A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Social Issues
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Danger in the Bike Lane



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old February 7th 08, 02:20 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Eric Vey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 399
Default Danger in the Bike Lane

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.


In Oregon, from what I have previously read, motorists are *not allowed*
to enter or use the bike lane for anything and that includes right
turns. You read that correctly, exactly 180 degrees from California and
my state Florida laws.

I have not been able to find anything definitive about Washington State
law in this regard. I found a web page that says the law is roughly the
same as California, but it referred me to code number that doesn't exist.

While I agree with your opinion, you should realize that and caution
should always be the rule when commenting on how things are in your
state and you should not project your knowledge of your state laws on
people that live in other states.

There is a good reason that lawyers talking to someone in another state
will always say, "Check the laws in your state" or "I'm not sure what
the laws are in your state, but generally . . . ,but don't rely on
that, because the laws in your state may be different. "

Here in Florida most motorists do not know that they are supposed to
take the bike lane when turning right. They routinely right cross me at
intersections if I stay in the bike lane. I've asked policeman if theyy
knew and a traffic engineer once asked me what the law was.

Even my wife isn't sure. I explained the law to her, but she still has
her doubts as did the traffic engineer and the cops. Who am I to know
the law when they all say I don't.

So, when I move close to the curb (as the FL law says I should) to make
my right turn, my wife always says "Your going to get a ticket for that
someday." And she is probably right.





Ads
  #22  
Old February 7th 08, 06:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Jens Müller[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 287
Default Danger in the Bike Lane

Eric Vey schrieb:
So, when I move close to the curb (as the FL law says I should) to make
my right turn, my wife always says "Your going to get a ticket for that
someday." And she is probably right.


Well, they probably drop the charges in court ...
  #23  
Old February 7th 08, 06:35 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Eric Vey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 399
Default Danger in the Bike Lane

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

  #24  
Old February 7th 08, 06:42 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Eric Vey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 399
Default Danger in the Bike Lane

Jens Müller wrote:
Eric Vey schrieb:
So, when I move close to the curb (as the FL law says I should) to
make my right turn, my wife always says "Your going to get a ticket
for that someday." And she is probably right.


Well, they probably drop the charges in court ...


Yes, but I have to go to court and also agree to more serious punishment
if found guilty by the judge. That's the way it works here, in this
state. Challenge a ticket and subject yourself to more risk than
pleading guilty.
  #25  
Old February 7th 08, 06:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Jens Müller[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 287
Default Danger in the Bike Lane

Eric Vey schrieb:
Jens Müller wrote:
Eric Vey schrieb:
So, when I move close to the curb (as the FL law says I should) to
make my right turn, my wife always says "Your going to get a ticket
for that someday." And she is probably right.


Well, they probably drop the charges in court ...


Yes, but I have to go to court and also agree to more serious punishment
if found guilty by the judge. That's the way it works here, in this
state. Challenge a ticket and subject yourself to more risk than
pleading guilty.


Oh, here you can take back the "appeal" in court, then you just pay for
the court proceedings, but cannot get more serious punishment.
  #26  
Old February 8th 08, 12:00 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Bill Z.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,556
Default Danger in the Bike Lane

Eric Vey writes:

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.

In Oregon, from what I have previously read, motorists are *not
allowed* to enter or use the bike lane for anything and that includes
right turns. You read that correctly, exactly 180 degrees from
California and my state Florida laws.


You moved it from Washington to Oregon? :-)

But of course, there is a simple solution to the problem in Oregon -
sue the state for the accident, claiming that they put in a dangerous
facility given state law. If you can win the suit, they'll change
the law really quickly - that's a lot cheaper than removing the
bike lanes.

I have not been able to find anything definitive about Washington
State law in this regard. I found a web page that says the law is
roughly the same as California, but it referred me to code number that
doesn't exist.

While I agree with your opinion, you should realize that and caution
should always be the rule when commenting on how things are in your
state and you should not project your knowledge of your state laws on
people that live in other states.


There is a good reason that lawyers talking to someone in another
state will always say, "Check the laws in your state" or "I'm not sure
what the laws are in your state, but generally . . . ,but don't rely
on that, because the laws in your state may be different. "


I've yet to see anyone traveling to a different state prepare for their
trip by getting that state's DMV's driver's handbook (or whatever that
state calls the pamphlet you are supposed to read before taking a
written test).

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
  #27  
Old February 8th 08, 12:12 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Eric Vey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 399
Default Danger in the Bike Lane

Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

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.

In Oregon, from what I have previously read, motorists are *not
allowed* to enter or use the bike lane for anything and that includes
right turns. You read that correctly, exactly 180 degrees from
California and my state Florida laws.


You moved it from Washington to Oregon? :-)

But of course, there is a simple solution to the problem in Oregon -
sue the state for the accident, claiming that they put in a dangerous
facility given state law. If you can win the suit, they'll change
the law really quickly - that's a lot cheaper than removing the
bike lanes.

I have not been able to find anything definitive about Washington
State law in this regard. I found a web page that says the law is
roughly the same as California, but it referred me to code number that
doesn't exist.

While I agree with your opinion, you should realize that and caution
should always be the rule when commenting on how things are in your
state and you should not project your knowledge of your state laws on
people that live in other states.


There is a good reason that lawyers talking to someone in another
state will always say, "Check the laws in your state" or "I'm not sure
what the laws are in your state, but generally . . . ,but don't rely
on that, because the laws in your state may be different. "


I've yet to see anyone traveling to a different state prepare for their
trip by getting that state's DMV's driver's handbook (or whatever that
state calls the pamphlet you are supposed to read before taking a
written test).


See my post about the variability of bicycle laws.
  #28  
Old February 8th 08, 12:14 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Bill Z.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,556
Default Danger in the Bike Lane

Eric Vey writes:

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


The letter is ambiguous - the writer also complained about being nearly
hit by bicycles while walking, which suggests a shared bike/ped path
or sidewalk rather than a bicycle lane.

Also, nothing in it provides a definitive indication of what the law
is.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
  #29  
Old February 8th 08, 03:08 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Bill Z.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,556
Default Danger in the Bike Lane

Eric Vey writes:

Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:


See my post about the variability of bicycle laws.


You mean you don't really have a response?




--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
  #30  
Old February 11th 08, 07:31 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Bill Z.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,556
Default 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.


Ever hear of the Uniform Code of Commerce? Try relying on that in
Louisiana and see what happens.


People engaged in commerce don't have to make quick decisions while
traveling over a mile per minute. Your example is not relevant.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DO NOT WEAR YOUR HELMLET!! DANGER, DANGER, danger TJ Mountain Biking 4 December 23rd 06 07:03 PM
Fast Lane/Fat Lane wins award Mark Thompson UK 0 December 14th 06 06:14 AM
Station St bike lane Bonbeach: cars parked in bike lane AndrewJ Australia 8 March 30th 06 10:37 AM
Bike Lane vs Wide outside Lane - benefit to AUTOS? [email protected] Techniques 29 June 8th 05 10:07 PM
Yarra bike path incident and current danger - watch out! Richard Sherratt Australia 4 December 1st 03 12:10 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.