CA Finally Admits 'Lane-Splitting' Is NOT Legal

[PGlaves]

Hey - I tried.


Ride well and often!

So let's agree that lane splitting is not illegal in California.

Now we all know that they can find something else to not like and get you for if they are determined, or if you are being careless, wreckless, inattentive, too fast, too close, or something else proscribed by the statutes.

 

[omega man]

So let's agree that lane splitting is not illegal in California.

Now we all know that they can find something else to not like and get you for if they are determined, or if you are being careless, wreckless, inattentive, too fast, too close, or something else proscribed by the statutes.

Naw, it's all good......We finally got the Wi-Fi we Need while we are in the car! It's the new must-have option

OM

 

[greenwald]

So let's agree that lane splitting is not illegal in California.

Now we all know that they can find something else to not like and get you for if they are determined, or if you are being careless, wreckless, inattentive, too fast, too close, or something else proscribed by the statutes.

Nice try, Paul, but I wasn't out to gather some sort of consensus. On this Forum? Are you kidding?

So, boiling someone to death in linseed oil is not illegal in Texas because those exact words don't appear anywhere in the statutes but we could apply the homicide language to make an arrest? Strange logic - nice try.

I only posted to inform;' inflame' is just predictable collateral damage with BMW owners - you learn that early on in this venue, and it ain't my first rodeo, so not surprised.

It's like trying to convince a fanatical Elvis fan that he's dead. No amount of documents, experience, privileged information or paperwork is going to sway 'emotional logic.' "He's not dead - just hasn't been seen for a while."

Perhaps he's off lane-splitting near Big Sur!

Thank you. Thank you very much.

 

[story]

There may be no laws making lane sharing legal but there are no laws making it illegal as well.
Last year there was a bill that would have make lane sharing illegal in California
Caltrans. (California Dept. of Transportation) commissioned a study on lane sharing with U.C.Berkley.
The results showed that lane sharing reduced traffic and saved lives if done in a safe manner.
The study described the safest way to split lanes.
The bill to outlaw lane splitting was dropped.
The CHP. (California Highway Patrol) published these recommendations under its
California Motorcycle Safety Program.
The AMA and other motorcycle advocates threw a fit.
Saying that because these recommendations were published by the CHP, they could be construed as law.
The recommendations were taken down.
You can bet every CHP officer has read them and will not hesitate to cite or arrest the fools who abuse the privilege.

I downloaded the CHP recommendations before they were removed.
If anyone wants a copy pm me your email address and I'll send it to you.

 

[greenwald]

There may be no laws making lane sharing legal but there are no laws making it illegal as well.
Last year there was a bill that would have make lane sharing illegal in California
Caltrans. (California Dept. of Transportation) commissioned a study on lane sharing with U.C.Berkley.
The results showed that lane sharing reduced traffic and saved lives if done in a safe manner.
The study described the safest way to split lanes.
The bill to outlaw lane splitting was dropped.
The CHP. (California Highway Patrol) published these recommendations under its
California Motorcycle Safety Program.
The AMA and other motorcycle advocates threw a fit.
Saying that because these recommendations were published by the CHP, they could be construed as law.
The recommendations were taken down.
You can bet every CHP officer has read them and will not hesitate to cite or arrest the fools who abuse the privilege.

I downloaded the CHP recommendations before they were removed.
If anyone wants a copy pm me your email address and I'll send it to you.

Yes - all members of MOSAC were provided with the actual report from the University of CA - Berkeley, dated August 6th, 2014. It is entitled "Safety Implications of Lane-Splitting Among CA Motorcyclists Involved in Collisions" and was authored by Thomas Rice and Lara Troszak. It is 9 pages in length and contains no less than 12 tables of data to digest. We've had it for weeks now - I re-read it just last week on my flight out to LA and again before our quarterly MOSAC meeting last night. Also have the CMSP Lane Splitting General Guidelines before they were pulled from CHP publications because of conflict with existing language in the CA Code of Traffic (and I'll concede, some saber-rattling from the AMA).

I also have the AMA's official policy statement on the issue, numerous other documents, blah, blah, blah. Didn't post this thread without a tad of research behind it, you know.

We part ways with your continued insistence that it was never illegal. But then again, you yourself state: "You can bet every CHP officer ....will not hesitate to cite or arrest the fools who abuse the privilege."

Really? Thought it wasn't illegal.

