ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > Regional forums > West – California, the desert southwest and whatever is left
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-22-2013, 12:07 AM   #46
francisthepig
Dances with Lurkers
 
francisthepig's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Oddometer: 153
[QUOTE
http://abatelocal27.org/pages/local-27/pac.php[/QUOTE]

Thanks for that. But Alejandra Molina, Robert Gladden and Officer Montoya are not elected legislators and can't make laws. If there was already a law allowing it, why would Beall waste his time writing another bill?
An anti-motorcyclists legislator could even take the last quote from Officer Montoya, used out of context, and convinced a bunch of other legislators to pass a bill outlawing lane sharing.
It would be very simple for a legislator to write a bill preventing us from doing it, just like 49 other states

I am not trying to argue, but open this up to discussion and ideas. I am very passionate about keeping lane sharing legal/not illegal. I commute daily on bike and haven't owned a car for over 5 years. Reasons being I can lane share, use the carpool lane and get premium parking at work. That and the weather in SoCal is partly why I haven't left California yet.

I see this as an opportunity to offer input to a well meaning, but poorly written bill. Then next time when someone ask to prove where it is legal, we can say see Vehicle Code SECTION 1.Section 21658.5.
francisthepig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 12:29 AM   #47
MeterPig
Meh
 
MeterPig's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Location: Parker, Colorado...
Oddometer: 17,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by francisthepig View Post
For those stating it lane sharing is already legal, can you show me where it is written?

Years ago, I could smoke in a bar, because it was "legal". No law was written outlawing it. Then a law was written and now I had to go to a patio.

A few years later, I could smoke on a patio of a bar in some cities, no law was written outlawing it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...2.A0California

I can lane share in California, because there is no law against it...yet.

I personally rather have a well written law allowing me to do something then one telling me I can't.
It has to do with that in California if two vehicles can share the same lane and pass, then it is legal.
__________________
You looked down here...didn't you.
MeterPig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 01:30 AM   #48
K. L. Rocket
Big bouncy make big happy
 
K. L. Rocket's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Location: North SF Bay, California
Oddometer: 1,134
To expand on SFH's analogy in orange: What did you have for dinner tonight? Is there a law that it's legal for you to eat that? No? Does that make it illegal? Ridiculous, right?


If you prefer another written source over common sense: "Lane splitting by motorcycles is permissible but must be done in a safe and prudent manner." http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/answers.html


If you need more reassurance, why not do your own web search and see what you discover? It's silly to argue about lane splitting/sharing's legality, while that legality is under threat of serious compromise by the very law you support.


I'd rather not sidetrack this discussion to examine politicians' motivations - for now. It may become a relevant topic later, though.



Quote:
Originally Posted by SF_Hooligan View Post
I agree with you, but it's already legal in the same way chewing gum while walking is - there's no law against it. Not illegal = legal.

I wouldn't be opposed to a well written law - but I also think its unnecessary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by francisthepig View Post
...If there was already a law allowing it, why would Beall waste his time writing another bill?...Then next time when someone ask to prove where it is legal, we can say see Vehicle Code SECTION 1.Section 21658.5.
__________________


K. L. Rocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:32 AM   #49
SF_Hooligan
Deadwood Original
 
SF_Hooligan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Oakland, CA
Oddometer: 160
There's also some confusion in the last few posts about the three lane condition - it seems it was originally read by many (myself included) as only allowing splitting on roads with three or more lanes. I actuality, it's almost certainly simply applying the conditions on roads with three or more lanes. It reads like this:

"...when a highway has been divided into three or more clearly marked lanes..." thou shalt not split unless it's "congested" and you can split at a "safe speed."

It seems Beall may be trying to address a specific complaint from motorists - riders splitting or weaving at high speeds on the freeway - like the driver in this video report by KCRA news up in Sac. The driver gives a common complaint - "...he comes zooming past at like 90 miles per hour." That complaint (caused by riders splitting like asses) and "he came out of nowhere" seem to be the two most common complaints by non-riders.
SF_Hooligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 09:30 AM   #50
Andrew
Optimus Primer
 
Andrew's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Location: Eastbania
Oddometer: 15,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by francisthepig View Post
For those stating it lane sharing is already legal, can you show me where it is written?

I can lane share in California, because there is no law against it... yet.

I personally rather have a well written law allowing me to do something then one telling me I can't.
"would" "well-written" "than"

I am quite content with ambiguities and grey areas in the law. As stated by others, "not in CVC or PC" = "not illegal" = "legal." Better to focus attention on driver and rider education, and training, than to legislate something that needs no legislation.
__________________
Splitting lanes, and splitting hairs.
Andrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 09:34 AM   #51
Andrew
Optimus Primer
 
Andrew's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Location: Eastbania
Oddometer: 15,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by SF_Hooligan View Post
There's also some confusion in the last few posts about the three lane condition - it seems it was originally read by many (myself included) as only allowing splitting on roads with three or more lanes. I actuality, it's almost certainly simply applying the conditions on roads with three or more lanes. It reads like this:

"...when a highway has been divided into three or more clearly marked lanes..." thou shalt not split unless it's "congested" and you can split at a "safe speed."

