It can. Just not in Ontario or, more specifically, the GTA. It works in California because people expect it, and know that it isn't against the law.
lane splitting and cagers honking
- Thread starter ep1x
- Start date
- Status
It can. Just not in Ontario or, more specifically, the GTA. It works in California because people expect it, and know that it isn't against the law.
Yeah, cagers are great drivers over there. I wonder why it's illegal to turn right on a red in Quebec?
So, if I somehow made you aware of the fact that I'm about to lane split and do so in a manner that does not jeopardize your life or space. Basically, eliminating the surprise and sudden act. Would you still have an issue with it? And if so, would that purely be a legal issue?
Thats just city driving within the island of Montreal -- Laval, Kanawake, Terrebonne, Longeuil its ok to make a right on a red.
++ Riding within the island of Montreal must be one of the shittiest riding experiences in the world...between the crazy drivers and the fkd up roads...you can't wait to get the f out.
Short answer: No. I wouldn't have an issue with it.
Long answer: What you're talking about is a virtual impossibility, and so isn't really germane to the conversation. There are very few times when you can give advanced warning that you're going to split, because the people who need to be warned are ahead of you. I would be satisfied if people would simply be circumspect in where/when they split but that doesn't seem to be the case, in my experience.
Fair enough. This whole thing is academic in any case. I was more curious to see the the root of the issue than to work out any technical details or logistics of 'how'.
I would expect such a statement from someone who rides Ontario's nicely paved roads, and doesn't have to worry so much about other drivers because of hta, but quebec riding is awesome if you can get past the fact the city has its drivers you wonder how they got their license, is broke and the provinces roads/highways are falling apart lol.
Last edited:
I rode in Sainte Sauver and the 117 corridor so I know about PQ riding. I was just commenting on your Montreal styles...
In my experience, Quebec drivers are at least consistent. Ontario drivers are all over the map.
johnnycage
Well-known member
The jerk wads honking at you are just krusty cus you got in front of them. The seem to think that you are making their trip drastically longer. It's like the jerkwads that tailgate. They're just pyssed cus you're in front of them. Just remember though, lane splitting is very dangerous. If some or something comes flying out in front of you, good luck getting out of it safely. If you're going to lane split, do it smart. Skipping in front of people like you currently are doing will just tick more drivers off and those are the same drivers that might not care if they rear end you or do something else stupid.
Last edited:
OpenGambit
Banned
There is no doubt that lane splitting is illegal, I can't believe people still argue that it isn't.
awyala
Guest
Fair point, and that is the point, the fact of your "day in court". Not all cops are correct or fully understand the law. It is interesting that you would rather passively accept 172 rather than dispute its abuses. But hey, you can play it safe and accept an encroaching police state.
GentlemanRacer
Well-known member
In terms of abiding by law, driving 100km in the passing lane as a means to force others into compliance with the law is not only dangerous, it is vigilantism, which is also happens to be illegal.
Respecting the rules of the road is also different from obeying them to the letter. We know the rules, mostly, and we abide by them, since the spirit of them is to ensure orderly flow of traffic, and to provide recourse to principle if someone disrupts it. It's not designed to be social engineering, even if some people think so. It's only when someone abuses the law, either through flagrant violation or through antagonistic enforcement, that we have a problem.
The HTA is not a moral or ethical standard, it's a tool for resolving differences. Ride as you will, just make sure you are principled so that you can defend your position if it is challenged.
And please don't waste clever defenses on the Internet. None of them are rocket science, but some of us may need to use them. It would be helpful if they hadn't already been telegraphed to overzealous prosecutors and police. If you say it here and it's any good, you can bet a countermeasure will be added as an order in council regulation in less than a year.
Respecting the rules of the road is also different from obeying them to the letter. We know the rules, mostly, and we abide by them, since the spirit of them is to ensure orderly flow of traffic, and to provide recourse to principle if someone disrupts it. It's not designed to be social engineering, even if some people think so. It's only when someone abuses the law, either through flagrant violation or through antagonistic enforcement, that we have a problem.
The HTA is not a moral or ethical standard, it's a tool for resolving differences. Ride as you will, just make sure you are principled so that you can defend your position if it is challenged.
