Danger in the Bike Lane

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.


Califoria allows something called "lane splitting." Try that in your
state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_splitting


Why shouldn't I try it in my state if I want to? I live in California.
Now, you'll find that nearly all the traffic laws in California are
the same as the traffic laws in all the other states. I fyou want
to claim that Washington is different with respect the the law we
were discussing - not cutting people in other lanes off when making
a turn - then show where that state is deficient.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

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

But the treaties entered into with the consent of the Congress are the
supreme law of the land.

Jens Müller wrote:
Eric Vey schrieb:
"Uniform" codes are just recommendations, not requirements which makes
their writing uniform, hence the name, but not their adoption.

But the treaties entered into with the consent of the Congress are the
supreme law of the land.

Has not much to do with State law and that is what we are talking about.

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.

Califoria allows something called "lane splitting." Try that in your
state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_splitting


Why shouldn't I try it in my state if I want to? I live in California.
Now, you'll find that nearly all the traffic laws in California are
the same as the traffic laws in all the other states. I fyou want
to claim that Washington is different with respect the the law we
were discussing - not cutting people in other lanes off when making
a turn - then show where that state is deficient.


I don't to prove anything. You are the one that said "assuming that
Washington has the same or similar laws as those in California . . ."

That is called an assertion and that means someone can call you on it
without having to prove anything. When I pointed this out, you proceed
to spin your wheels complaining that I have to prove my point. I prove
my point and still you complin.

Why assume? Why not look it up? We have this new fangled thing now where
state laws are just a click away. In the time you spent picking a fight
with me, you could have looked it up and said "Washington has the same
law on this as California . . . " which makes a much stronger point.

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.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

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.

Califoria allows something called "lane splitting." Try that in your
state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_splitting
Why shouldn't I try it in my state if I want to? I live in
California.
Now, you'll find that nearly all the traffic laws in California are
the same as the traffic laws in all the other states. I fyou want
to claim that Washington is different with respect the the law we
were discussing - not cutting people in other lanes off when making
a turn - then show where that state is deficient.


I don't to prove anything. You are the one that said "assuming that
Washington has the same or similar laws as those in California . . ."

That is called an assertion and that means someone can call you on it
without having to prove anything. When I pointed this out, you proceed
to spin your wheels complaining that I have to prove my point. I prove
my point and still you complin.

No, you didn't prove your point. I'm simply familiar with Caiifornia
laws as I live there and know where to find the official copy.

Since it is common sense that you don't let someone make a right
turn from a lane to the left of a "through" lane, I think we can
safely assume that's the case in Washington - i.e., that the laws
were not written by incompetent legislators. If this is not the
case for some strange reason, why don't you enlighten us.

Since you bothered to look up "lane splitting", which was irrelevant,
I suspect that you checked the laws in Washington State and couldn't
find anything to back up your assertions.

Why assume? Why not look it up? We have this new fangled thing now
where state laws are just a click away. In the time you spent picking
a fight with me, you could have looked it up and said "Washington has
the same law on this as California . . . " which makes a much stronger
point.

Then why don't you find it for us? :-) I know the URL for the California
laws, and I know that most states are similar. But I really don't have
the time right now to bother verifying the obvious.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

Jens Müller wrote:
Eric Vey schrieb:
"Uniform" codes are just recommendations, not requirements which makes
their writing uniform, hence the name, but not their adoption.

But the treaties entered into with the consent of the Congress are the
supreme law of the land.

No, the constitution is inferior to Our Great and Dear Leader, THE
GEORGE WALKER BUSH.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Bill Z. schrieb:

Since it is common sense that you don't let someone make a right
turn from a lane to the left of a "through" lane, I think we can
safely assume that's the case in Washington - i.e., that the laws
were not written by incompetent legislators. If this is not the
case for some strange reason, why don't you enlighten us.

Oh, this is the case with bike lanes in Germany ...

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_p.../cis_1123.html

"Many German streets and sidewalks have dedicated bike lanes for use by
bicyclists. Pedestrians should be aware that bicycles have priority use
of these lanes and should be careful to observe whether any bicyclist is
approaching before crossing or stepping into the bike lane. Bicyclists
also have priority over cars turning onto side streets, and motorists
should always confirm whether a bicyclist is approaching from either
direction before attempting to enter side streets, even when the light
is in their favor. Motorists turning into a side street who hit a
bicyclist who is using a marked bike lane will be held responsible for
any injury or damage caused."

Jens Müller writes:

Bill Z. schrieb:

Since it is common sense that you don't let someone make a right
turn from a lane to the left of a "through" lane, I think we can
safely assume that's the case in Washington - i.e., that the laws
were not written by incompetent legislators. If this is not the
case for some strange reason, why don't you enlighten us.

Oh, this is the case with bike lanes in Germany ...

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_p.../cis_1123.html

"Many German streets and sidewalks have dedicated bike lanes for use
by bicyclists. snip

Thanks for the info. One thing to keep in mind for discussion purposes
is that California terminology (e.g., the terminology used by traffic
engineers) uses the term bike lane to refer to a lane that is part of
a roadway. If it is part of a sidewalk, the facility is called a bike
path. Colloquially, many people use these terms interchangably,
although I've been following the official usage in our state.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

Bill Z. schrieb:
Jens Müller writes:

Bill Z. schrieb:

Since it is common sense that you don't let someone make a right
turn from a lane to the left of a "through" lane, I think we can
safely assume that's the case in Washington - i.e., that the laws
were not written by incompetent legislators. If this is not the
case for some strange reason, why don't you enlighten us.
Oh, this is the case with bike lanes in Germany ...

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_p.../cis_1123.html

"Many German streets and sidewalks have dedicated bike lanes for use
by bicyclists. snip

Thanks for the info. One thing to keep in mind for discussion purposes
is that California terminology (e.g., the terminology used by traffic
engineers) uses the term bike lane to refer to a lane that is part of
a roadway. If it is part of a sidewalk, the facility is called a bike
path.

Yepp. I'd use roughly equivalent terms in German, although, when talking
about German cycling facilities, I try to use terms that adequately
describe their legal status, e.g., if they are mandatory to use.