awyala
Guest
The fired one...I couldnt contain my driving ego any longer and had to write a tell all book.
|
|
|
Why Lane Splitting / Filtering is GOOD for traffic
- Thread starter Outlaws Justice
- Start date
The fired one...I couldnt contain my driving ego any longer and had to write a tell all book.
nesobriquet
Well-known member
Not sure what you mean by this expression "car turned out to the right" ?
Also, I think it's important to realize that if a filtering law is going to be imposed, it should probably have two names. Lane filtering/ and standard filtering.
Lane filtering reserved for situations when cars are moving (slowly, otherwise it's not allowed, period..like you say..maybe under 20 kph..although admittedly hard to enforce due to so much interpretation, both on the filterer's part and the cop writing you up). And even if the magic number was 20 kph, IMO, that is getting to be on the cusp of too fast for a rider to be filtering past..especially if we are to bring this law into effect with a safety record that will, especially in the beginning stages, be under the spotlight and vehement scrutinization and prone to a higher potential of incidence in its infancy.
Standard filtering would pertain to stopped vehicles, either at stoplights or stop signs, or obvious congestion due to bottle necking or an accident.
And in BOTH cases, I think the law has to be written exclusively for both types of filtering and NOT try to piggyback off any form of existing passing laws that are in place now, be it left turning vehicles, parked vehicles etc etc. To try to incorporate a safe filtering law structure that people are going to be able to follow and understand, you have to try to keep it unmuddied. This is also a prerequisite in order for the law to be enforced with as little grey area as possible. IOW's, NOT like they wrote up the catchall 172.
I may sound like a broken record, but I think it is important to constantly mention in any supporting post the importance that filtering is viewed as an extremely SLOW maneuver. The idea is to be able to keep moving to a spot in traffic where the rider has not impacted any other traffic but finds that opening that allows them to continue on their way, if for no other reason, that, as a rider, a) we have more of a birds-eye view of the traffic around us, and b) we can simply fit both widthwise and lengthwise in so many more places than cages can. By exploiting those two perks; the first one being that because we can see around us better 360º we can execute filtering more safely than any cage; and the second being that we can fit so many other places. We can make our way to work, up to our last light, hang a right and be one less vehicle waiting to make it through the light, adding to the lineup, if we weren't allowed to filter and was just another vehicle 'in traffic' adding to the line, and thereby slowed congestion.
Nice start to putting something together. Now it is the represenitives that need to be convinced or all this is just talk. Forums like this have the power of numbers and can draw people together for a cause that benefits the community as a whole. It is in our numbers that we can make changes. If we do nothing nothing will ever change.
wonderings
Well-known member
I would like to see numbers to show how many bikes are out there on a given day and if it would actually have any impact in congested areas. Some countries/cities have HUGE 2 wheel traffic every day. Does the GTA really have that many riders on a road in a given day to really change or help with congestion? I personally would not do it myself, cars don't see me as it is, and I ride where I should be riding, not in places they are expecting me to be even less.
Good point on the numbers, and another question if filtering was allowed would more people commute?
The only numbers that I can give you are what I posted in another thread; that in 2008 the number of motorcycles (less than 200,000), that were registered in Ontario, represented less than 3% of the number of passenger vehicles (almost six and a half million), alone, that were registered. Total number of registered vehicles, of all types, was in excess of 8.6 million.
Personal observation tells me that nowhere near that percentage actively commute on their bikes.
Very few here actually commute as well. I work for a company of 100 people, 40 have motorcycle license, and over 20 actually have bikes. but on any given day you will find between two and five bikes outside in the bike parking area. the most I have seen is eight.
Right now, in the Toronto area, a much bigger issue that lane splitting and filtering is the possibility that the city might revoke the free parking that motorcyclists currently enjoy, in on-street pay and display locations. One of the two counsellors who is pushing for this is doing so because she has personally seen irresponsible riders parking on the sidewalk, when free on-street parking is available. Again, a case of the few creating a problem for the many. If we have trouble keeping what we already have, then the prospect of getting more is minimal at best.
wonderings
Well-known member
Not very high numbers, don't think that would really hold in an argument saying it would help with the flow of traffic.
No free parking for bikes anyplace here, I got hit for truck with trailer tolls on my last bike trip because I was pulling a trailer with my bike. We dont even get a break on tolls.
You have to fight for what you want and believe in. Keep up the good fight!
You have to fight for what you want and believe in. Keep up the good fight!
Mael
Well-known member
from the perspective of someone just rear ended by a driver who was not looking (40kph aprox) i like the idea of filtering at least one or 2 cars to get out of the danger zone
lane splitting not so much but more because i don't think drivers are ready to have to look for and pay more attention to bikes in canada
lane splitting not so much but more because i don't think drivers are ready to have to look for and pay more attention to bikes in canada
Proponents would say that the small numbers mean that such vehicles wouldn't HINDER other traffic. I just say go through the hoops to make it legal, rather than potentially screwing things up for everyone.
The only time that I've been hit from behind at a stoplight, I was the first vehicle in line. On a few occasions I've slipped between vehicles, when it appeared that someone wasn't paying attention and might hit me while I was stopped. In all of those cases my fear was ultimately proven unjustified.
Last edited:
nesobriquet
Well-known member
It would appear that there are a lot of riders (as just one source of representative) that are also not convinced. Who knows why, many seem so dense that they completely throw out important details like the SPEED of which a filtering maneuver is done. It has to be done SLOWLY and not only in the correct places, but at the correct times. You get some idiot arguing a situation that is painfully obvious that that would not be the time to filter, but then it's followed up by some comment like, "ya'll ain't gonna catch my *** (lane-splitting ) so I cana be a semmi-sammich enatime soon". Well duuuhhhhh..that wouldn't be a good time to do it even after its legalization would it, Albert?
