For those of you who filter

[Rob MacLennan]

Forum Sponsor

Dude, I split and filter regularly. But the fact is I have been warned about it by a cop, and there is a damn law case stickied in the law section regarding this issue. -__-

The law is AGAINST your side in the event of an accident that occurs with you filter or splitting. Hell, I doubt even insurance will side with you.

If somebody purposely moved out last minute to hit you and wipe you out, I'm not sure if you could even charge them unless you went into civil court and tried to move that they had the intent to murder/hurt you.

First you'd even have to prove that you were the reason why someone changed positions within his own lane.

 

[caboose56]

What aaaaaaaaare you talking about?!?! Do you understand the characteristics of a motorcycle as compared to that of a car's?

What do you do, if the car ahead of you in a red light queue is slightly slow to respond and opens a gap of a car length or two? Do you ram them or cuss at them?

You got some issues bud. How do you sleep at night when a car merges into your lane, thus taking up a spot ahead of you? The inside of your cage must be a steamy seathing hot sweaty suana of rage; how do you even see through your fogged windscreen with all that rage of yours?

Your character extrapolation is utterly retarded.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

 

[awyala]

It will take a lot more than the legalization of filtering to turn the GTA into a moto friendly environment.

Climate change, for starters. Once a moto becomes a practical year-round vehicle you might be able to build a case for making the GTA more moto friendly.

Until then you're just a selfish dick cutting in line.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

Maybe you're some kind of weekend warrior on your "recreational vehicle" but I for one ride as long as snow isn't accumulating on the ground. I ride even when snow is falling. Aside from 2 weeks last winter I was on the road commuting. Guess I am even selfishly taking up space just being out there eh?

That argument makes no sense! If it is legal, and space is available it is fine! If after the light turns green, a car passes another car, gets in front and they all stop again at the next red light, you would consider this selfish??!?!?! One car just passed another, got in front and kept the formerly lead car 1 whole car length from the lead at the next light. This is selfish to you? Or this is legal?

I have every damn right to get in front of any other vehicle as long as there is space, I do it within the law, and it is safe! You are simply confusing informal etiquette of a line with traffic rules, and then advocating criminal vigilantism to enforced matters which are not even law!!!

 

[caboose56]

Maybe you're some kind of weekend warrior on your "recreational vehicle" but I for one ride as long as snow isn't accumulating on the ground. I ride even when snow is falling. Aside from 2 weeks last winter I was on the road commuting. Guess I am even selfishly taking up space just being out there eh?

That argument makes no sense! If it is legal, and space is available it is fine! If after the light turns green, a car passes another car, gets in front and they all stop again at the next red light, you would consider this selfish??!?!?! One car just passed another, got in front and kept the formerly lead car 1 whole car length from the lead at the next light. This is selfish to you? Or this is legal?

I have every damn right to get in front of any other vehicle as long as there is space, I do it within the law, and it is safe! You are simply confusing informal etiquette of a line with traffic rules, and then advocating criminal vigilantism to enforced matters which are not even law!!!

I am advocating nothing of the sort.

Do you think that everyone who disagrees with you is an infantile rage-aholic?

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

 

[kickstartt]

Maybe you're some kind of weekend warrior on your "recreational vehicle" but I for one ride as long as snow isn't accumulating on the ground. I ride even when snow is falling. Aside from 2 weeks last winter I was on the road commuting. Guess I am even selfishly taking up space just being out there eh?

That argument makes no sense! If it is legal, and space is available it is fine! If after the light turns green, a car passes another car, gets in front and they all stop again at the next red light, you would consider this selfish??!?!?! One car just passed another, got in front and kept the formerly lead car 1 whole car length from the lead at the next light. This is selfish to you? Or this is legal?

I have every damn right to get in front of any other vehicle as long as there is space, I do it within the law, and it is safe! You are simply confusing informal etiquette of a line with traffic rules, and then advocating criminal vigilantism to enforced matters which are not even law!!!

I am advocating nothing of the sort.

Do you think that everyone who disagrees with you is an infantile rage-aholic?

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

Guys... its a simple matter... filter at ur own will... all the consequences of the law have been repeated enough. Stop wasting ur times arguing over something so pointless, geez

 

[ZX600]

Once AGAIN yes! See my Lakeshore and Kipling reference once again for the "if" situation you are refering to. Sheesh. I answered this 3 times already.

As long as the cars you are passing are not actually moving, you are not violating HTA 140, to "filter" past them. It is also wise to make sure your car has the power to accelerate and out pace the other cars because at some point you will likely need to pull in front. Even in the Lakeshore Kipling example, often that space in the right lane will become consumed by parked cars within 40 to 50m of the intersection. So in that instance, with enough space, no cars approaching the intersection, and enough HP to accelerate past the lead cars and merge back into the right lane, if it can all be done in safety, then YES I would filter in a 4 wheeled vehicle.

Motorcycles on the other hand dramatically increase the number of situations where this is safe and feasible, and legal.

ahhhhh nope

 

[awyala]

Dude, I split and filter regularly. But the fact is I have been warned about it by a cop, and there is a damn law case stickied in the law section regarding this issue. -__-

Bunda yes I know. Look more indepth into why he was charged and you will find a number of technical issues as well as his own sabotaging of his defence by conflicting testimony. Read the transcript carefully. Take the time if you care to.

The law is AGAINST your side in the event of an accident that occurs with you filter or splitting. Hell, I doubt even insurance will side with you.

The insurance argument is an interesting one as splitting became legal in the UK due to 2 insurance rulings, 1 in the 70s followed by 1 in 2006. In both cases insurance found the driver involved in the accident partially culpable, and the latter case, both were 50% culpable. It was due to these 2 insurance case rulings that the law was clarified, explicitly ALLOWING splitting! Look into it before you sweepingly suggest insurance precedent will never be on the side of filtering.

If somebody purposely moved out last minute to hit you and wipe you out, I'm not sure if you could even charge them unless you went into civil court and tried to move that they had the intent to murder/hurt you.

So that act is ok then? The often used cop argument..."someone will turn out and try and hit you, or open their door" has been rebutted by me several times with "then use your time better to enforce criminal violations or offenders of 165, before coming after me where I have not broken the law". Of course it is worded in a more respectful tone but that usually ends that argument. It is like charging someone for counting their money near a bank machine. Sure it carries risk, but the offence is that of the thief who mugs you. You cannot charge the victim with "enticement" and classify the thief as "acting accordingly". If cops want to warn us and caution us, fine, but to prosecute us where we have no broken the law, this is wrong.

See above

 

[Riceburner]

+1 ...filter at your own risk. It currently is illegal.

...and even if it was legal you will still get lots of ppl here that will get ticked cause you got in front.

 

[caboose56]

+1 ...filter at your own risk. It currently is illegal.

...and even if it was legal you will still get lots of ppl here that will get ticked cause you got in front.

Careful.. someone here might think you're advocating an angry response!

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

 

[awyala]

I am advocating nothing of the sort.

Do you think that everyone who disagrees with you is an infantile rage-aholic?

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

Your words:

"Legal or not. Most people will view it as you cutting in line and will react accordingly. Some will just mutter under their breath, some will honk and swear at you, others might cut you off and some might try to hit you."


YOU HAVE QUANTIFIED THE RESPONSE OF TRYING TO HIT A PERSON WHO FILTERED AS "ACCORDINGLY". YOU SIR HAVE ADVOCATED IT AS JUST, FAIR, AND A MATTER OF COURSE. YOU ARE WRONG ON EVERY LEVEL IN THIS CASE. I have not incorrectly characterized you. You have characterized yourself or misused language in a poor attempt to justify your position.

ac·cord·ing·ly

   /əˈkɔrdɪŋli/ Show Spelled[uh-kawr-ding-lee] Show IPA
adverb 1. therefore; so; in due course.

2. in accordance; correspondingly.

due

   /du, dyu/ Show Spelled[doo, dyoo] Show IPA
adjective 1. owed at present; having reached the date for payment: This bill is due.

2. owing or owed, irrespective of whether the time of payment has arrived: This bill is due next month.

3. owing or observed as a moral or natural right.

4. rightful; proper; fitting: due care; in due time.

5. adequate; sufficient: a due margin for delay.




...now man up and retract or perhaps appear infantile in your poor execution or your stubborness.

 

[LePhillou]

You should ask the population

"If lane splitting can reduce you commute time, would you like that it be legal"

If people agree make it legal so people dnot get in trouble
End of story.

If the population isnt ready for it...well ... i guess we still have to evolve

 

[caboose56]

Your words:

"Legal or not. Most people will view it as you cutting in line and will react accordingly. Some will just mutter under their breath, some will honk and swear at you, others might cut you off and some might try to hit you."


YOU HAVE QUANTIFIED THE RESPONSE OF TRYING TO HIT A PERSON WHO FILTERED AS "ACCORDINGLY". YOU SIR HAVE ADVOCATED IT AS JUST, FAIR, AND A MATTER OF COURSE. YOU ARE WRONG ON EVERY LEVEL IN THIS CASE. I have not incorrectly characterized you. You have characterized yourself or misused language in a poor attempt to justify your position.

ac·cord·ing·ly

   /əˈkɔrdɪŋli/ Show Spelled[uh-kawr-ding-lee] Show IPA
adverb 1. therefore; so; in due course.

2. in accordance; correspondingly.

due

   /du, dyu/ Show Spelled[doo, dyoo] Show IPA
adjective 1. owed at present; having reached the date for payment: This bill is due.

2. owing or owed, irrespective of whether the time of payment has arrived: This bill is due next month.

3. owing or observed as a moral or natural right.

4. rightful; proper; fitting: due care; in due time.

5. adequate; sufficient: a due margin for delay.

Their response (muttering, honking, trying to hit you, etc) is what they consider 'reacting accordingly'. I'm merely suggesting how other drivers can and will react to filtering.

Calm down.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

 

[kickstartt]

Their response (muttering, honking, trying to hit you, etc) is what they consider 'reacting accordingly'. I'm merely suggesting how other drivers can and will react to filtering.

Calm down.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

buy him a lap dance, problem solved

 

[Riceburner]

You should ask the population

"If lane splitting can reduce you commute time, would you like that it be legal"

If people agree make it legal so people dnot get in trouble
End of story.

If the population isnt ready for it...well ... i guess we still have to evolve

Big Brother will say no it's not safe for us.... Doesn't matter what millions of ppl across the pond do.

 

[Riceburner]

buy him a lap dance, problem solved

and if he reacts accordingly, he'll get kicked out....or propositioned. :lmao:

 

[kickstartt]

Big Brother will say no it's not safe for us.... Doesn't matter what millions of ppl across the pond do.

It is not safe for motorcyclist, thats why they made it illegal, its all for ur own good.
So just filter at ur own will/risk... I do it when i think its safe. Wats there to argue...

 

[caboose56]

buy him a lap dance, problem solved

and if he reacts accordingly, he'll get kicked out....or propositioned. :lmao:

Ha!!

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

 

[Brian]

Several drivers at a red light have motorcycle filter past them. They each now have an additional delay for one extra vehicle in front of them to start moving. There's even a good chance that a driver will not get through that green light who otherwise would have and now has to wait another cycle.

These drivers should be thankful that the rider is helping relieve congestion? Ok buddy!

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

I can tell you that's not how it works over here in California in congested traffic/rush hour. Car drivers don't wait for the motorcycle to clear the way before starting off, so there is no 'additional delay'. When I lane share, everyone starts moving at approximately the same time. The difference is that most motorcycles can accelerate much faster than most cars.

Also, in cases where traffic is completely stopped (or moving very slowly), lane sharing allows motorcyclists to not add to the number of stopped cars. The best example is when a traffic light is green, but cars cannot proceed because traffic is backed up right to the intersection. In this case, if motorcycles are allowed to lane share, then more vehicles can make it past the intersection. If lane sharing was not allowed and motorcyclists had to 'wait in line', the end result would be fewer total vehicles that would be able to make it past the intersection.

Think of it like adding additional lanes. If a road has too much traffic on it, adding additional lanes will reduce congestion (short term - I'm not talking about long term where traffic volume will increase to use up the added capacity). It's the same thing with lane sharing - by making lane sharing legal, you have essentially doubled the number of lanes available to motorcyclists. The amount of congestion that you reduce is proportional to the number of motorcycles on the road, so you gain more benefit by having more people on motorcycles.

 

[LePhillou]

It is not safe for motorcyclist, thats why they made it illegal, its all for ur own good.
So just filter at ur own will/risk... I do it when i think its safe. Wats there to argue...

Everything

 

[tricky]

Your words:

"Legal or not. Most people will view it as you cutting in line and will react accordingly. Some will just mutter under their breath, some will honk and swear at you, others might cut you off and some might try to hit you."


YOU HAVE QUANTIFIED THE RESPONSE OF TRYING TO HIT A PERSON WHO FILTERED AS "ACCORDINGLY". YOU SIR HAVE ADVOCATED IT AS JUST, FAIR, AND A MATTER OF COURSE. YOU ARE WRONG ON EVERY LEVEL IN THIS CASE. I have not incorrectly characterized you. You have characterized yourself or misused language in a poor attempt to justify your position.

ac·cord·ing·ly

   /əˈkɔrdɪŋli/ Show Spelled[uh-kawr-ding-lee] Show IPA
adverb 1. therefore; so; in due course.

2. in accordance; correspondingly.

due

   /du, dyu/ Show Spelled[doo, dyoo] Show IPA
adjective 1. owed at present; having reached the date for payment: This bill is due.

2. owing or owed, irrespective of whether the time of payment has arrived: This bill is due next month.

3. owing or observed as a moral or natural right.

4. rightful; proper; fitting: due care; in due time.

5. adequate; sufficient: a due margin for delay.




...now man up and retract or perhaps appear infantile in your poor execution or your stubborness.

I don't know why I'm tapping into this **** show but that "accordingly" would be with respect to the person who felt wronged by the filtering..... not caboose483's idea of accordingly......

In my opinion, when people start arguing semantics and busting out dictionary definitions, an argument is long past dead

Forum Sponsor