On Dec 9, 9:23*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Hmm. *Correct me if I'm wrong; .....

Frank that has pretty much been the focus of this thread
So let's at least get the proper theme into the subject line - at your
request, of course. Everyone here HAS been correcting you, repeatedly.
We had not fully appreciated the extent of your learning disorder.

Correct? *Because you're saying that O.R.S. § 811.130 , although it
specifically says "motor vehicle," must apply also to bicycles. .....

Seems that O.R.S. § 814.400 covers that.

Get with Mionske. See what he says. Seriously.

The Court of Appeals has answered the question. *I don't need to talk
to Bob...

What Frank fails to understand is that the Court of Appeals decision
IS a complete answer. Frank can rant all day about HOW he thinks it
SHOULD be. What is clear is how it IS.

Rather than waste the time of others, Frank can set up a test case
(think Selz and a narrow 2-1 decision) if he wants or he can lobby the
Oregon legislature. Although what he describes is already addressed in
a clear and reasonable manner.

....
I think it would be a really good idea. *If nothing else, ask him if
he controls a lane that's too narrow for safe passing. *Ask him why.
You could then report back to us about what he says. *It would be
interesting, don't you agree?

Frank- YOU call Bob and bend his ear. Give him a link to this thread.
Tell us what he says about the law. Not some silly carefully
constructed hypothetical, ask about the big picture of what the law
provides.
No, on second thought, have him post here himself. You have not quoted
anyone accurately yet.

DR