FRAP law -- say what?
09-21-11, 02:28 PM
#102
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,040
Bikes: Bacchetta Giro, Strada
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
In Texas at least, a citizens arrest can only be done if the crime is a felony or it disturbs the peace. (relevant law.) Most moving violations don't qualify ...
In any event, citizens arrest is a big box of worms that I'd suggest that nobody ever open.
In any event, citizens arrest is a big box of worms that I'd suggest that nobody ever open.
09-21-11, 02:43 PM
#103
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,278
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,364 Times
in
945 Posts
09-21-11, 04:44 PM
#104
2 Fat 2 Furious
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: England
Posts: 3,996
Bikes: 2009 Specialized Rockhopper Comp Disc, 2009 Specialized Tricross Sport RIP
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
1 Post
Assume for a moment that it is a recklessly fast driver who cares nothing for your safety. Which is safer -- letting the reckless driver speed down the left lane, or having the reckless driver weave in and out of traffic in multiple lanes?
Unless you're equipped to stop a speeder, you should get out of their way if it is safe to do so.
09-21-11, 04:56 PM
#105
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,278
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,364 Times
in
945 Posts
Up to a point. On a bike it's usually easy but if these FRAP rules relate to "slow moving traffic" when "slow moving" means "slower that whatever is behind" then it means a car doing 50mph through a 25 zone is required to pull over to let the greater fool behind trying to do 75 get past.
The reckless driver will do whatever they feel will gain them those precious few seconds. I'm not going to try and prove a point when I'm the soft squidgy bit on a bike and the speeder is driving a 2-ton SUV unless I really don't have anywhere else to go. Even having said that there's a world of difference between minor motoring infractions (speeding, tailgating etc) and deliberately mowing down a cyclist (which would most likely count as attempted murder in many areas)
If you can't trust your competence in making this determination for yourself, then, maybe, you should give up driving or riding.
It doesn't seem that drivers or riders really have any problem dealing with these laws.
Last edited by njkayaker; 09-21-11 at 05:05 PM.
09-21-11, 05:11 PM
#106
Arizona Dessert
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,030
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
09-21-11, 05:48 PM
#107
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,278
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,364 Times
in
945 Posts
And, how would you (generally) be able to tell if that vehicle was speeding (note that car speedometers often are set to read lower than the actual speed)?
Your obligation to follow the law is not suspended if someone else is breaking some other law.
It should be clear that the two parties could both be breaking the law.
https://www.drivers.com/article/542/
The Chief of the Minnesota State Patrol says that two wrongs don't make a right when it comes to driving in the left lane. Col. Anne Beers argues that speeding in the left lane is wrong, but it's also wrong to camp there and refuse to move to the right so faster-moving traffic can pass. "We know there is aggressive behavior out on the highways. Why contribute to that?" she said. "Let someone who wants to go faster go by you and your stress stays under control." According to the article in the Star Tribune, drivers in Minnesota, USA, are not consistently moving to the right lane when possible to allow others to pass--as required by state law. Highway signs indicating "Slower traffic keep right" have not helped, and some drivers responded to a recent article by stating their objection to being pushed from behind by speeders and asking "where are the police?" One driver asked: "If I am going 70 in a 60 zone in the left-hand lane, why am I considered a 'camper'?" However, Beers said that the force has little spare time or budget to spend on speed enforcement. "At our normal staffing levels we are losing the battle." See more on this hot topic on the Drivers.com Discussion board.
Last edited by njkayaker; 09-21-11 at 05:55 PM.
09-21-11, 05:58 PM
#108
Arizona Dessert
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,030
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
09-21-11, 06:08 PM
#109
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,278
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,364 Times
in
945 Posts
Some people in this thread think it's "odd".
I think they mean move to the right. The "pull out" laws don't typically apply (at least in any practical way) to bicyclists anyway.
(My mind is still reeling from somebody's "belief" in another thread that bicyclist become pedestrians when they ride in the shoulder and that pedestrians don't have to obey any laws.)
But others here keep writing 'pull over'. The only pull over law I am aware of applies to vehicles traveling below normal speed of traffic when safe passing is not possible and five or more vehicles are following.
(My mind is still reeling from somebody's "belief" in another thread that bicyclist become pedestrians when they ride in the shoulder and that pedestrians don't have to obey any laws.)
Last edited by njkayaker; 09-21-11 at 06:14 PM.
09-21-11, 06:32 PM
#110
Arizona Dessert
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,030
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
'Moving to the right' only has practical implications if
1. Traveling on a road that has multiple lanes for the same direction of travel.
2. The only or right most lane is substantially wider than the vehicle being driven.
Which means that if one is driving a car on a typical street with one lane for each direction of travel and there is a vehicle approaching from the rear traveling faster than you, then you most likely are required to do nothing.
1. Traveling on a road that has multiple lanes for the same direction of travel.
2. The only or right most lane is substantially wider than the vehicle being driven.
Which means that if one is driving a car on a typical street with one lane for each direction of travel and there is a vehicle approaching from the rear traveling faster than you, then you most likely are required to do nothing.
09-21-11, 07:17 PM
#111
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
True, it could be fun. 
That is true, as I would presume that an ordinary citizen wouldn't have the same protections as a LEO would.
In Texas at least, a citizens arrest can only be done if the crime is a felony or it disturbs the peace. (relevant law.) Most moving violations don't qualify ...
In any event, citizens arrest is a big box of worms that I'd suggest that nobody ever open.
In any event, citizens arrest is a big box of worms that I'd suggest that nobody ever open.
09-21-11, 07:18 PM
#112
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
09-21-11, 09:26 PM
#113
2 Fat 2 Furious
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: England
Posts: 3,996
Bikes: 2009 Specialized Rockhopper Comp Disc, 2009 Specialized Tricross Sport RIP
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
1 Post
[QUOTE=njkayaker;13259563]No, the FRAP laws typically talk about "normal" traffic. And 50 mph in a 25 mph zone is not "normal" (75 mph is even less so). And do you really want to be a car driving 25 mph with a car coming up from behind you going 75? It is possible that a competent driver might think that not moving moving to the right is the safest choice. But the situation is still not "normal".[/quiote]
The whole point of raising the issue was that if a cyclist doing 23-25 in a 25 zone is still considered "slower traffic" if the prevailing speed is 35 or more (as a previous poster suggested) then the question is raised whether a car driving at 25 under the same circumstances is also classed as "slower traffic" and required to keep over to let faster traffic pass.
Thanks for the lesson. I'm quite capable of deciding for myself whether I consider something to be safe but if the law takes a different view I might still get a ticket.
From the fact we're having this discussion when I was simply trying to figure out just what the scope of this FRAP lark is suggests it's not as clear as it might be, or that different people interpret it different ways.
The whole point of raising the issue was that if a cyclist doing 23-25 in a 25 zone is still considered "slower traffic" if the prevailing speed is 35 or more (as a previous poster suggested) then the question is raised whether a car driving at 25 under the same circumstances is also classed as "slower traffic" and required to keep over to let faster traffic pass.
If you can't trust your competence in making this determination for yourself, then, maybe, you should give up driving or riding.
It doesn't seem that drivers or riders really have any problem dealing with these laws.
09-21-11, 09:27 PM
#114
2 Fat 2 Furious
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: England
Posts: 3,996
Bikes: 2009 Specialized Rockhopper Comp Disc, 2009 Specialized Tricross Sport RIP
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
1 Post
Don't ask me, I was just querying what this FRAP lark actually means. Someone mentioned that if a bike is travelling at the speed limit it is still required to keep right as far as possible to allow speeding traffic behind it to pass.
09-22-11, 04:08 AM
#115
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
'Moving to the right' only has practical implications if
1. Traveling on a road that has multiple lanes for the same direction of travel.
2. The only or right most lane is substantially wider than the vehicle being driven.
Which means that if one is driving a car on a typical street with one lane for each direction of travel and there is a vehicle approaching from the rear traveling faster than you, then you most likely are required to do nothing.
