|
|
|
Clarification on lane splitting?
- Thread starter mistersouthpaw
- Start date
Riceburner
Well-known member
That's the grey zone to operate in.
There was another thread that dealt about the "riding in same lane as parked cars"
It was deemed that it was legal. And honestly, if the lane was wider, cars would be doing it too... Just like cars will turn right at an intersection if there's enough space even if there's already a car in the lane.
I think if i remember well, it has to be a lane of immobilized vehicles and there's has to be enough space not to make it a squeeze.
Personally i don't need to venture on those streets often but when i do, i definitely use those parking lanes. If i see ahead that there's a truck or something obstructing the way i'll stay with the left lane traffic until i pass it so i don't end up cutting someone off at that obstacle....
Obviously that's me and how i do it... but so far haven't gotten in trouble.
It was deemed that it was legal. And honestly, if the lane was wider, cars would be doing it too... Just like cars will turn right at an intersection if there's enough space even if there's already a car in the lane.
I think if i remember well, it has to be a lane of immobilized vehicles and there's has to be enough space not to make it a squeeze.
Personally i don't need to venture on those streets often but when i do, i definitely use those parking lanes. If i see ahead that there's a truck or something obstructing the way i'll stay with the left lane traffic until i pass it so i don't end up cutting someone off at that obstacle....
Obviously that's me and how i do it... but so far haven't gotten in trouble.
Probably best to head back to the MTO and turn in your what... M1 or G1? Then.. keep reading the handbook and re-take the test when you're ready...
Alex_San
Well-known member
If more of us would do it, society would just accept it and it would become the "norm". Filtering is not "legal" in many jurisdictions around the world, however it is accepted (see California, where it was only formally legalized just now). So no, I don't see filtering as self entitlement. Self entitlement is the big a** suv who blocks a rider from filtering because...well...self entitlement. A rider going to the front of the line safely does NOT delay anyone, on the contrary, so I fail to see where the self entitlement is on the rider's part.
If the law is such that you can't split/filter.. then if I have to sit in my SUV in traffic, so do you. You must be quite self-entitled to think you are able break the law and filter through past everyone. Do that at the grocery store waiting in line? At nasuem, etc.. etc..
I'd simply stick with this... go ahead and filter/split. Do it safely. Do it as responsibly as you believe you can. However, know full well that it's illegal, and if you get caught or get in an accident or someone gets mad at you/tries to block your path realize you don't have a leg to stand on. Shut your trap and carry on.
In the above, "you," does not equal anyone in particular.
Alex_San
Well-known member
At the grocery store you DO delay everyone if you go in front. By filtering, you do NOT, on the contrary, so your analogy does not apply.
It was not a question if it's legal or not. My point was about what's socially acceptable, and laws and more importantly enforcement derive from that.
That's an assumption that's usually argued with "I'll move away faster" or "bikes generally out-accelerate cars".
You're moving in front of traffic that was ahead of you, simply because you fit. If the rules of the road are to be interpreted as "survival of the fittest" then we don't need rules. Faster vehicles will get to go first - or at least the drivers/riders that are willing to take the most risks will get to go first. The right of way would actually become the right of weight.
The point is that however miniscule the delay, the principle is the same - you're moving ahead of a line of traffic that you don't explicitly have the right to move ahead of. It's also contrary to our social norms, which is, in my opinion, the biggest reason it isn't allowed.
I posted what I thought was a well reasoned argument about motorcycles in HOV lanes based on safety. While there are not studies to support or dispute my assertion, I believe that IF a lane already exists that has a shoulder on one side and limited access on the other side, it would be a safer lane of traffic for motorcycles than than the other lanes on that road. Ostensibly, this should work because there is legally less access to the lane (ignore bad driving and mistakes, they happen no matter what the rules are, so they are statistically irrelevant for comparison.) I expected people would disagree. What I didn't expect was so many riders to dismiss it out of hand as a play at getting some form of privilege, but that's what happened.
I think filtering through stopped traffic has some merit, but not now, and not unless it is more socially acceptable. When you get up to the front of the line, with a vehicle on each side of you on a two lane road - what happens when the light changes? You have to outrun them. Or you wait so you don't move off between them....but the next guys don't know why you're waiting and have no intention of waiting for you and you may end up beside them. If other motorists think we're taking advantage (i.e. cutting in front of them) then we can't expect them to respect us. It has to be explicitly legal, or more socially acceptable. I would have added "or in extreme circumstances, when those people would be thinking of doing the same if they could fit...". I'm not going to add that, because I see people splitting and filtering as soon as traffic slows down, and I think that shows a lack of discretion and a willingness to consider the slightest delay as a "severe traffic jam".
Alex_San
Well-known member
That is precisely the social norm I was talking about. 90% of the world allows filtering, because yes, bikes do accelerate faster from the light and can use the space between cars.
I simply do not understand how am I showing disrespect to the cagers around me if I am filtering slowly on the DVP when the traffic is completely stalled. Why do you, in a cage, feel the need to hunk your horn at me in despair for doing it (or worse, maneuvering to block me)? Are you getting home later because of me? Or are you being a concerned citizen trying to uphold the law? By that token, I would presume that if tomorrow we'll legalize filtering you'll be completely ok with it?
