|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Danger in the Bike Lane
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. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Danger in the Bike Lane
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. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Danger in the Bike Lane
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. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Danger in the Bike Lane
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 |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Danger in the Bike Lane
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 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Danger in the Bike Lane
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 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Danger in the Bike Lane
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." |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Danger in the Bike Lane
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 |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Danger in the Bike Lane
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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DO NOT WEAR YOUR HELMLET!! DANGER, DANGER, danger | TJ | Mountain Biking | 4 | December 23rd 06 06:03 PM |
Fast Lane/Fat Lane wins award | Mark Thompson | UK | 0 | December 14th 06 05:14 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 | November 30th 03 11:10 PM |