I favor Lane Sharing in Colorado

[Ghost]

Don't try to turn this argument around on me - you are the one who said that if an action isn't specified in law, then it's illegal. I'm only trying to simplify the absurdity of that statement into terms you can understand while ruffling your feathers.

That's your twist, not mine.

I said (essentially) that due to "mission creep" the Cops are now interpreting laws instead of merely enforcing them, and that since there's very little oversight they can enforce them as they see fit--just like it's up to them to decide if you're being reckless and when you're not and it's all a relatively grey area.

Thus, your "freedoms" are restricted in reality by interpretation far more so than they are in theory where we're all "free" as long as we don't violate some specific law--and even that's an intangible freedom at best.

[TinkerinWstuff]

That's your twist, not mine.

I said (essentially) that due to "mission creep" the Cops are now interpreting laws instead of merely enforcing them, and that since there's very little oversight they can enforce them as they see fit--just like it's up to them to decide if you're being reckless and when you're not and it's all a relatively grey area.

Thus, your "freedoms" are restricted in reality by interpretation far more so than they are in theory where we're all "free" as long as we don't violate some specific law--and even that's an intangible freedom at best.

^^this we agree. But I'm willing to fight through the interpretation and use my day in court. I also refuse to see government as my caretaker or permission giver.

It's been an enjoyable discussion, I best get some work done.

I support lane splitting if people are not an asshat. Now we just have to figure out how to define asshat and who's interpretation will be accepted.

[Ghost]

I also refuse to see government as my caretaker or permission giver.

It's been an enjoyable discussion, I best get some work done.

I support lane splitting if people are not an asshat. Now we just have to figure out how to define asshat and who's interpretation will be accepted.

Regardless, it's still the Enforcer, and it has all the power.

Yep, have fun.

And there's the rub--and the core of any problem.

[Devaclis]

First, why would you subscribe so heavily to an idea that several very experienced riders insist is a bad, bad course of action? Every time I've come to the CSC looking for good advice, I've found it. (Dana's insistence on going stunting after downing 15 jello shots not-withstanding ) Listen to these guys.

Great, now I am in a partying mood.

[cptschlongenheimer]

Sorry didn't mean to change your plans for tonight....

[Darth Do'Urden]

All the naysayers just want to mindlessly repeat the mantra of "cagers ain't smart enough to learn to adapt to lane sharing, therefore ya'll's a bunch o' idiots for even thinkin' it, uh huh." Whatever. Lane-sharing/splitting/filtering-forward absolutely CAN be done intelligently and safely--no, not at 60mph--and the stupid cagers CAN (and will if forced to) adapt to the law just like anything else.

I'm not asking that everyone practice lane-sharing...only to support allowing us that wish to the freedom and legality to do so, exactly like the helmet law (or lack thereof). I think it's downright stupid to not wear a helmet at all times on a bike, but I don't want a law to be enacted requiring it, because I also believe in letting people live the way they want. And that's all we who support lane-sharing are asking for...the freedom to CHOOSE. And anyone who claims that the practice could prove to be a hindrance to cars is just grasping as straws. There's no legitimate scenario I can fathom in which me carefully and slowly picking my way through traffic hinders ANYONE ELSE--if anything the act actually reduces congestion and helps out EVERYONE...even the jackass cagers who thinks it's "unfair".

So there--another voice in support of lane-sharing. Also...Terry, you let me know via PM when and where to be regarding legislation of motorcycle laws and I'll take off work to be there to help support it (my job is ridiculously flexible).

And P.S.
I'm not a Texan, but I did just move from there back in January. It's a wonderful state to leave. And that's the great thing about this country...you high-and-mighty "native Coloradans" (your ancestors were unwanted at one point, too, unless you're full-blood Native American...yeah, that's what I thought) aren't imbued with the power to keep the rest of the country out, for which I am personally thankful, because I love this state and deeply cherish the opportunity that arose to allow me to live here. And from what I can tell, your DL looks just like mine, as I've never been asked what my "native state" is.

[CaptGoodvibes]

I don't have a native state. I was born in a district. :/

Fwiw, I have a bit of experience lane sharing in congested situations. I am for it if the cagers can be edumicated. The penalty for failure going 25 and rebounding at an angle of a car door is far less than a front tire flat going 100mph. I'm just sayin'

[stubbicatt]

I'd be in favor of this change.

[Bueller]

The arguments "for" can't even sell the choir, good luck with the general public, since that is who you should be trying to sell.

[cptschlongenheimer]

And P.S.
I'm not a Texan, but I did just move from there back in January. It's a wonderful state to leave. And that's the great thing about this country...you high-and-mighty "native Coloradans" (your ancestors were unwanted at one point, too, unless you're full-blood Native American...yeah, that's what I thought) aren't imbued with the power to keep the rest of the country out, for which I am personally thankful, because I love this state and deeply cherish the opportunity that arose to allow me to live here. And from what I can tell, your DL looks just like mine, as I've never been asked what my "native state" is.

