From: cantrell@seqp4.sequoia.com (Paul Cantrell)
Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles
Subject: Re: Lane Splitting (was Re: Cager penile size (was Re: %$*#^$! Tailgaters))
Date: 31 Aug 92 15:07:24 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Sequoia Computer Systems

> In article <BD.92Aug20092400@fluent.UUCP> bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU writes:
> |
> |Am I the only one who thinks it rather hypocritical that riders on the one 
> |hand bitch at cagers for encroaching on their lane space, and one the other 
> |hand do it to cagers on a regular basis?

You're not the only one. I don't lane split because I ride in Massachusetts,
but I usually won't even pass a line of stopped cars for the very reason you
say. When a cage does it to me, I don't appreciate it, so I try not to do it
myself. I admit to doing it at a stoplight when a slow vehicle is ahead, and
there is little chance of a passing zone getting me ahead of the slow vehicle.
(especially true when the vehicle is a large truck which obstructs my vision)

> 
In article <1992Aug21.201529.6468@rtsg.mot.com>, svoboda@rtsg.mot.com (David Svoboda) writes:
> Well, the way I see it, a bike splitting between cars is somewhat
> different than a car between bikes.  The reason for this lies in comparing
> risk.  First, we have to take as given that less lanespace implies more
> likelyhood of a collision.  Now, consider if a car initiates a lanesharing
> situation.  In the now more likely collision, the bike *will* lose, and
> the rider likely will sustain bodily injuries, while the car *might*
> sustain some property damage, and the driver almost certainly will be
> unhurt.  In effect, the driver is  taking some personal safety away from
> the biker, at little cost to himself.

> In the case of the biker initiating a laneshare, he is again increasing
> the likelyhood of an accident, an accident which he will again lose.  The
> driver  will likely take very little if any damage from such a collision.

I hate to say this, but I think David is just trying to rationalize the fact
that bikers *are* often hypocritical on this issue. I don't think it's at all
reasonable to argue that it's okay to for bikers to put cagers at risk, while
it's not okay for cagers to put us at risk. It's not the *cagers* fault that
you decided to ride a motorcycle. They're just as entitled to the full use
of the lane as you are. So I think David's argument is flawed. Perhaps someone
can think of a better one.

Generally, when I drive a car in California (not very often) I feel quite
uncomfortable on the freeway with motorcycles lane splitting. I wouldn't
feel uncomfortable about motorcycles using the breakdown lane, and I don't
care that they're getting someplace faster than I am. I'm sure that a lot
of my problem with it is just that I'm not used to it, so it feels
strange. But I'm also a little nervous with a vehicle passing within a
foot or so of me. A 15 MPH difference in speed seems like a lot when the
vehicles are that close together. By the way, it doesn't bother me as much
when traffic is totally stopped. I'm more nervous when I'm in start and
stop, or slowly moving traffic, and motorcycles are passing close to the
car.

Are California motorcyclists allowed to use the carpool lanes?

Paul
--
cantrell@sequoia.com
'89 ZX-10
-- 
cantrell@sequoia.com
Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles