Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Practicable/possible definition

Search
Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Practicable/possible definition

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-26-08, 02:08 PM
  #76  
Infamous Member
 
chipcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360

Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by ChipSeal
The general public would be better served if legislators would simply change the word "practicable" to "safe".

It is obvious that our legislators are serving lawyers rather than the general public.
If laws were understandable by the general public, we would have less need for lawyers and the lynching of legislators would be a common occurrence.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
chipcom is offline  
Old 03-26-08, 02:14 PM
  #77  
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Blue Order
And that argument will likely garner you a conviction.
Perhaps, but we'll probably never find out because I will probably never even get cited if I'm riding as far right as the door zone on a street where curbside parked cars are not present.

Originally Posted by Blue Order
Whether we consider it right or wrong, the purpose of the statute is to keep cyclists to the right of faster vehicular traffic. Recognizing that keeping cyclists as far right as possible would subject cyclists to unsafe conditions, the legislatures have instead required cyclists to ride as far right as is safe.
Agreed.

Originally Posted by Blue Order
Your argument that it is unsafe to ride to the right of traffic, ...
Huh? My argument is not and has never been that it is unsafe to ride to the right of traffic.

Originally Posted by Blue Order
and therefore, "practicable" means riding in the lane with faster vehicular traffic, defeats the purpose of the law, and therefore, no judge is likely to agree with you.
What the heck are you talking about? With parked cars not being present, I'm talking about riding in the door zone, beside faster vehicular traffic where I'm not interfering with their travel any more than the presence of a parked car would be, not in the lane inline with them. I would only be there if the parked cars are present, and I have reason to stay out of the door zone.

Originally Posted by Blue Order
No, what's absurd is claiming that (absent any other actual hazards that would make it unsafe to do so) it's unsafe to ride any further to the right than the door zone of an imaginary line of parked cars.
I never said it was unsafe. I said it's needless compromise in safety, which makes it impracticable (a behavior that is not reasonable to put in practice).

Originally Posted by Blue Order
It's equally absurd to believe that a judge would agree with you that you're riding as far to the right as practicable in that situation.
And you "know" this because???
Helmet Head is offline  
Old 03-26-08, 02:19 PM
  #78  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,274
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
And you "know" this because???
Because it's likely the judge never drank the kool-aid.
Blue Order is offline  
Old 03-26-08, 02:24 PM
  #79  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,274
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
With parked cars not being present, I'm talking about riding in the door zone, beside faster vehicular traffic where I'm not interfering with their travel any more than the presence of a parked car would be, not in the lane inline with them. I would only be there if the parked cars are present, and I have reason to stay out of the door zone.
By riding as far from the curb as practicable, and as close to the other traffic as practicable, you're treating the curb as a greater hazard than the cars to your immediate left, and that is turning the meaning of the law upside down.


Originally Posted by Helmet Head
I never said it was unsafe. I said it's needless compromise in safety, which makes it impracticable (a behavior that is not reasonable to put in practice).
So you're saying it IS safe?
Blue Order is offline  
Old 03-26-08, 07:12 PM
  #80  
Devilmaycare Cycling Fool
 
Allister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wynnum, Australia
Posts: 3,819

Bikes: 1998 Cannondale F700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
I'm suggesting that the further right you are, the more you are compromising conspicuousness, vantage, predictability, and buffer/escape space.
I know you're 'suggesting' that. It's not the first time you've 'suggested' it. Still doesn't make it true. The difference in all those things between riding in the centre of the lane and riding 2 metres to the side of it is neglibigle to be non-existent. We're talking about a field of view of less than ten degrees - that's well within even the most tunnel-vision-afflicted drivers like yourself. Your irrational fear of being inconspicuous is as counter-productive as an irrational fear of overtaking traffic. Tens of thousands of kilometers of actually riding that way is far more convincing to me than your ill-informed scaremongering.

By the way, if motorists are honking and yelling and buzzing me, it's a pretty safe bet it's not because they haven't seen me.

You've seen my videos - show me where I compromise conspicuousness, vantage, predictability, and buffer/escape space.
Allister is offline  
Old 03-26-08, 07:22 PM
  #81  
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Blue Order
By riding as far from the curb as practicable, and as close to the other traffic as practicable, you're treating the curb as a greater hazard than the cars to your immediate left, and that is turning the meaning of the law upside down.
Who is riding as far from the curb as practicable?

Originally Posted by Blue Order
So you're saying it IS safe?
Another false dichotomy. Safety is measured on a continuum only the extremes of which can be characterized as "safe" or "not safe", and neither of which arguably applies in traffic.
Helmet Head is offline  
Old 04-01-08, 09:16 AM
  #82  
52-week commuter
 
DCCommuter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,929

Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
In addition to what "practicable" means, you also have to think about what "roadway" means. The roadway is only the traveled part of the road -- the travel lanes. So it's a red herring when the law says "curb or edge of roadway" -- the word "curb" only serves to confuse the purpose of the law. The curb can be the edge of the roadway, or there can be space between the edge of the roadway and the curb -- a parking lane for example. So having the word "curb" in the law adds nothing to the meaning of the law -- it will never happen that the curb is to the left of the edge of the roadway.

Is a parking lane that is not being used for parking part of the roadway? Is it legal to drive there? I think you'd have to check your local statutes. If it is not legal to drive in a parking lane, it is not part of the roadway, and you cannot be required to ride there.
__________________
The United States of America is the only democratic nation in the world to deny citizens living in the nation's capital representation in the national legislature. District residents have no vote in either the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives. www.dcvote.org
DCCommuter is offline  
Old 04-01-08, 05:55 PM
  #83  
Devilmaycare Cycling Fool
 
Allister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wynnum, Australia
Posts: 3,819

Bikes: 1998 Cannondale F700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DCCommuter
In addition to what "practicable" means, you also have to think about what "roadway" means. The roadway is only the traveled part of the road -- the travel lanes.
Not sure about there, but the rules here do include what they call 'road-related area' in the difinition of road, unless expressly stated otherwise.

11 Regulation applies to vehicles and road users on roads and
road-related areas
(1) This regulation applies to vehicles and road users on roads and
road-related areas.
(2) A reference in this regulation (except in this division) to a “road”
includes a reference to a “road related area”, unless otherwise expressly
stated in this regulation.
and

13 What is a road related area
A “road-related area” is any of the following—
(a) an area that divides a road;
(b) a footpath or nature strip adjacent to a road;
(c) an area that is not a road and that is open to the public and
designated for use by cyclists or animals;
(d) an area that is not a road and that is open to, or used by, the
public for parking vehicles;
(2) However, unless the contrary intention appears, a reference in this
regulation (except this division) to a “road-related area” includes a
reference to—
(a) any shoulder of a road; or
(b) any other area that is a footpath or nature strip as defined in the
dictionary.
I think it'd pay to check your local rules to confirm that.
Allister is offline  
Old 04-01-08, 07:10 PM
  #84  
52-week commuter
 
DCCommuter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,929

Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Allister
I think it'd pay to check your local rules to confirm that.
My local rules say:
Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this subsection and in subsection 2202.9 of this title, any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall travel as closely as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, or as closely as practicable to the left-hand curb or edge of the roadway when on a one-way street.
"Roadway" is defined as "that portion of a highway ordinarily used for vehicular travel, excluding the sidewalk or shoulder."
__________________
The United States of America is the only democratic nation in the world to deny citizens living in the nation's capital representation in the national legislature. District residents have no vote in either the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives. www.dcvote.org
DCCommuter is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.