You're right my grandparents got off a boat and I don't presume the ability to tell anyone where to live. I just think that you are hurting your cause every time you use the "California does it" argument. I know it's a form of racism and it makes me a hypocrite. It's kinda like when the rest of the country says "Blame Canada" Coloradoans are thinking "Blame California"

We know it's not the Californians' fault, we place the blame with Romer and Pena. But the license plates are the reminder that our politicians sold us out for a couple million in kickbacks and if you want your issue to garner support, you will need a different argument.

While we're at it:
[QUOTE=Darth Do'Urden;580424]..only to support allowing us that wish to the freedom and legality to do so...[\QUOTE]

How about some evidence that it increases safety for anyone, or that it reduces congestion. Conduct/gather/cite scientific studies that show reduced m/c crash rates (even if it's only rear enders) in states/countries that allow it vs. ones who don't.
(and you don't have to mention names)

If lane sharing is to gain support and acceptance here it will have to be on it's own merits.

[Spooph]

I contest the perception that I'm apathetic though. I chime in on these topics because of my desire to improve our society. I think that until we create a culture that celebrates personal responsibility and mutual and self respect, our best efforts are aimed at keeping those who don't, off our roadways.

OK, that's fair, I'll take that back. I'm not sure which word I would pick then but I was essentially going for this:

Darth O' Duren: All the naysayers just want to mindlessly repeat the mantra of "cagers ain't smart enough to learn to adapt to lane sharing, therefore ya'll's a bunch o' idiots for even thinkin' it, uh huh."

Gosh, I wish I had the time to find some statistics on this, lol, I guess I'm in the same boat as you, because even though I support the idea, I'm not willing to put in the work to make it happen.... I'm such a damn hypocrite!

[Bueller]

I guess I'm in the same boat as you, because even though I support the idea, I'm not willing to put in the work to make it happen.... I'm such a damn hypocrite!

No, just prioritizing by importance or feasibility.

[stubbicatt]

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/dl655/dl665mcycle.pdf I found this on the subject of lane sharing. I'm not so sure it is legal in Cali.

[DevilsTonic]

I'm in favor and would support and sign any petition to get it passed.

[SloBlue]

My son and I trailered our XR's through Denver to go ride the at Rampart Range on Thursday. Pretty cool, I've never been there before. Anyway, on the way back, traffic was STOPPED almost all the way through Denver. I was near a rider on an RC51 for a lot of that time. I looked at the 8 or 10 ft. gap in between the parked cars and it just seemed so very stupid for the RC51 to sit there, slipping the clutch, heating, dragging his feet and adding one more vehicle to the congestion. I tried to articulate to myself why lane sharing would be bad from the point of view of a motorcycle rider who opposes the idea.

1. It's a bad idea. (not really a reason, but it's the first thing said)

2. "the Man" doesn't say it's ok, so it must be bad.

3. I'm scared to do it.

4. I'd feel inferior and humiliated if I was sitting in traffic on my motorcycle and you passed me on your motorcycle lane sharing.

5. Car drivers might not like me.

6. Car drivers are stupid and distracted and have an average IQ of 25.

7. I don't want to, so you shouldn't be able to.

8. It's not fair, everyone should have to sit in traffic jams

9. I chose to ride a motorcycle so I should just have to endure any unpleasantness that arises while riding it.

10. It's what they do in California and I hate California, so it must be bad.


So, there's my best shot at the top ten reasons some of you oppose lane sharing in Colorado. If you match up the two lists, side by side, sure you may find some repetition on either list. But go deeper. I think the the list against is mostly emotional and fear based. If that's how you make your decisions, I guess that's your DNA, but I've been riding motorcycles all my life and many of the "against" reasons are the same things non-riders say to me when they're trying to tell me riding my motorcycle is too dangerous and I should stop.

[THoward]

From an ex CA highway patrol motorcycle officer friend: "Lane splitting in California is legal in many circumstances, but not in all circumstances, so whether a biker is cited for illegal lane splitting in California has as much to do with what kind of mood a police officer is in as it does with the realities of lane splitting law. It is open to interpretation by the Officers. The law states lane splitting by motorcycles is permissible but must be done in a safe and prudent manner. Most officers feel that traveling over 25 or 5 faster than traffic is unsafe. I rode through stop and go traffic every day on a motorcycle and I hate to say it but I would feel that if you were going 35-40 mph and the other traffic was stopped or at 5mph it was unsafe. Lane splitting law is one of the greyest areas of ambiguity in modern laws that govern the safe use of vehicles, so there is a lot of confusion about the lane splitting law among driver, motorcycle riders, and even among lawyers and other law professionals."

No disrespect to the LEO's in CO...but I could see a lot of tickets generated even if it were legal.

[Darth Do'Urden]

From an ex CA highway patrol motorcycle officer friend: "Lane splitting in California is legal in many circumstances, but not in all circumstances, so whether a biker is cited for illegal lane splitting in California has as much to do with what kind of mood a police officer is in as it does with the realities of lane splitting law. It is open to interpretation by the Officers. The law states lane splitting by motorcycles is permissible but must be done in a safe and prudent manner. Most officers feel that traveling over 25 or 5 faster than traffic is unsafe. I rode through stop and go traffic every day on a motorcycle and I hate to say it but I would feel that if you were going 35-40 mph and the other traffic was stopped or at 5mph it was unsafe. Lane splitting law is one of the greyest areas of ambiguity in modern laws that govern the safe use of vehicles, so there is a lot of confusion about the lane splitting law among driver, motorcycle riders, and even among lawyers and other law professionals."

