... after all, there is no minimum speed limit on these kinds of roads.

weshigh... you handled this situation extremely well... you're a friggin Ghandi.