 

[henzilla]

I always thought since Jon and Ponch did it on TV that it was OK for me to follow the practice

If it were illegal, why is it OK for CHP Motos to do it daily...or the few times I was actually on a CA gridlocked freeway and couldn't filter with my GSA...comfortably

It has come up every two years here under the TX Rotunda lately...I truly believe the Cruiser crowd who champions the practice are thinking they will double file split with 40 of their friends. That is one scary thought as opposed to sensible use of an occasional filter.

 

[greenwald]

I always thought since Jon and Ponch did it on TV that it was OK for me to follow the practice

If it were illegal, why is it OK for CHP Motos to do it daily...or the few times I was actually on a CA gridlocked freeway and couldn't filter with my GSA...comfortably

It has come up every two years here under the TX Rotunda lately...I truly believe the Cruiser crowd who champions the practice are thinking they will double file split with 40 of their friends. That is one scary thought as opposed to sensible use of an occasional filter.

Like I said in the opening post - my personal opinion is irrelevant. If CA or TX or whomever wants it, then hopefully, your voters will back it.

The 'cruiser crowd,' besides petty jealousy, have issues with air-cooled V-twins overheating and want the privilege to not play 'stop-n-go' for hours. That's the reason it's being discussed here in WI. With minimal congestion in my state, it's more likely that MOSAC will craft legislation that simply allows for operation by motorcycles on the shoulder until the nearest exit is reached.

As for LEO's, it's pretty much a blank check how they operate if they can articulate they are performing necessary duties.

Most of the time, that's really the case. Sometimes, I'm sure the privilege is being abused. Human nature.

 

[David13]

Boiling someone in oil does not have to be mentioned.
It is under the heading of "causing the death of another human without justification, excuse or in self defense" or whatever the state statute says.
Lane splitting can be charged under reckless.
But it never is.
One thing you will find when you see those lane splitter motorcycles out there, many of them are law enforcement on the way to work.
I have had uniformed motor officers wave me into lane splitting line with a bunch of others.
And it's also legal in Nevada. Cause you don't do it alone, you wait til you get a few other bikes to ride with.
Cause what's not caught in Nevada is legal in Nevada, and what happens in Nevada stays in Nevada.
dc

 

[dbrick]

We part ways with your continued insistence that it was never illegal. But then again, you yourself state: "You can bet every CHP officer ....will not hesitate to cite or arrest the fools who abuse the privilege."

Really? Thought it wasn't illegal.

Kevin,

You missed the point, I think. CHP (or any other agency) can't cite for splitting because the Codes doesn't make it illegal. What can be cited, however, is all the other violations that an unsafe or imprudent splitter will usually commit. For example: unsafe lane changes (CVC Sec. 21658(a), moving without signaling (CVC Sec. 22107), violation of the prime facie speed limit (CVC Secs. 22348-22366), violation of the basic speed law (CVC Sec. 22350). And for serious violators: reckless driving (CVC Sec. 23103).

 

[98lee]

Couple weeks ago, my wife was past by a dozen CHP lane splitting for miles in afternoon "rush hour" 20mph traffic. Tucked in nicely behind them were a half dozen civilians. The CHP were returning from an officers funeral in San Jose, so they were not on active patrol and not going to a call. They just consider it normal motorcycle practice to do that during conjested traffic.

Kevin, you're welcome to ride anyway you see fit, and have your own opinions about your local laws, but you are totally out of touch about the laws, norms, attitudes, and practices of California and our law enforcement officers.

I really don't see your point of starting this thread. You had to know you weren't going to change the attitude of the CHP by posting on the MOA forum. Maybe you should write to the CHP and tell them how much better Wisconsin law enforcement is and give some recomendations so the CHP can improve. I'm SURE it would be better received than it is here.

 

[greenwald]

Couple weeks ago, my wife was past by a dozen CHP lane splitting for miles in afternoon "rush hour" 20mph traffic. Tucked in nicely behind them were a half dozen civilians. The CHP were returning from an officers funeral in San Jose, so they were not on active patrol and not going to a call. They just consider it normal motorcycle practice to do that during conjested traffic.

Kevin, you're welcome to ride anyway you see fit, and have your own opinions about your local laws, but you are totally out of touch about the laws, norms, attitudes, and practices of California and our law enforcement officers.

