Actually no, I didn't know that, after having read your comment. Let me clearly state my position then. It's not as simple as a yes/no answer. No truly thoughtful position really ever should be, when dealing with a complex issue. It's not a 'biased' opinion, it's 'my' opinion.
I would love to be able to do it, myself.
If the California model is followed,it could be done safely.
I know what you're trying to say here, but don't entirely agree..regardless of Cali driver's incompetence, I feel confident we can out do them in that area. Unfortunately. And I say that due to the next part of your quote below. California's model allows for far too great a speed differential, and regardless of whatever their safety track record may be, I'm positive it could be improved upon by taking out "half the speed limit" and instead making it 5-10-20 kph max depending on the circ.
Drivers aren't sufficiently attentive, are not held to a high enough standard of performance, and do not expect you to do it. As a result it is currently unsafe to do so.
Exactly, and because of this, a very low speed differential helps to support the beginnings of a recognition and safety track record of a new law/entitlement if we are to address your next quote below.. V
People who currently lane split and filter are generally creating a negative impression, that will make it more difficult to ever have the ability to land split or filter legally.
And by doing it SLOWLY..more slowly than anywhere else in the world, increases our chances by having it accepted/tolerated here. I really don't think most people reading ANY of these filtering threads have actually and actively envisioned just how
SLOW 5 - 10 kph is! I have no doubt because they are used to seeing 40 to 120 kph filtering. If people would just try to get their head around how
workable a filtering scene could be, and be done with relative safety and success (in LIEU of ******** trying to kill you..there are laws called attempted vehicular manslaughter) If, and yes I am saying
IF, but we do have to start somewhere and with the right attitudes..IF we could get all the filterers out there right now to STOP doing it at such a fast speed, it would have a huge affect on addressing negative publicity and eventual acceptance.
I've said it before and I'll say it again...as riders, we are so decidedly our own worse enemy. The irrational **** the-world type of rider outnumbers the rational peace-oriented rider 1000 to 1 it seems. Certainly if what the numbers on this forum is any indication..
Any effort to obtain the ability to filter, legally, will involve petitioning the government, via your elected representatives, to pass a law that permits it. This, because extensive practice and case law has been built up, over the years, stating that it is not legal. There is currently no viable challenge to this and, in fact, recent additional laws have made the battle even more difficult. I don't think that anyone could be on this board for more than a week, without coming to know what my position on HTA 172 is. That doesn't change the fact that it exists, and is a real danger to those who choose to lane split or filter, even though it's killing a fly with a hammer for it to be so applied (as it almost always is when this law is applied).
This is good advice, but we have to help ourselves FIRST. If we can show gvt that we have the restraint to filter at slow speeds it will reduce the incidence of public outcry..and thereby having a far lesser chance of voting influence at the polls.
