Because every state is different and I can only answer for the statues / laws I know and use which are CFR (which is federal and has nothing to do with cycling and very little with traffic at that) and Wisconsin where I’m located which would be chapter 346 “rules of the road” in the Wi statues.
346.02 Applicability of chapter.
(4) APPLICABILITY TO PERSONS RIDING BICYCLES AND MOTOR
BICYCLES. (a) Subject to the special provisions applicable to
bicycles, every person riding a bicycle upon a roadway or shoulder
of a highway is granted all the rights and is subject to all the
duties which this chapter grants or applies to the operator of a
vehicle, except those provisions which by their express terms
apply only to motor vehicles or which by their very nature would
have no application to bicycles. For purposes of this chapter, provisions
which apply to bicycles also apply to motor bicycles,
except as otherwise expressly provided.
(b) Provisions which apply to the operation of bicycles in
crosswalks under ss. 346.23, 346.24, 346.37 (1) (a) 2., (c) 2 and
(d) 2. and 346.38 do not apply to motor bicycles.

Illegal for slow vehicles to block;
346.59 Minimum speed regulation. (1) No person shall
drive a motor vehicle at a speed so slow as to impede the normal
and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed
is necessary for safe operation or is necessary to comply with the
law.
(2) The operator of a vehicle moving at a speed so slow as to
impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic shall, if
practicable, yield the roadway to an overtaking vehicle whenever
the operator of the overtaking vehicle gives audible warning with
a warning device and shall move at a reasonably increased speed
or yield the roadway to overtaking vehicles when directed to do
so by a traffic officer.
History: 1977 c. 100.
(b) Any operator of a bicycle or electric personal assistive
mobility device who violates s. 346.59 may be required to forfeit
not more than $10.
History: 1971 c. 278; 1973 c. 182, 218; 1973 c. 333 ss. 174p, 202 (12); 1973 c.
336; 1977 c. 30 ss. 6, 7; 1983 a. 27; 1987 a. 17; 1993 a. 198; 1995 a. 44; 1997 a. 277,
325; 2001 a. 90.

speed-up or otherwise make passing difficult;
346.07 Overtaking and passing on the left. The following
rules govern the overtaking and passing of vehicles proceeding
in the same direction, subject to those limitations, exceptions
and special rules stated in ss. 346.075 (2) and 346.08 to 346.11:
(2) The operator of a vehicle overtaking another vehicle proceeding
in the same direction shall pass to the left thereof at a safe
distance and shall not again drive to the right side of the roadway
until safely clear of the overtaken vehicle.
(3) Except when overtaking and passing on the right is permitted,
the operator of an overtaken vehicle shall give way to the
right in favor of the overtaking vehicle on audible signal and shall
not increase the speed of the vehicle until completely passed by
the overtaking vehicle.
History: 1971 c. 208; 1985 a. 301 s. 4; 1991 a. 316; 1997 a. 32.
346.075 Overtaking and passing bicycles, electric personal
assistive mobility devices, and motor buses.
(1) The operator of a motor vehicle overtaking a bicycle or electric
personal assistive mobility device proceeding in the same
direction shall exercise due care, leaving a safe distance, but in no
case less than 3 feet clearance when passing the bicycle or electric
personal assistive mobility device, and shall maintain clearance
until safely past the overtaken bicycle or electric personal assistive
mobility device.
(2) Except as provided in s. 346.48, if the operator of a motor
vehicle overtakes a motor bus which is stopped at an intersection
on the right side of the roadway and is receiving or discharging
passengers, the operator shall pass at a safe distance to the left of
the motor bus and shall not turn to the right in front of the motor
bus at that intersection.
History: 1973 c. 182; 1977 c. 208; 1985 a. 301; 2001 a. 90.

