Originally Posted by
bshanteau
...
Trying to write into law when a bicyclist is not required to ride AFRAP hasn't worked. Wouldn't it be better if bicyclists ALWAYS had the right to use a full lane, the same as other drivers? That doesn't mean bicyclists would always want to EXERCISE that right, since being a safe and cooperative road user means moving right to allow faster traffic to pass when it is safe. But isn't it better to leave that decision up to the bicyclist than to try to write it into law, which is the way it is now?
OP makes a good argument, and this is an excellent point. Is it not reasonable that the failings of the FRAP laws, and of the general understanding and enforcement thereof, are due to the exception basis manner of their application? Even the FRAP law itself is an exception: yes, you can ride a bike on the streets BUT .... it creates a separate -exceptional- class of road users right from the start. And then there are the exceptions to the exception. It makes much more sense to have one set of laws for all vehicles, then address slow moving vehicles - any vehicle regardless of whether or how powered. The default should be the set of traffic laws that we all follow, which would necessarily include using the full lane. Exceptions are when you're impeding traffic (move over when you can) just like any other slow moving vehicle. I think that OP has persuaded me.