I really don't see your point of starting this thread. You had to know you weren't going to change the attitude of the CHP by posting on the MOA forum. Maybe you should write to the CHP and tell them how much better Wisconsin law enforcement is and give some recomendations so the CHP can improve. I'm SURE it would be better received than it is here.

Well Lee -

I didn't start this post to, as you say, "...change the attitude of the CHP..." I employed this platform to post information relevant to motorcyclists curious about the status of 'lane-splitting' in the United States, and those states that are the first to pursue legalizing it (sorry - Nevada didn't make the short list). Given PM's and other venues of feedback, it's been well received.

Given my access to national documentation and how this matter is treated in CA civil courts vs. anecdotal commuting observations, we could spend all day debating this and never walk together on common ground.

But that was never a goal. This Forum is neither a friendly playground nor a venue oozing with objectivity. No one who spends time here needs a Master's Degree in Sociology to sense that.

I'll just ride off in my direction ........... you ride off in yours, and don't forget to wave at Elvis.

 

[akbeemer]

I am glad Kevin posted the thread. He has access to information about lane spliting that the vast majority of us do not have, or at least do not take the time to find. Additionally, he has the field experience as a LEO and the experience working as a member of the Motorcycle Safety Advisory Committee in Wisconsin. All of this gives him the insight needed to have a well thoughtout opinion. Not saying it means he is correct, nor the final word, but at least what he said in is original post is thought evoking. I've never done any lane splitting that I can recall. Probably would if faced with massive traffic jams, but I'm tremendously grateful that such a problem is not part of my experiences while riding. There was talk of allowing lane splitting in MT a few years ago. The idea did not pass the "so what" test and it faded away... it would be like trying to pass a free range law in Rhode Island.... just no need.

 

[98lee]

Kevin,

Your title is a COMPLETE falsehood. California did NOT admit that lane splitting is "not legal". They reconfirmed that it is not addressed by statute, a COMPLETELY different thing. And it wasn't "Finally". They have officially said that for at least 50 years.

If you want to give information about a propsed law, BE ACCURATE! Otherwise, your just stirring the pot and you shouldn't be surprised when it comes bubbling back.

I am surprised that as an ex-LEO that you play so loosely with the words "not legal". In this freedom based society, "not legal" is recognized as illegal. Illegal must be covered by statute. When was the last time you cited someone for something that wasn't covered by statute? Case dismissed.


Using your tortured logic it must be NOT LEGAL to back out of your driveway or wear HiViz gear in WI.

Although from watching the news it does seem that "WI finally admits rational thinking NOT legal in WI", so maybe it IS illegal to wear HiViz.



Actually, passing a law confirming lane splitting will hamper law enforcement from using more of their discretion as to whether they believe it was done in a safe, prudent, or responsible manner or a hazardous, imprudent, or irresponsible manner. It would give the rider (or his lawyer) ammo in saying that it is specifically allowed and they shouldn't have been cited based on the new law. It makes the burden of proof higher for the officer.

 

[greenwald]

Kevin,

Your title is a COMPLETE falsehood. California did NOT admit that lane splitting is "not legal". They reconfirmed that it is not addressed by statute, a COMPLETELY different thing. And it wasn't "Finally". They have officially said that for at least 50 years.

If you want to give information about a propsed law, BE ACCURATE! Otherwise, your just stirring the pot and you shouldn't be surprised when it comes bubbling back.

I am surprised that as an ex-LEO that you play so loosely with the words "not legal". In this freedom based society, "not legal" is recognized as illegal. Illegal must be covered by statute. When was the last time you cited someone for something that wasn't covered by statute? Case dismissed.


Using your tortured logic it must be NOT LEGAL to back out of your driveway or wear HiViz gear in WI.

Although from watching the news it does seem that "WI finally admits rational thinking NOT legal in WI", so maybe it IS illegal to wear HiViz.



Actually, passing a law confirming lane splitting will hamper law enforcement from using more of their discretion as to whether they believe it was done in a safe, prudent, or responsible manner or a hazardous, imprudent, or irresponsible manner. It would give the rider (or his lawyer) ammo in saying that it is specifically allowed and they shouldn't have been cited based on the new law. It makes the burden of proof higher for the officer.

I'll be brief, since my informational intent was met with the very first post.


"...COMPLETE falsehood..." "...stirring the pot..." "...you play so loosely with words..." "...the last time you cited someone for something that wasn't covered by statute.." "...Case dismissed." "...your tortured logic..." "...rational thinking NOT legal in WI..."