And it doesn't help when you have a moderator (who because of simply being a moderator there will be a certain percentage of fence-sitters will side with his, what seems to be, biased opinion) is constantly stirring the pot. There are 3 daily-active threads talking about this topic lately and in each one, Rob does Devil's Advocate so convincingly...that if you are of weak mind, a person might easily mistake him for being more than just an advocate. Please stop helping us, Rob.
Sure you give stats with numbers that pooh pooh the effort/effect of a law change, but don't seem to know that talking like that does influence our own group cause. If you fight the message within our own group, how can that help with getting public perception and acceptance on board? You say yourself you would do it 2 years after it was law to increase your chances of cagers adaptation, so...you are smart. Any other rider (especially those whose skills are less than others) might be wise to wait awhile also.
If you ask me, (I know you didn't..whatever) if you really wanted to help instead of hinder the cause, every single post you make should have note at the bottom (or better still at the top) of it that states that if a filtering law was to be allowed, its use is with the strict acknowledgment that it must be done at under 20 kph, and in some circumstances slower still/or not done at all even if/when it did become legal.
Are you saying that I am not entitled to having an opinion on the matter? You wouldn't be the first.
nesobriquet
Well-known member
No of course not and you know it..gotta run right now but will check back when can..
The laws on this matter are ambiguous and vague (just like many HTA rules). It allows the police to use judgement and discretion (whether they use J&D well is another post/rant). This is why we have Judges and Courts; which is to determine if the charges fall within the law.
There is a very easy way to settle this issue. To all the supporters of lane splitting or filtering (your term or maneuver); please do the action beside marked police cruisers. If there is a volume of riders that continue doing this in different jurisdictions, and do not get charged, it will lay weight to your position.
If the you are charged, since you feel so strongly in your position of legality, you can be sure the charges will not be upheld in court. You will have created precedent case law making these actions legal without having to go through the provincial legislator and politicians. I am sure the other supporters will contribute to the legal costs of defending the case as they have a vested interest in the successful outcome.
It will also be helpful to the nay-sayers (I am using the term neutrally, please no flames), if you post your actions and outcomes here. If they are successful, then some will become supporters.
So, what's it going to be????
Put up or shut up?
There is a very easy way to settle this issue. To all the supporters of lane splitting or filtering (your term or maneuver); please do the action beside marked police cruisers. If there is a volume of riders that continue doing this in different jurisdictions, and do not get charged, it will lay weight to your position.
If the you are charged, since you feel so strongly in your position of legality, you can be sure the charges will not be upheld in court. You will have created precedent case law making these actions legal without having to go through the provincial legislator and politicians. I am sure the other supporters will contribute to the legal costs of defending the case as they have a vested interest in the successful outcome.
It will also be helpful to the nay-sayers (I am using the term neutrally, please no flames), if you post your actions and outcomes here. If they are successful, then some will become supporters.
So, what's it going to be????
Put up or shut up?
Last edited:
I'm aways surprised on how bad drivers are here in Ontario. I'm usually swearing and giving dirty looks to the hundred of stupid people on the road. But in my opinion, it's not even their fault... it's the government's fault. They have the mentality that defensive driving is the best driving, and that anyone driving agressivelly should not be on the road. And that is probably the main reason why we have so many bad drivers on the road (not necessarily because of immigrants).
For example, take the M1 licence. You read a book and that qualifies you, without any training or ever touching a bike, to ride on the streets with other drivers. How about M2; you take a weekend course on how to ride on a parking lot and that automatically gives you the right to ride on the highway. The license system should be a lot harder and more restrict... give the slow people that have no reflex, restrictions on were they can drive or when. Less experienced drivers should do a hard course to filter out. Slow people and left lane drivers should get tickets, etc...
But back to the topic... I do agree that filtering/lane splitting is dangerous, but that's because our drivers are really bad. Give the choice so riders can choose for themselves. I mean, why not make an law that forces riders to wear proper gear then?
And something else to look... how come bycicles (who have no insurance, license, or training) can filter (and do pretty much anthing they want) but motorcycles cannot?
Maybe someone can organize a petition and a ride day for filtering!!!
For example, take the M1 licence. You read a book and that qualifies you, without any training or ever touching a bike, to ride on the streets with other drivers. How about M2; you take a weekend course on how to ride on a parking lot and that automatically gives you the right to ride on the highway. The license system should be a lot harder and more restrict... give the slow people that have no reflex, restrictions on were they can drive or when. Less experienced drivers should do a hard course to filter out. Slow people and left lane drivers should get tickets, etc...
But back to the topic... I do agree that filtering/lane splitting is dangerous, but that's because our drivers are really bad. Give the choice so riders can choose for themselves. I mean, why not make an law that forces riders to wear proper gear then?
And something else to look... how come bycicles (who have no insurance, license, or training) can filter (and do pretty much anthing they want) but motorcycles cannot?
Maybe someone can organize a petition and a ride day for filtering!!!
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.
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.
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.
Contrary to the belief of at least one poster here, it is currently not legal to lane split or filter. You do so at your own peril.
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).
If it's legal and there is a collision, who should be 'at-fault' and whose rates should increase?
And generally narrower roads and lanes, and roads with low number of lanes to start with, so passing is a way of life so the traffic gets anywhere with all the trucks on the road from Mon - Fri. They simply do not have a choice they must drive better, otherwise the traffic would collapse at a much faster rate.
|
|
|
|
|