Extra;
346.04 Obedience to traffic officers, signs and signals;
fleeing from officer. (1) No person shall fail or refuse
to comply with any lawful order, signal or direction of a traffic
officer.(2) No operator of a vehicle shall disobey the instructions of
any official traffic sign or signal unless otherwise directed by a
traffic officer.
(2t) No operator of a vehicle, after having received a visible
or audible signal to stop his or her vehicle from a traffic officer or
marked police vehicle, shall knowingly resist the traffic officer by
failing to stop his or her vehicle as promptly as safety reasonably
permits.
(3) No operator of a vehicle, after having received a visual or
audible signal from a traffic officer, or marked police vehicle,
shall knowingly flee or attempt to elude any traffic officer by willful
or wanton disregard of such signal so as to interfere with or
endanger the operation of the police vehicle, or the traffic officer
or other vehicles or pedestrians, nor shall the operator increase the
speed of the operator’s vehicle or extinguish the lights of the
vehicle in an attempt to elude or flee.
(4) Subsection (2t) is not an included offense of sub. (3), but
a person may not be convicted of violating both subs. (2t) and (3)
for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence.
346.09 Limitations on overtaking on left or driving on
left side of roadway. (1) Upon any roadway where traffic is
permitted to move in both directions simultaneously, the operator
of a vehicle shall not drive to the left side of the center of the roadway
in overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the
same direction unless such left side is clearly visible and is free of
oncoming traffic for a sufficient distance ahead to permit such
overtaking and passing to be done in safety. In no case when overtaking
and passing on a roadway divided into 4 or more clearly
indicated lanes shall the operator of a vehicle drive to the left of
the pavement marking indicating allocation of lanes to vehicles
moving in the opposite direction or, in the absence of such marking,
to the left of the center of the roadway. In no case shall the
operator of a vehicle drive in a lane when signs or signals indicate
that such lane is allocated exclusively to vehicles moving in the
opposite direction.
(2) Upon any roadway where traffic is permitted to move in
both directions simultaneously, the operator of a vehicle shall not
drive on the left side of the center of the roadway upon any part
of a grade or upon a curve in the roadway where the operator’s
view is obstructed for such a distance as to create a hazard in the
event another vehicle might approach from the opposite direction.
(3) The operator of a vehicle shall not drive on the left side of
the center of a roadway on any portion thereof which has been designated
a no−passing zone, either by signs or by a yellow unbroken
line on the pavement on the right−hand side of and adjacent
to the center line of the roadway, provided such signs or lines
would be clearly visible to an ordinarily observant person.

346.37 Traffic−control signal legend.
(c) Red. 1. Vehicular traffic facing a red signal shall stop
before entering the crosswalk on the near side of an intersection,
or if none, then before entering the intersection or at such other
point as may be indicated by a clearly visible sign or marking and
shall remain standing until green or other signal permitting movement
is shown.
2. No pedestrian, bicyclist, or rider of an electric personal
assistive mobility device facing such signal shall enter the roadway
unless he or she can do so safely and without interfering with
any vehicular traffic.
4. Notwithstanding subd. 1., a motorcycle, moped, motor
bicycle, or bicycle facing a red signal at an intersection may, after
stopping as required under subd. 1. for not less than 45 seconds,
proceed cautiously through the intersection before the signal turns
green if no other vehicles are present at the intersection to actuate
the signal and the operator of the motorcycle, moped, motor
bicycle, or bicycle reasonably believes the signal is vehicle actuated.
The operator of a motorcycle, moped, motor bicycle, or
bicycle proceeding through a red signal under this subdivision
shall yield the right−of−way to any vehicular traffic, pedestrian,
bicyclist, or rider of an electric personal assistive mobility device
proceeding through a green signal at the intersection or lawfully
within a crosswalk or using the intersection. This subdivision
does not affect any authorization for a bicyclist under subd. 2.

https://www.legis.state.wi.us/statutes/Stat0346.pdf

(This was on the west side of Madison off S. Whitney about a block from Toki middle school. Where there are oversized streets) The only reason (besides not being in a hurry and trying to waste time) I didn’t pass is because I was concerned he would lose control and end up swerving into my path. Note: the majority of side streets in Madison WI do not have painted lines in the center. So legally I could pass.