Bikes are not cars, they should not be treated the same.
Note I am talking about filtering, not splitting at high speeds.
There's no way to test your cute little theory, without putting motorcyclists in harm's way.
So just be a good chap, and follow the rules like all of the other nice people.
And for goodness sake. Stop making stuff up. It reflects poorly upon you.
Alex_San
Well-known member
I am a good chap, and I follow the rules, I do not filter or split. I am talking about the idea of filtering, and about the fact that I think that the law is wrong. I am not simply drinking the government koolaid like you do, progress is made when status quo is challenged, even if it's only on a forum thread.
Riceburner
Well-known member
Filtering is self-entitled only because of the "me first" mentality in NA. If you weren't pre-occupied about being first in line, letting bikes go ahead and getting out of your way would actually help you get to your destination faster as that bike isn't holding up a half car length in the line.
fify
The self entitlement works both ways. Like I said above.
Testing that cute little theory about bikes not holding up cars, would put the motorcyclists in harm's way.
In some parts of the world, that would be considered o.k.
Then again, in some parts, cars and trucks filter and split as well.
I've never had someone filter in front of me that didn't hold me up.
Should I have just run them down to prove the theory wrong-headed?
mistersouthpaw
Well-known member
Lol ok? I'll head right over
Last edited:
Thank you. Surely, by now you've read and re-read your original post to see what I'm getting at. Your questions shouldn't be questions. With a license to operate a motor-vehicle you should know the answer to those 3 very basic rules of the road.
sonyminidiscman
Well-known member
LOL... the G1 and M1 are jokes. I went to chapters and sat on the floor reading it for 30 min and went to take the test... and passed. It doesn't even come close to letting drivers know whats really in the HTA. Most drivers in GTA need to hand their license in.
I bet you in the handbook, it does not mention that if its one wide lane, and all the cars are stopped had their signal for turning left, you can legally use the right side of the road to keep going straight.
sonyminidiscman
Well-known member
I filter and don't get mad when someone tries to move their car to block me. If they move to the left, I simply go to their right and laugh cause I know the guy is fuming...... lol...
Lots of cagers feels entitled. How about those passing lane squatters? Just cause they think they are "fast enough" going 120, they think they have the right to stay there. I don't feel the least bit guilty when all the cars are stuck and I am filtering thru, blame it on the guy that approved closing one lane on finch to repave during RUSH HOUR (no, its not an emergency repair. Its just that they want to repave it...)
Sorry mate you lost ALL credibility when you posted these two VERY contradictory statements.
Note I am talking about filtering, not splitting at high speeds.
I simply do not understand how am I showing disrespect to the cagers around me if I am filtering slowly on the DVP when the traffic is completely stalled.
That is NOT filtering that is LANE SPLITTING. Lane splitting need not only be a "high speed" maneuver. Riding between two lanes of traffic on a roadway, where there are NO traffic control devices, (stop sign or traffic light at an intersection), is LANE SPLITTING.
So by your logi of making things "socially acceptable by having large numbers of people doing it" if I get enough people to start stealing from a store then it should "should" by your logic become okay? Sure it is illegal, but if great numbers do it then social should just suck it up?
There are "acceptable" ways of getting a law changed, and then there is the "self entitled" way.., You are advocating the self entitled way, NOT the proper, (socially accepted) way, which is by lobbying the law makers to change the law. Self entitled way is to simply say I believe this law is sh*t and therefore I choose to break it in hopes it will get changed by my illegal behaviour.
So yes you are self entitled, (or at least your acting like you are).
Note I am talking about filtering, not splitting at high speeds.
I simply do not understand how am I showing disrespect to the cagers around me if I am filtering slowly on the DVP when the traffic is completely stalled.
That is NOT filtering that is LANE SPLITTING. Lane splitting need not only be a "high speed" maneuver. Riding between two lanes of traffic on a roadway, where there are NO traffic control devices, (stop sign or traffic light at an intersection), is LANE SPLITTING.
So by your logi of making things "socially acceptable by having large numbers of people doing it" if I get enough people to start stealing from a store then it should "should" by your logic become okay? Sure it is illegal, but if great numbers do it then social should just suck it up?
There are "acceptable" ways of getting a law changed, and then there is the "self entitled" way.., You are advocating the self entitled way, NOT the proper, (socially accepted) way, which is by lobbying the law makers to change the law. Self entitled way is to simply say I believe this law is sh*t and therefore I choose to break it in hopes it will get changed by my illegal behaviour.
So yes you are self entitled, (or at least your acting like you are).
Actually if it is a single lane road, NO you can NOT use the right side of the road legally to go straight. Feel free to post the section of the HTA that permits this. You WILL find a section in the HTA that states it is ILLEGAL for two vehicles to occupy the same lane at the same time, (which is what your saying is legal to do). Please come back when you have a proper argument, not one that advocates illegal activities as being legal. That is why it isn't as you did state correctly in the driver's handbook....lol
|
|
|
|
|