Ah, the ancient art of the partial quote lol.
So up to 40% of the accidents were caused by splitting.
damn we need lane splitting
- Thread starter chiller
- Start date
Ah, the ancient art of the partial quote lol.
So up to 40% of the accidents were caused by splitting.
bobjohnson
Well-known member
Thats a ****** quote based on whats basically irrelevant data that the journalist found on the CHP website. Saying that 40% of accidents are caused by lanesplitting and using that data to back it up is like saying 100% of violent crime is caused by interacting with people since the violent criminals in every case interacted in some way with their victims. Its a true statistic but its completely meaningless to use it that way.
Considering the report was done 4 years ago in SF, id say the report is analogous to toronto type traffic, heavy stop and go city traffic. The quotes from drivers are also ridiculous. The 2 complaints are either they think motorcycles should wait in line (again, why? get a bike if youre so jealous) or that the drivers dont want to pay attention. "A biker scared me by lane splitting and almost caused me to have an accident!". Heres an idea, check your mirrors and do a shoulder check before making a lane change in gridlock, becuase the same thing could happen if the car behind you decided to gas it and pop into that empty spot.
The california style law would be perfect here, 10-15mph faster than traffic. Any faster than that, its ticket time for dangerous driving according to the cops discretion. And you guys do realise that even if filtering or lane splitting were made legal, if youre not comfortable doing it or dont feel safe doing it, youre not FORCED to do it? Its still a choice you can make depending on the circumstances.
And no, i dont split with a passenger, but i generally wouldnt take a passenger on my bike during rush hour anyway because rush hour riding is more dangerous just due to the volume of cars on the road. And if i had kids i wouldnt take my kid to the downtown core at 9am or 5pm for a cruise on the bike...
Unfortunately that's a typical journalistic bait-&-switch. No statement is made that the incidents actually occurred, while lane splitting, but rather the comment VAGUELY LINKS the behaviour to lane splitting. It's the sort of practise, used by irresponsible journalists who are looking to make a name, to try and foster opposition for a position. Those who use it don't belong in the 'news' business.
ddusseld
Well-known member
Everybody is missing the big picture. I lane split pretty much every day heading home down Church. It saves me 5-10 minutes in time but that is not why I lane split. I lane split to "save the children". You see, I idle much less and therefore I'm helping the environment. If I'm helping the environment I'm "saving the children". How can anybody argue against "saving the children"?.....
I also checked the Hurt report that was cited as saying that lane splitting is safer. There is nothing about lane splitting in the report. Here is a later interview of Harry Hurt by David Hough supporting this view.
Here is the way I picture people splitting when everyone is trying to get to work:
[video=youtube;_GH8D2EqDZs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GH8D2EqDZs"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GH8D2EqDZs[/video]
Imagine if that happened on the Gardiner, the road would be down for hours.
Oh, and when I googled "california lanes splitting crashes" 6 of the first 10 replies were for law firms.
What about insurance companies? Would it also be a bonus day for them? Would rates for motorcycles go up or down? Would you stop if you accidentally break someone's mirror as you are required to?
I like to have my lane to myself on a motorcycle. If I start acting like a bicycle, I would expect to start getting treated as one.
Finally, lane splitting is illegal in most parts of the world. Lane sharing isn't. Here's "the definitive lanesharing thread"" from BARF http://www.bayarearidersforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154980&highlight=laneSharing
Here is the way I picture people splitting when everyone is trying to get to work:
[video=youtube;_GH8D2EqDZs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GH8D2EqDZs"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GH8D2EqDZs[/video]
Imagine if that happened on the Gardiner, the road would be down for hours.
Oh, and when I googled "california lanes splitting crashes" 6 of the first 10 replies were for law firms.
What about insurance companies? Would it also be a bonus day for them? Would rates for motorcycles go up or down? Would you stop if you accidentally break someone's mirror as you are required to?
I like to have my lane to myself on a motorcycle. If I start acting like a bicycle, I would expect to start getting treated as one.
Finally, lane splitting is illegal in most parts of the world. Lane sharing isn't. Here's "the definitive lanesharing thread"" from BARF http://www.bayarearidersforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154980&highlight=laneSharing
compare california to texas and florida, all have a similar riding season (year round) but california has fewer deaths (30%) caused by a motorcyclist being rear ended due to the fact you can lane split...
Crashtest
Well-known member
That guy was riding too fast in stopped traffic, and really should have noticed that van, as it had its signal lights on. Bike's fully at fault.
Are you so sure that the difference can be attributed to being able to lane split?
According to 2009 NHTSA stats, Texas at 1.33 fatalities per 100 Million Vehicle Miles travelled has a 40% higher traffic fatality rate across the board when compared to California, which sits at .95 fatalities per 100 Million Vehicle Miles travelled. Anyone on the road in Texas has a much better chance of being smoked in a crash than their counterpart in California.
California also has a mandatory motorcycle helmet law. Texas does not. That alone could account for the difference in death rate. Put helmets on all Texas riders and then compare fatality stats.
Last edited:
That study didn't differentiate between who was rear ending who (i.e. motorcycles running into the back of other vehicles and vice versa).