No disrespect to the LEO's in CO...but I could see a lot of tickets generated even if it were legal.

Just as in CA, it would be incumbent on the biker to make sure he/she was lane-splitting in a safe manner, ie. only 5 (10 max) mph faster than the stopped/extremely slow traffic. This isn't friggin' open-heart surgery, even with the caveat that it's at the "discretion of the police officer". The idea of lane-splitting isn't so that on my bike I can blow past all the "suckers" in their cages. It's so that I can simply continue to make progress in heavy stop-and-go traffic to keep my bike engine cooled off, ME cooled off, and prevent being rear-ended by some idiot on her cell phone (same with filtering forward).

But because there's potential for the law to be abused/broken and therefore people getting tickets, we should NOT enact the law? Yet we're well on our way towards legalizing marijuana (in the state, if not the entire country soon enough)...the logic just baffles me.

And as for a "study" on congestion reduction: absolutely no need. The very idea speaks for itself. If there are 20 bikes stuck in a traffic jam and just 5 of them choose to lane-split, then that's 5 fewer CARS taking up room (that's right, CARS, because even with our fractionally smaller size we still take up a car length in traffic). It's impossible for congestion to NOT improve. But honestly, what would be even safer and make more sense would be to allow motorcycles to use the shoulders in heavy congested traffic.

[THoward]

I don't disagree with you. There will always be those that abuse the law and that doesn't mean it shouldn't be pursued. One of my favorite former State Senators used to say "you can't legislate stupidity". When you pursue a law however, there is a lot to consider and there should be as little gray area as possible. I see nothing wrong with a bike taking the shoulder in heavy traffic. Makes more sense to me than going through cars.

[SloBlue]

I see nothing wrong with a bike taking the shoulder in heavy traffic. Makes more sense to me than going through cars.

A bit of wisdom from the middle! A compromise! Great, I'll take it.

[Rocket01]

Looks like I'm one year late on this discussion, but I just moved to CO. I grew up in California and LOVED lane sharing. Every time I go back and ride, I get spoiled by being able to move through stopped traffic. We totally need lane sharing here. I tried riding my bike from Centennial to Westminster the other day (around 5pm), and I will probably never do that again. The bike was overheating, my hand was getting cramped from holding the clutch for an hour, and I was frustrated from not being able to simply drive through stopped traffic. Denver traffic can totally benefit from lane sharing, since I think it would draw out all the motorcycle riders for daily commute.

[DemonRider]

from what i hear, most Colorado Drivers are from California anyway ?? LOL


@ Rocket - My Wife makes that trip every weekday, sucks for sure, takes 1-1.5 hours to get home most days ....

With the congestion we have been getting and lets face it, it has been getting hotter here in Colorado.. This might be something that needs to be visited soon.. But until then... lets just say,, well never mind (Public Forum and all)

oh and I'm from Cali myself, didn't ride on a normal bases but did take the bike on a recent visit out there My mom rode on the back on day when we hit heavy traffic and she was the one who told me; "just go between those cars!" hahahahah

[Sully]

I see nothing wrong with a bike taking the shoulder in heavy traffic. Makes more sense to me than going through cars.

I totally agree with you, Terry!

[Ghosty]

Except when the shoulder has the nasty remnants of semi-truck tires sitting there ready to kill you. Plus tons of other debris/sand. But if clear, I agree on it being safer than white-lining.

Colorado drivers are too stupid to handle lane-sharing, they'd kill a motorcyclist everyday I'm sure. I'm afraid to test the waters. They're all idiots out there.

[CaneZach]

I didn't wade through the last five pages, but here's my primary reason to object to lane-sharing:

THE AVERAGE COLORADO DRIVER IS A COMPLETE MORON!

What makes it worse is knowing that if the AVERAGE driver is a moron, half of them are even below that standard. I'm approaching a traffic light yesterday and I'm getting into the left turn lane. There is already a minivan in the left turn lane, so as I'm slowing down behind them, our light turns green. Instead of making a left, the genius decides he really wanted to make a right, so he throws himself across two "through" lanes and a right turn lane. And you want to ride within two feet of these people???

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The average driver in Colorado focuses on a 20' x 10' field ahead of them. 20' ahead and 10' wide. If you're next to them, you don't exist. If you're behind them, you don't exist. If you're 21' ahead, you don't exist. We've all been cut off or pushed onto the shoulder because some idiot didn't look before they changed lanes. To make matters worse, they're not only oblivious, but they are completely self-absorbed, so not only do other drivers or riders not exist, they don't even care if you do exist. There is no such thing as "common courtesy" in Colorado, mainly because most people here are completely self-absorbed.

They are also completely ignorant of basic traffic laws, so even if it was legal, you can be certain they wouldn't care enough to know if it was. They ABSOLUTELY WILL run into/over a motorcyclist without giving it a second thought.