And please don't waste clever defenses on the Internet. None of them are rocket science, but some of us may need to use them. It would be helpful if they hadn't already been telegraphed to overzealous prosecutors and police. If you say it here and it's any good, you can bet a countermeasure will be added as an order in council regulation in less than a year.
awyala
Guest
Rob, as you even put it, some explicit laws have fallen by the waste side. I had a cop in Peel say to me when they pulled me over for filtering on the HW10 offramp from the 403....They were the undercover boys in grey swat outfits by the way...they said "you can't do that because one of these cars may open their doors to spite you". I was shocked and responded, "then you should do your job and enforce that law rather than come after me for not breaking any law".
Both those cops let me go by the way. I took them through all the laws I have taken you through earlier in this post and explained to them my position.
But I find it odd you accept and "ride around" the illegality of cars, but then somehow feel an ambigious act of filtering is totally illegal and somehow reckless. You don't even accept it can be done safely and legally in some cases.
It is strange how you don't seem to get in an uproar over lack of turn signalling, lane blocking, and so on. You seem to accept it as Toronto driving culture, yet you won't accept increasing filtering as also Toronto riding culture. If cars don't expect us, then with time, increased filtering, lax enforcement, filtering will be just as expected and tolerated as your other acceptable lax culturally inflrigned "Toronto" driving scene laws.
awyala
Guest
I gotta tell ya Rob I whole heartedly dissagree with you. I have ridden / driven in many places and quite a few countries, and I can't say I find Ontario drivers stand out much, with the exception of bitterness. In general their driving is rather dull and predicatable. Not as predicatable as Germans for example but similar. Ontario drivers are quite tame in gridlock and dense urban traffic and from day to day varry on the highways, sometimes averaging 110 or 130 on highways for no apparent reason, but despite this still drive in the passing lanes and still make consistantly poor entry and exits off highways. The funny part is that their faults or poor or even random seaming habbits are actually quite predictable. At times I do 130 on the way home and I am flying past everyone, other times I am barely creeping up on anyone, but once the "mood" of the traffic that day is assessed, there seems to be a fairly consistant behavior.
I wouldn't at all describe Toronto driving as all over the map and dangerous or unpredictable.
For example I don't much rely on turn signals from cars. Often drivers leave them on, use the wrong side, or don't signal at all. To me that IS predictable. So i rely on other indicators which are more predictable, such as wheel orientation, likelihood of a vehicle looking to get ahead into a gap in the next lane, speed differentials, behavior near off ramps (like the westbound gardener, qew, 427 cross over) etc. These instead are much better indicators.
I am not sure why Ontario is played up as this biker Mad Max hell zone. This forum definately has a distinct character that is not represented out there in the real riding world.
I'm not really sure if that's much of a point. How many downtown roads have these? (I'm gonna know every single road that you'd name) The ones that you NEED to be on to get somewhere all have no standing signs during rush hour. There are really only a handful of roads with consistent parked cars along the core of downtown and there are so many pedestrians waiting to j-walk + cars pulling out + people getting out of their cars that it could be said to be just as dangerous as low-speed, careful splitting/filtering.
Zipping into an open spot isn't always safe, either. I could argue that it's just as dangerous as really careful lane-splitting. Cars do a shoulder check and don't expect you to be there that quick. There are instances where one method's safer than the other, but I don't think it's that clear cut. The only difference is that spltting/filtering's illegal. But I think arguments for safety are very questionable when we're talking about downtown. I've had to swerve back into my lane from some dude gunning it for the same gap in traffic more times than I've had to press my horn at a car changing lanes while I'm splitting.
You really haven't spent much time in the Law & HTA forum, have you?
The discussion wasn't about the stupidity of the law but rather about the illegality of lane splitting/filtering, and the danger of doing it.
You can't hold the moral high ground, while simultaneously undermining the hill that you stand on. This thread isn't about them. It's about US.
I find Quebecois to be predictable, in that they are fairly uniformly aggressive drivers. Ontario drivers vary from simply vacant, to very bad, to insanely aggressive. That's why they aren't predictable.
Last edited:
And, ultimately, that's the point. One is legal. The other isn't. To those who say, "I don't give a damn what other people think. I'm going to do what I want" I say in response, "I don't care about you, because you make the rest of us look bad. I'd give you up in a heartbeat."
Sure, just like running red lights can be done safely, right?
- Status