"Because it doesn't apply in this case. It wasn't the bicyclist's speed or position making "passing difficult", it was the fact that there wasn't sufficient room to pass safely under any circumstances"
True but also if I remember right in the video it was a double yellow line with no breaks in it which I think it’s safe to say all states consider that “no passing.”

Thanks Dave. I was correct, eh ?



So anyway, there was a double line center the entire commute.

I see the video, I accept that the guy was riding legally, but unsafely, I accept that the car made an illegal move, I accept that the cyclist can't handle his bike(a poser), really who swerves to the left into passing traffic?, I accept the cyclist failed to pull over when he heard an emergency vehicle, I accept that the cop was a kn ob. I'm not failing to accept anything. I don't care whether it's legal for him to ride in the center of the lane or not, he was riding like a self-absorbed pr!ck. Some cyclists, yourself included, are their own worst enemy, just because you CAN doesn't always mean you SHOULD, being in the right won't keep you alive. Those 'Share the Road' signs aren't just for cars you know. You are making up a law about 3ft of space when passing, show me the law, you are full of it, a poser perhaps? You can argue and repeat yourself all you want, the guy was riding his bike in an unsafe and selfish manner and the cop called him out on it, good for the cop. Why the hell was he riding with a camera anyway? Does he get that much trouble on the roads that he needs it for evidence? Maybe he should learn to ride in traffic.

What do you mean by a poser? seriously? How old are you? Are you using your mom's computer? Does she know? I ride my bike to work everyday, even in the winter, I regularly spend my weekends building and maintaing local trails, I volunteer often at races and local advocacy events, I donate used and unwanted bikes and parts to the local community bike program and fix up bikes for the needy kids that my wife teaches, I stop and offer help to everyone I see at the side of the road/trail. I also ride courteously on the road and the trails, I have never been hit or pulled over. When I see someone being a d!ck on a bike I'll tell them, it gets my goat when I'm sat at every red light and see another rider running one, I stop at every stop sign, I signal every turn. What here makes me a poser? Get your head out of your arse.

If the travel lane was wide enough to safely share side by side (14' +) you have a point otherwise in order to pass you have to use the adjacent travel lane and for safe passing, it makes little difference if you have to use some or all of the adjacent lane so the cyclists position is irrelevant.

@longman
+100%
Thanks for all your good deeds and generosity.

I'm objecting to the hyperbole in the following.

1) He wasn't "run off the road".

2) You are likely not able to diagnose any mental deficiency in the driver merely by looking the video.

Other than pointing out that the cyclist ignored the siren, I, personally haven't done either (just saying: you might not be referring to me).

This appears to be the case.

You haven't been watching the same video! It wasn't a van (it's a a Ford SUV). The cyclist did not "swerve into the gutter" (he doesn't appear to cross the white line on the right side). The cyclist does swerve across the center yellow line after the SUV has passed him.

===============

It looks like the driver cut over too quickly (presumably because of the oncoming traffic). It's hard to say how much space he gave the cyclist at the start of the pass. (It wasn't a safe pass, in my opinion.)

@ The Human Car
What a laughable viewpoint. Does your bike or all the cars come equiped with a lazer guided measuring tape?
It doesn't make sense on any street or any highway. Is it safe forcing the passing cars left wheels to be 2 inches from the left
shoulder while going 50 mph ? Maybe then over-correcting and swerving into your lane and squishing your bike like a bug ?

What evidence is there that the driver was appreciable "inconvenienced" (let alone "grossly")?

The "two wrongs don't make a right" rule that you must have heard as a child applies to driving: the behavior of other drivers does not provide an excuse for unsafe behavior. Nor does being "inconvenienced" or being impatient.

Well, I too don't see what the problem is with requiring/expecting passing cars to go completely into the oncoming lane when passing. They'd do so to pass a car, right?

The safest thing for everyone is to drive like a bicycle and a car are the same size. Imagine they take up the same square footage, and then place the cyclist inside that imaginary car-sized rectangle and don't encroach upon it at all so that he has the buffer space all around him.

But personally, I don't get bent out of shape if drivers pass closely: as long as they don't cause me to alter my path then my life hasn't changed one bit.

What you missed:

346.02 Applicability of chapter.
(4) APPLICABILITY TO PERSONS RIDING BICYCLES AND MOTOR
BICYCLES. (a) Subject to the special provisions applicable to
bicycles,

And what are they?

346.80 Riding bicycle or electric personal assistive
mobility device on roadway. (1) In this section, “substandard
width lane” means a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle or
electric personal assistive mobility device and a motor vehicle to
travel safely side by side within the lane.
(2) (a) Any person operating a bicycle or electric personal
assistive mobility device upon a roadway at less than the normal
speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then
existing shall ride as close as practicable to the right−hand edge
or curb of the unobstructed traveled roadway, including operators
who are riding 2 or more abreast where permitted under sub. (3),
except:
1. When overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding
in the same direction.
2. When preparing for a left turn or U−turn at an intersection
or a left turn into a private road or driveway.
3. When reasonably necessary to avoid unsafe conditions,
including fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles,
pedestrians, animals, surface hazards or substandard width lanes
that make it unsafe to ride along the right−hand edge or curb.

Even more laughable is your view point. Standard lane width is 10'-12' you'll know when your in a wide lane. "Forcing" someone to pass in adjacent lane no more requires tires to be 2 inches from the shoulder then it does for normal travel in that lane. Extremely hypocritical to "require" cyclists to ride 2 inches from the shoulder when you think a car cannot.

I also think and act exactly the same, whether i am driving or riding. I don't need or expect anyone to do anything but
Share the road. In a car or bike i gladly move to the right to allow a safe pass. Your VC manifesto does not exclude, preclude or FU-dude any of the common courtesies of any situation. I'll ride on a 1 ft. shoulder and calmly watch as 2 cars come passing at me at 90 mph in 14 ft lanes.

Besides that, there are Laws in several states that require slow moving vehicles who are delaying 5 vehicles, to pull over into pullouts. I bet that includes bicycles.

Not quite.

Section 1 does not apply to bicycles (it only applies to "motor vehicles").
Section 2 applies to all vehicles (including bicycles).

The "far right as practicable" clause (in the FRAP law you quoted) either constitutes "yielding the roadway" OR it makes the act of impeding largely moot for bicycles (because a bicycle riding FRAP isn't hindering following traffic).

That is, by riding FRAP, bicyclists are complying with the requirements of the "impeding traffic" law.

By the way, I don't think "yield the roadway" means "leave the roadway".

Other states say "keep to the right" instead (what I think WI means), which bicyclists do by riding FRAP.


Keep in mind that the requirements of any law (the FRAP law and the impeding traffic law) are only applicable if it is safe to satisfy them.

(Note that I basically agree with your point. I just don't think your argument in support of it is technically completely correct.)

There is a bit going on in this thread that I will not comment on.

What I would like to set straight though is the video/audio recording of the officer. Yes Massachusetts has a wiretapping law, and unfortunately it has been abused by some police and DAs for the past number of years. However, the Middlesex District Attorney, Gerry Leone, of which this matter took place in Wilmington, has recently instructed the departments of his jurisdiction that it is not illegal to publicly record video or audio of police action, so long as it does not interfere with the investigatory process. This was in response to a recent matter that I have particular knowledge of.

Congruently, the Massachusetts ACLU is also looking for a test case. Furthermore there is recent federal legislative action to specifically address the open recording of police (ie. to specifically make said recording protected, which would render any police interference illegal and actionable.)