Your tone and innuendos would be unbecoming of a mere Forum participant. The fact that you are a Forum Moderator makes your rant even more disappointing.

Ride well and often.

 

[greenwald]

I am glad Kevin posted the thread. He has access to information about lane spliting that the vast majority of us do not have, or at least do not take the time to find. Additionally, he has the field experience as a LEO and the experience working as a member of the Motorcycle Safety Advisory Committee in Wisconsin. All of this gives him the insight needed to have a well thoughtout opinion. Not saying it means he is correct, nor the final word, but at least what he said in is original post is thought evoking. I've never done any lane splitting that I can recall. Probably would if faced with massive traffic jams, but I'm tremendously grateful that such a problem is not part of my experiences while riding. There was talk of allowing lane splitting in MT a few years ago. The idea did not pass the "so what" test and it faded away... it would be like trying to pass a free range law in Rhode Island.... just no need.

Thanks. You echo what many PM's have expressed.

And you're right - I'm absolutely NOT the last word on this or any other motorcycle subject. Just alerting members what states to watch, should lane-splitting be of personal interest to them, perhaps because they reside or frequently travel in one of the 5 states now considering making it legal.

As for congestion, while WI is no mega-metropolis, I suspect Montana is even a bit thinner - yes?!

 

[pauls1150]

Wow, what a can of worms... While I continue to disagree with Kevin, I applaud his effort and desire to share relevant communication.

However...
Not only have I often passed CHP cars while splitting, with Zero altercation (and gosh, note that they even have radios now), but I have been "blipped" by motor officers BEHIND me so they could pass and jet on up ahead, and they give me a little wave of thanks as they go by (even when they're on Hondas or HDs). Maybe it's because I'm on an RT and not a rocketbike? Or I don't wear shorts and a helmet with a purple mohawk? Or maybe because I'm riding "reasonably" and not being a showoff or pissing off the cars?

Anyway...
The California Department of Motor Vehicles publishes - on paper, available at every DMV station, and on the web, see my earlier post - this "motorcycle drivers' handbook" that they expect people to read. Who reads it? Folks about to go in for their driving test. Newbies, and renewals.
Part of this handbook includes information about lane sharing, including suggestions on how to be safer while doing it, IF one CHOOSES to do it. (Note also that nobody has ever said that You MUST do it.)
So, the State is openly, blatantly condoning, aiding, and abetting an act that is illegal?
Yeah, right.

Slight tangent here: I haven't looked for the specific statutes for a while, but I seem to recall that part of the issue used to be the Definition of lane sharing and lane encroachment. Part of that was that a motorcycle may share a lane with a car, but a car may not share a lane with a motorcycle - the difference being who encroaches upon whom.

 

[88bmwjeff]

Part of that was that a motorcycle may share a lane with a car, but a car may not share a lane with a motorcycle

Leave up to lawyers to state something in very confusing way.

 

[88bmwjeff]

I always find it interesting hearing other people's views and opinions. IMO, it doesn't matter whether or not Kevin thinks lane splitting in CA is legal or illegal. California's agencies (DMV, CHP, etc.) appear to be all operating under the impression that lane splitting is not illegal. Of course this depends on how one defines legal vs illegal. Obviously, if the law states something is illegal, then it's illegal. If the law specifically states something is legal, then it's legal. Lane splitting is in the grey area in between those. For some, something not specifically indicated as legal, that something is not legal. And, vise versa. I'm sure we can find attorneys to debate both sides of the issue.

Lastly, thanks Kevin for your opinions and insight.

 

[rad]

The problem with this thread is not what the OP stated, it is much more how. He is a very knowledgeable motorcyclist with a great LEO background, but the opening statements appeared to be a jab at California and those of us who ride here, intended or not.

It could be just me, but the point being made could well have been done in an informative nonjudgmental manner and my guess is we would all have been on board.

The Internet is a funny place compared to face to face communication.

I mean no disrespect to Kevin, he has a wealth of knowledge to share and I often times enjoy his insight.

 

[98lee]

It could be just me, but the point being made could well have been done in an informative nonjudgmental manner and my guess is we would all have been on board.

Couldn't agree more.

And the title gives non California readers a totally false impression on what is going on. It misinforms.

The info about pending legislation is VERY good and important.