It seems Beall may be trying to address a specific complaint from motorists - riders splitting or weaving at high speeds on the freeway - like the driver in this video report by KCRA news up in Sac. The driver gives a common complaint - "...he comes zooming past at like 90 miles per hour." That complaint (caused by riders splitting like asses) and "he came out of nowhere" seem to be the two most common complaints by non-riders.
I think you're right, I sure jumped to a conclusion on that one. It does read as new restrictions on MC behavior when there are three or more lanes, not two. But that just begs the question, if it's to be status quo for riders splitting on roads with just two lanes in a direction, why bother with a new law in the first place?
__________________
Splitting lanes, and splitting hairs.
Andrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 09:56 AM   #52
SF_Hooligan
Deadwood Original
 
SF_Hooligan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Oakland, CA
Oddometer: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew View Post
I think you're right, I sure jumped to a conclusion on that one. It does read as new restrictions on MC behavior when there are three or more lanes, not two. But that just begs the question, if it's to be status quo for riders splitting on roads with just two lanes in a direction, why bother with a new law in the first place?
I'm in contact with some folks much closer to the issue (not sure I'm allowed to disclose sources on this just yet) and some folks think getting some kind of law on the books helps prevent splitting being outlawed. One of the reasons it's so difficult to make splitting legal in some states is that it's specifically illegal - section 46.61.608 of Washington's Revised Code specifically says motorcyclists ”shall not overtake and pass in the same lane occupied by the vehicle being overtaken” and riders “shall operate a motorcycle between lanes of traffic." In cases where there's already a law, it's apparently much harder to repeal/pass a new law. So this would be the reverse - make it specifically legal, and it becomes harder to to outlaw. Maybe.
SF_Hooligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 11:09 AM   #53
Rob.G
Mostly Harmless
 
Rob.G's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Fulltiming in an RV!
Oddometer: 2,132
I say go for a full defeat of SB350. The ONLY way I would support an actual law legalizing it is if it clearly spelled out everything we already do now, including filtering, AND filtering on two-lane roads. Otherwise, just leave it alone.

I'm hoping that CHP will step in and ask that the bill be withdrawn as they have in the past, because it still screws them... note it says "officer in performance of his duties." That means unless they're on a call, they're stuck like the rest of us.

I'd like to suggest a step farther, and rally people to defeat this motherfucker Beall the next time he's up for election.

The text of SB541 in Oregon states very simply that a motorcycle may split when traffic speed drops below 20 mph and the motorcycle is traveling no more than 10 mph faster than traffic. That opens up a LOT of opportunities to split.

Rob
__________________
'12 Suzuki V-Strom DL650
'96 Suzuki DR650
'10 Kawasaki KLX351S #320 For Sale!
Rob.G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 11:35 AM   #54
Andrew
Optimus Primer
 
Andrew's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Location: Eastbania
Oddometer: 15,328
What has Beall's office said is his/her motivation for introducing this legislation?
__________________
Splitting lanes, and splitting hairs.
Andrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 11:52 AM   #55
SF_Hooligan
Deadwood Original
 
SF_Hooligan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Oakland, CA
Oddometer: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew View Post
What has Beall's office said is his/her motivation for introducing this legislation?
I didn't find anything in a quick search of his site. I emailed his office last night and am going to call his office today to see if I can get a staffer to talk to me. Very interested in understanding the motivation behind the bill.
SF_Hooligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 12:37 PM   #56
francisthepig
Dances with Lurkers
 
francisthepig's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Oddometer: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by SF_Hooligan View Post
In cases where there's already a law, it's apparently much harder to repeal/pass a new law. So this would be the reverse - make it specifically legal, and it becomes harder to to outlaw. Maybe.

Exactly, why I think some good may come of this. I am also hoping that a good law will give a tool to other states to overturn their existing laws.

I did find this from Oregon which has some good data from the MAIDS study and other sources for making a case to keep it legal or legalize it in other states.

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP_RES...ne_sharing.pdf
francisthepig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 12:39 PM   #57
francisthepig
Dances with Lurkers
 
francisthepig's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Oddometer: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by SF_Hooligan View Post
I didn't find anything in a quick search of his site. I emailed his office last night and am going to call his office today to see if I can get a staffer to talk to me. Very interested in understanding the motivation behind the bill.
Please keep us posted. Are there any inmates here in his district that could contact his home office?
francisthepig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 01:31 PM   #58
K. L. Rocket
Big bouncy make big happy
 
K. L. Rocket's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Location: North SF Bay, California
Oddometer: 1,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by SF_Hooligan View Post
...In cases where there's already a law, it's apparently much harder to repeal/pass a new law. So this would be the reverse - make it specifically legal, and it becomes harder to to outlaw. Maybe.
Can you find out more about this, particularly about ammending the law, in case this bill is passed and it's 'decided' later that the law doesn't appease drivers enough?

BTW, thanks for taking this on, I appreciate you stepping up.
__________________


K. L. Rocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 02:41 PM   #59
SF_Hooligan
Deadwood Original
 
SF_Hooligan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Oakland, CA
Oddometer: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by K. L. Rocket View Post
Can you find out more about this, particularly about ammending the law, in case this bill is passed and it's 'decided' later that the law doesn't appease drivers enough?

BTW, thanks for taking this on, I appreciate you stepping up.
Thanks.

Hoping to hear back from one of my contacts today with more info.

I left a message with one of Beall's staffers earlier today, who said he wasn't qualified to answer my questions but promised to get the right person to call me back.

I think there are some BARFers in his district for sure and they're certainly "reaching out."
SF_Hooligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 03:16 PM   #60
Cpt. Ron
Advrider #128
 
Cpt. Ron's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Location: Sacramento, CA
Oddometer: 3,243
Told ya so....

I hate to say it, but I called it back at Post #21.

Fuck.
__________________
Cpt. Ron

"I don't know what you do, but I know what I do, and I don't do that." --Uncle Doug, R.I.P.
"Without the possibility of death, adventure is not possible"--Reinhold Messner
Cpt. Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

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 On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 06:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014