So while Mass. courts have issued some head scratchers on this issue, it appears going forward that at least here in Middlesex, where this occurred, as long as you are open about it, and not interfering, then you do not need Police consent, and indeed it could (should) be a civil rights violation for the police to attempt in any way to interfere with said recording.

zac

EDIT: apologies in advance for grammatical-spelling errors. I am posting this on my phone.

All of this stuff differs depending on the states. I'm still trying to figure out why some guys are discussing Illinois law in this thread about a situation in Massachusetts.

Some states define bikes as vehicles and other states (california being one) don't. Some require anyone going slowly to pull over and let others pass, others only require that if you're going slower than your vehicle is capable of normally going (i.e. tractors and bikes going like 20mph plus aren't required to pull over when cars line up behind them because they are going their normal speed). Some have 3-foot clearance for passing rules, others don't. And so on...

The "pull over" law would only (possibly) apply to bicyclists if the bicyclist was not able to ride FRAP. Plus, a "pullout" must be present. Usually, this law is intended for slow vehicles going up steep mountain passes. That is, in practice, many planets would have to align for this kind of law to apply to a bicyclist (generally).

Either the law defines a bicycle as a "vehicle" or it indicates that a bicyclist has the "rights and duties" of a driver of a vehicle. That is, there isn't any practical difference between the two versions.

For laws that describe behavior in traffic, one reads "vehicle" (unqualified) as including "bicycles" (note that bicycles are not "motor vehicles", and laws which qualify "vehicle" with "motor" do not apply to bicycles).

Note that the traffic laws are not generally interested in bicycles as objects but with how they are used. This is different from certain vehicles like cars, where there are a lot of laws (eg, registration laws) that are interested in them as objects!

No, the impeding traffic laws never apply just to vehicles able to maintain "normal speed".

Tractors, for example, would not be exempt from the law. Bicyclists are generally exempt in a practical way because they are narrow and can ride FRAP.

That is, the impeding traffic law allow you two ways to remedy the "impeding" problem: speeding up or pulling over. And, obviously, "speeding up" isn't an option for speed-limited vehicles.

Note that it's fairly common that the state laws either require all vehicles to stay to the right or that slower vehicles do so.

I was asked about the Laws and could only answer using Wisconsin statues (Illinois Pffff, please) so I'm the guilty party for bringing up another state to the Massachusetts discussion.

The problem with doing that is that the Massachusetts law is unusual. (You do want to be clear about which state you are referencing.)

(Note that the internet gives you access to the MA law, even in WI!!)

Oh, I was very clear from the beginning;
“Because every state is different and I can only answer for the statues / laws I know and use which are CFR (which is federal and has nothing to do with cycling and very little with traffic at that) and Wisconsin where I’m located which would be chapter 346 “rules of the road” in the Wi statues.”

You were clear about your source (I didn't say that you weren't). (Other people might not be.)

The thing that you weren't clear about was why you thought that the WI law was relevant to this thread (especially, when there were a few posts indicting that MA wasn't a FRAP state).

A&S continues to live up to its reputation as the most wildly entertaining subforum in BF.

Maybe in your state, but not necessarily in all others. You have a bad habit of making blanket statements using words like "never" in your posts on this forum. You really should use more qualifiers so that your statements have a chance in hell of actually being true.

California's minimum speed law, for example, is generally understood to excludes cyclists. It says "unless the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation, because of grade, ....etc." and clearly a bicycle can only be operated safely at it's normal speed.

OK name one state where bicycles are prohibited on all roads (even 25mph ones) where they can't do the speed limit. It's hard to "qualify" something if no qualifiers are known.

There is no such state, and nothing I've said implies I believe there is. So I'm puzzled by why you are replying to my post with such a question.

I was simply trying to remind everyone that laws related to traffic and vehicles and bicycles vary widely amongst the states and that one shouldn't say things like "never" or make big blanket statements based on their local laws because they might not be true everywhere.