1. Traveling on a road that has multiple lanes for the same direction of travel.
2. The only or right most lane is substantially wider than the vehicle being driven.
Which means that if one is driving a car on a typical street with one lane for each direction of travel and there is a vehicle approaching from the rear traveling faster than you, then you most likely are required to do nothing.
incorrrect; the widespread, near universal duty to 'turn out to the right' as 'far right as practicable or safe' for overtaking traffic does not go away on single lane roads; indeed, it is on single lane or two lane roads sharing the road becomes most crucial for smooth traffic flow.
I recently took a great american road trip across the US; there was a lot of 'turning out to the right' of slowly driven motor vehicles along two lane highways. its a long standing traffic standard -slowly driven vehicles, turn out to the right when sharing the road. QED.
noisebeam is right though - 'driving a car' may require different lane positioning than if on a bike......but we're in a bike forum, usually on bikes.......... we're NOT talking about driving cars down two lane roads, are we?
Unless the state you're in state has a specific law that allows bikes to take entire lanes unsafe to share, a rider is generally required to ride safely right to share a two lane road regardless of the shareability of the individual lane.
overtaking traffic in most states is allowed to partially change lanes to pass bike traffic.
Last edited by Bekologist; 09-22-11 at 04:15 AM.
09-22-11, 07:10 AM
#116
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,278
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,364 Times
in
945 Posts
The whole point of raising the issue was that if a cyclist doing 23-25 in a 25 zone is still considered "slower traffic" if the prevailing speed is 35 or more (as a previous poster suggested) then the question is raised whether a car driving at 25 under the same circumstances is also classed as "slower traffic" and required to keep over to let faster traffic pass.
(You follow the law to the best of your ability and you can't use other people's illegal actions as an excuse for not doing that.)
A motor vehicle travelling at the posted speed limit is not a "slow moving vehicle". If there are two lanes (going in the same direction), vehicles are commonly required to move to the right lane if driving slower than other vehicles (even if those other vehicles are speeding).
From what some people said here, riding a bicycle requires Talmudic arguments about what "normal" and "traffic" means and requires knowing the precise speed of overtaking vehicles. The behavior of people in the real world (not A&S) says otherwise.
Last edited by njkayaker; 09-22-11 at 07:26 AM.
09-22-11, 07:49 AM
#117
Arizona Dessert
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,030
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
incorrrect; the widespread, near universal duty to 'turn out to the right' as 'far right as practicable or safe' for overtaking traffic does not go away on single lane roads; indeed, it is on single lane or two lane roads sharing the road becomes most crucial for smooth traffic flow..
What specifically was incorrect about what I wrote?
09-22-11, 01:42 PM
#118
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
incorrrect; the widespread, near universal duty to 'turn out to the right' as 'far right as practicable or safe' for overtaking traffic does not go away on single lane roads; indeed, it is on single lane or two lane roads sharing the road becomes most crucial for smooth traffic flow.
I recently took a great american road trip across the US; there was a lot of 'turning out to the right' of slowly driven motor vehicles along two lane highways. its a long standing traffic standard -slowly driven vehicles, turn out to the right when sharing the road. QED.
noisebeam is right though - 'driving a car' may require different lane positioning than if on a bike......but we're in a bike forum, usually on bikes.......... we're NOT talking about driving cars down two lane roads, are we?
Unless the state you're in state has a specific law that allows bikes to take entire lanes unsafe to share, a rider is generally required to ride safely right to share a two lane road regardless of the shareability of the individual lane.
overtaking traffic in most states is allowed to partially change lanes to pass bike traffic.
I recently took a great american road trip across the US; there was a lot of 'turning out to the right' of slowly driven motor vehicles along two lane highways. its a long standing traffic standard -slowly driven vehicles, turn out to the right when sharing the road. QED.
noisebeam is right though - 'driving a car' may require different lane positioning than if on a bike......but we're in a bike forum, usually on bikes.......... we're NOT talking about driving cars down two lane roads, are we?
Unless the state you're in state has a specific law that allows bikes to take entire lanes unsafe to share, a rider is generally required to ride safely right to share a two lane road regardless of the shareability of the individual lane.
overtaking traffic in most states is allowed to partially change lanes to pass bike traffic.
09-22-11, 05:03 PM
#119
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
how will bicyclists be alleviated of the duty to share the road safely?
only ride in arkansas?
only ride in arkansas?