The van did pull across a white+2 yellow lines whatever that means, but the rider could have prevented the accident.
My fears for lane sharing are:
Motorcyclists around here aren't trained well enough in basic riding on the road to be able to split appropriately,
Other drivers are not trained likewise,
There aren't enough alternate routes when accidents occur,
Poorer and younger riders would no longer be able to afford to ride,
Current legislation is going in the totally opposite direction e.g. "street racing".
Are you so sure that the difference can be attributed to being able to lane split?
More 2009 NHTSA stats http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-30/ncsa/STSI/USA WEB REPORT.HTM , which has direct bearing on any attempt to compare California and Texas motorcycle fatality stats given the differences in helmet laws where in California helmets are mandatory while in Texas they are not.
California
Total motorcycle fatalities - 394
Rider was wearing a helmet - 342
Rider not wearing a helmet - 46
Unknown if helmet was worn - 6
Texas
Total motorcycle fatalities - 426
Rider was wearing a helmet - 147
Rider not wearing a helmet - 275
Unknown if helmet was worn - 4
So how again does one say with any certainty that lane splitting in CA is the reason why fatalties are lower there as compared to TX?
And what other factors are different in TX, such as having significantly higher speed limits than CA, that might also contribute to higher motorcycle fatality stats regardless of crash circumstance? Comparisons in experimental results tend to work best when all variables other than the ONE being tested are controlled.
Last edited:
looking at some of the countries that allow lane splitting you have to wonder what training they have that we don't
accidents already occur
why would poorer younger riders not be able to ride? if the stats show fewer accidents shouldn't rates go down?
no one is asking for carte blanche to travel at any speed in between traffic.
Last edited:
Odd that no one has yet pointed out that the Minivan crossed the solid white line. Two wrongs don't make a right, the rider is traveling to fast for conditions.
What I see are the differences between California and Ontario with respect to motorcycle riding is awareness. People here are very aware that motorcycles are around them; it helps you can ride 12 month a year vs 6 or 7. The DOT also changes the electronic signs to read "Share the Road - Motorcycles are all around you" or something similar. I see these all the time.
Most folks I know who ride are aware of the dangers of lane sharing and ride cautiously when doing so. They are also good at reading traffic conditions and getting a sense of when you can share or filter, and when you shouldn't. Again awareness is the key.
Where I see this played out is when out of state folks come here and start lane sharing because it is cool. They weave in and out of cars, ride more than ~ 20 mph faster than the other traffic, don't respect yellow lines etc. I have said it before just because you can do it, doesn't mean you should.
Awareness of so many factors is the key to safe lane sharing; Torontonians would eventually get it, but it would take some time (and sadly probably a few lives as well).
our electric signs say watch out for motorcyclists too, dunno if many people read them. wanted to get a pic but i was driving
Are riders not on smaller displacement bikes and have on road training there? I'm pretty sure that that's the case in England.
I would anticipate that the insurance companies would see it as more potential risk and raise their rates accordingly. Right now there are many people who could not ride if they wanted to for financial reasons and I don't see lane sharing decreasing that number. Uncertainty = Risk.
The problem is that there are no conclusive stats. Back to Uncertainty = Risk.
I guess the next question is where? Should it be limited to only certain highways/streets? In the downtown core there are some diamond lanes that motorcycles can use, can't they?
The 401 and DVP are kind of isolated and every accident affects 1000s of people. Someone could talk to the 407 people - it might be good public relations for them.
Lakeshore maybe? But it doesn't usually get that bad unless there is an accident or the Exhibition.
White+2 yellow whatever that means (HOV lane maybe?). Who knows what the rules are for crossing in and out of those. Here you can only go in and out on the dotted lines.
1WheelDrive
Active member
Sorry, that was my bad. It wasn't my intention to twist the meaning of what you wrote. That's just how I interpreted it in my head. Regardless, the spirit of what you're trying to say didn't change. Equating the two statements is still equally rediculous to me with or without the "up to" part included.
For the record: You're right, the report itself never explicitly said it was "safe" to split/filter (semantics aside) lanes. It merely implicated that splitting/filtering "wasn't a factor" in the 900 accidents in his report and I'm 100% sure he was looking for ANY factor that might cause a motorcycle accident. That's good enough for me, since that's seemingly all the data we have right now.
Uncertaincy may equal risk, but that's not to say it can't be managed.
All that said, I agree with you... Toronto isn't ready for lane splitting today, but maybe tomorrow with the right steps taken.
Legally, the van was at fault - you're not allowed to cross the double yellow. According to the video notes, the rider got "a nice settlement".
Why not ? It seemed to be a "real" discussion and not a bunch of mud slinging
In many countries that allow lane splitting automatic cars are the rarity and not the norm so most people have driven a car at least knowing how to manipulate a clutch with accelerator and gears and brakes, that's actually a pretty significant skill if you think about it. Many young motorcycle riders on this forum have probably never had to deal with a clutch before they rode their first bike.
This is only an explanation for a few counties mind, doesn't explain poorer nations where motorcycles might be the first and only transport for a person or California where automatic cars are the norm.
