Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

Bill Z. wrote:
vey writes:

Bill Z. wrote:

Assuming Washington has the same or similar laws to those in California,
That is not a safe assumption to make. CA has many laws that are not
found in the rest of the US.
Actually, it is a safe assumption - ever hear of the Uniform Vehicle
Code? There are cogent reasons for making traffic laws similar in
all states. California is no exception.
Ever hear of the Uniform Code of Commerce? Try relying on that in
Louisiana and see what happens.
Invalid argument - you said it was not a safe assumption to make. In
fact, traffic laws are pretty similar across the U.S. Otherwise people
wouldn't be able to fly somewhere, rent a car, and have a reasonable
chance of driving around without getting tickets.

Similar does not mean the same. The rules concerning vehicles crossing
bike lanes are different in Oregon, for example. Do you know which way
*all* the states have gone on this important question?

Interesting that you claim the rules are "different" but won't state
what you think the difference is. :-) It's common sense, though -
you don't let people make right turns without being in or to the
right of the rightmost through lane. Otherwise the inevitable would
happen.

That, after all, is what we were talking about.

"Uniform" codes are just recommendations, not requirements which makes
their writing uniform, hence the name, but not their adoption.

And most of what are in them has been adopted by most states.



Appears as though Washington State law is similar to FL.

RCW 46.61.290
Required position and method of turning at intersections.
The driver of a vehicle intending to turn shall do so as follows:

(1) Right turns. Both the approach for a right turn and a right
turn shall be made as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or
edge of the roadway.

But they have the same trouble there as here with taking the bike lane
when making a right turn.

Look at this letter to the editor about the article:

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsourc...6&query=danger

We are currently treating cars and bicycles as equal modes of
transportation when they are not. You will never remove the risk of
"right- hook"-type collisions with our current bike lanes because
automobiles are not allowed to cross into, and use, the rightmost or
leftmost lane of traffic — which is the bicycle lane.

Basic traffic flow works at intersections because a car must be in the
leftmost lane to turn left and the rightmost lane to turn right. This
concept is violated with a bike lane because a car cannot block the lane
for turning right. This allows cyclists to have the perceived right of
way and puts them at risk of collision.

We have solved this problem for pedestrians. They have a dedicated lane
(sidewalk/crosswalk). Their flow is also governed by their own traffic
signal (Walk/Don't Walk signals). Their path through an intersection is
slow and clearly seen by vehicles at an intersection.

The only way to manage bicycle/vehicle traffic is to recognize bicycles
as a distinct form of transportation. There should be dedicated bicycle
lanes with dedicated bicycle-traffic signals governing their flow
through intersections, in concert with vehicle and pedestrian traffic.

— John Thornquist, Seattle