09-22-11, 05:08 PM
#120
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
there is typically no safe option to move further right, but only if already operating FRAP. Sometimes the shoulder is safe to pull onto to share the road. i've done it in my car plenty of times on two lane roads, certainly on my bicycle, wether legally required (only 3 states) or as a courtesy.
share the road. its not an onerous duty.
09-22-11, 05:09 PM
#121
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Under the typical slow-moving vehicle statute, which requires cyclists to use the right-hand lane when such exists, and otherwise to ride as close as practicable to the right-hand edge of the roadway.
09-22-11, 05:17 PM
#122
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
john, this is a tired topic you can't obfuscate.
States with SMV-FRAP laws uniformly regulate bike traffic to ride FRAP on all roads regardless of number of lanes.
you can check it out, i certainly have. internet bluffoonery about being only required to operate in the right hand lane of traffic is NOT how Kentucky, for example, regulates bicycle traffic.
NONE of the states that regulate bikes under general SMV laws allow bikes to take the right hand lane of traffic unequivocally; they regulate FRAP under nearly every circumstance, with limited legal cause to take the lane.
sorry, but your assertions about SMV laws are groundless.
FRAP law say WHAT?
share the road, safely.
States with SMV-FRAP laws uniformly regulate bike traffic to ride FRAP on all roads regardless of number of lanes.
you can check it out, i certainly have. internet bluffoonery about being only required to operate in the right hand lane of traffic is NOT how Kentucky, for example, regulates bicycle traffic.
Originally Posted by KRS
The operator of any vehicle when upon a highway shall travel upon the right side of
the highway whenever possible, and unless the left side of the highway is clear of
all other traffic or obstructions for a sufficient distance ahead to permit the
overtaking and passing of another vehicle to be completed without interfering with
the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction or any vehicle
being overtaken. The overtaking vehicle shall return to the proper traffic lane as
soon as practicable and, if the passing vehicle enters the oncoming traffic lane,
before coming within two hundred (200) feet of any approaching vehicle.
(2) The operator of any vehicle moving slowly upon a highway shall keep his vehicle as
closely as practicable to the right-hand boundary of the highway, allowing more
swiftly moving vehicles reasonably free passage to the left.
the highway whenever possible, and unless the left side of the highway is clear of
all other traffic or obstructions for a sufficient distance ahead to permit the
overtaking and passing of another vehicle to be completed without interfering with
the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction or any vehicle
being overtaken. The overtaking vehicle shall return to the proper traffic lane as
soon as practicable and, if the passing vehicle enters the oncoming traffic lane,
before coming within two hundred (200) feet of any approaching vehicle.
(2) The operator of any vehicle moving slowly upon a highway shall keep his vehicle as
closely as practicable to the right-hand boundary of the highway, allowing more
swiftly moving vehicles reasonably free passage to the left.
sorry, but your assertions about SMV laws are groundless.
FRAP law say WHAT?
share the road, safely.
09-22-11, 05:55 PM
#123
Arizona Dessert
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,030
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
vehicle traffic is generally required to operate FRAP on single lane each direction roadways; indeed, it is on those types of roads that road sharing by turning out to the right is most obviously beneficial.
there is typically no safe option to move further right, but only if already operating FRAP. Sometimes the shoulder is safe to pull onto to share the road. i've done it in my car plenty of times on two lane roads, certainly on my bicycle, wether legally required (only 3 states) or as a courtesy.
share the road. its not an onerous duty.
there is typically no safe option to move further right, but only if already operating FRAP. Sometimes the shoulder is safe to pull onto to share the road. i've done it in my car plenty of times on two lane roads, certainly on my bicycle, wether legally required (only 3 states) or as a courtesy.
share the road. its not an onerous duty.
09-22-11, 06:19 PM
#124
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
a subtle but required obligation.
09-22-11, 06:27 PM
#125
Arizona Dessert
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,030
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
But moving into the shoulder as you suggested is leaving the roadway. Again if driving in the only or a rightmost lane that is not substantially wider than the vehicle one is driving there is nothing in practice that a driver needs to do if a faster vehicle is approaching from rear. That is the statement I made that you continue to disagree with.