On Feb 2, 10:28 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Feb 2, 11:26 am, Jay Beattie wrote:



On Feb 1, 10:14 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Feb 2, 12:36 am, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI

$southslope.net" wrote:
"The public should see the vehicular cyclist as simply one more driver
on the road, operating like the others. However, the cyclist should
understand that because his vehicle is both narrower and, often, slower
than the others, he has a duty to cooperate with faster drivers by
facilitating their overtaking where that action is safe for both
drivers. That is not a duty to cringe out of the way regardless of
danger or inconvenience to the cyclist, but a duty to move right only
when it is safe to do so and is in accordance with the rules of the road
for drivers of vehicles."

So why do so many people conflate taking the lane with deliberately
blocking traffic?

Because many people are easily confused.

One of the sites recently linked in these discussions contains a
pretty extensive page in which the author complains about things
Effective Cycling gets wrong. Except that, as in your example above,
it's actually his impression of Effective Cycling that's wrong. He
confuses statements others make with statements Forester makes. He
imagines motives that simply don't exist.

In other words, the author is confused.

Except that it is your position that bicycles are not subject to the
slow-moving vehicle laws, which if true, would make hash of the
Forester quote.

Actually, my position is that bicycles are subject to the laws as
written, and as interpreted by court decisions and common sense. You
recall that I live in a state where, like many, the question of my
right to control a narrow lane has been settled firmly in my favor.

But even in less enlightened jurisdictions, common sense usually
reigns. Practically speaking, the tactics Forester describe seem to
work nearly everywhere. I've ridden in (I think) 44 states of the
Union and about a dozen foreign countries so far with no problem.

How common is it, really, for a cyclist to be prosecuted for
controlling a lane that's too narrow for safe passing?


Not fully prosecuted by the legal system (one would hope, anyway), but
certainly persecuted by outraged cagers - who will in fact carry their
irritation to the rest of us.

I agree that common sense should and generally does prevail.