From: fester@island.COM (Mike Fester)
Subject: Re: Lane Splitting (was Re: Cager penile size (was Re: %$*#^$! Tailgaters))
Organization: /usr/local/rn/organization
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:24:54 GMT

In article <BD.92Aug25091038@fluent.UUCP> bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU writes:
>svoboda@rtsg.mot.com (David Svoboda) writes:

>There's some merit to this argument, but perhaps not as much as David thinks.
>While it's true that in a simple cage/bike collision, the bike will come 
>off worse, from the cages's point of view if it swerves to avoid a suddenly 
>appearing bike (bad move, I grant you, but cages are _known_ for bad moves) 
>and hits a guard rail, the damage could be consiferablr and the driver 
>could be hurt.
>
>>Now, to address the first point; that a collision is more likely when lane
>>sharing.  This is not necessarily true.
>
>I don't recall making that point - I agree with you that it isn't
>neccesarily true.

It doesn't appear to be at all true. More later.

>>So, for the motorcyclist, lane splitting (carefully, observing the unique
>>risks presented by the practice, of course) can be *safer* than riding in 
>>traffic.  What about the increased risk to cars, though?  Well, since we 
>>are talking about car vs bike accidents, anything that makes accidents 
>>less likely for motorcycles also makes them less likely for cars.  QED.

>True.

Also, as the car isn't moving, the "increased risk" to him is negligible.

>>I don't think you picked a very good example.  Nearly anyone would agree
>>that those bikers were being pretty stupid.  But that isn't a reason to
>>condemn all lane splitting, or all bikers, for that matter.

>I don't recall condemning all lane-splitters, and certainly didn't condemn 
>all bikers (being one myself).  Being relatively unfamiliar with 
>lane-splitting, I gave an example of it where I thought the people doing 
>it were acting like jerks, and I asked for feedback.  Most people seem to 
>agreee with you, and with my impression, that these folks were jerks 
>(except for Ed Green, who seems to think I was making the episode up).

I believe Mr Green said he doubted that the people in question were actually
doing 40. No offense, but if traffic was stopped, I kind of doubt it as
well; I've lane-split at ~15 mph and had people lane-spliting come up
behind me FAST. When I let them go ahead of me, and tried to follow them, their
speed was usually ~ 22 - 25 mph. Sure SEEMED a lot faster. Now, if they actually
WERE doing 30+, I have no sympathy for them either.

In any event, the Nov '91 issue of Motorcyclist had an article on lane-
splitting. In it, they cite results of the 1982 Hurst report by USC, the only
comprehensive survey of lane-splitting accidents/fatalities. The conclusion
was that lane-splitting (I'm sure they mean safely) is one of the safer things
to do.

Mike
-- 
Disclaimer - These opiini^H^H damn! ^H^H ^Q ^[ .... :w  :q  :wq  :wq! ^d  X ^?
exit X Q  ^C ^? :quitbye  CtrlAltDel   ~~q  :~q  logout  save/quit :!QUIT
^[zz ^[ZZZZZZ ^H  man vi ^@  ^L  ^[c  ^# ^E ^X ^I ^T ? help  helpquit ^D  ^d 
man help ^C ^c help exit ?Quit ?q CtrlShftDel "Hey, what does this button d..."
Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles