It's FILTERING, NOT lane splitting!

[ItalStal]

I see scooters and e-bikes doing this all the time, where downtown you have 2 lanes; left lane with slow/moving traffice and right lane with cars parked.

Would this be lane splitting or filtering? Illegal or not... I see motorcycles do it all the time, and I do myself. I'm always looking for the popo while doing it but wonder if they see me couldent I just pretend like I was parking the bike in between cars?

 

[Torcida]

I see scooters and e-bikes doing this all the time, where downtown you have 2 lanes; left lane with slow/moving traffice and right lane with cars parked.

Would this be lane splitting or filtering? Illegal or not... I see motorcycles do it all the time, and I do myself. I'm always looking for the popo while doing it but wonder if they see me couldent I just pretend like I was parking the bike in between cars?

You are allowed to share a lane with a parked vehicle, I believe. And I would guess that's "splitting" (though I wouldn't call it that) since filtering is more moving to the front of traffic while it is stopped.

 

[jonpurdy]

You are allowed to share a lane with a parked vehicle, I believe. And I would guess that's "splitting" (though I wouldn't call it that) since filtering is more moving to the front of traffic while it is stopped.

It's legal. And it wouldn't be filtering or splitting because you've got your own lane with no moving vehicle in it.

Anyone who gets upset about motorcyclists passing them should take anger management classes. Seriously.

 

[spinto]

It's legal. And it wouldn't be filtering or splitting because you've got your own lane with no moving vehicle in it.

Anyone who gets upset about motorcyclists passing them should take anger management classes. Seriously.

I don't see anywhere in the HTA where it says it is legal, that being said, i would it's reasonable to assume so since no one is at risk and there are laws about opening your door into oncoming traffic. The question is though...what if its in the same lane? Shouldn't the parked car have the right to space in his lane??

Regarding motorcycles passing in the same lane....why should i have to endure the anguish if i hit him changing lanes because some moron wants move through traffic illegally? It's like those people who are so possessed texting while walking that i have to watch out for them when i'm walking....they end up on their ***.

 

[mindactivated]

I see scooters and e-bikes doing this all the time, where downtown you have 2 lanes; left lane with slow/moving traffice and right lane with cars parked.

Would this be lane splitting or filtering? Illegal or not... I see motorcycles do it all the time, and I do myself. I'm always looking for the popo while doing it but wonder if they see me couldent I just pretend like I was parking the bike in between cars?

It's legal, and it's neither splitting or filtering. I've had it verified by one of the motorcycle police officers at one of the motorcycle shows. That being said... (1) look out for door prizes, (2) look out for pedestrians trying to cross, (3) look out for bicycles, especially ones behind you when traffic is slow, (4) look out for psycho motorists who don't understand that it's legal to do this and try to cut you off. I've had this done to me with a passenger on the back, too.

When I do it, It's done with caution.

 

[mindactivated]

Here's one... ever decide to go down to the beach area during fireworks? Traffic is at an absolute standstill. I was trying to do the right thing and not filter, and even had a dude in a car tell me that he'd go between cars if he was me. I ended up just parking the motorcycle around the corner and walking the rest of the way to my destination. It seems that in that instance, where cars are at an absolute dead stop it could be argued to be safe to filter between cars at a very slow pace, say with your brakes on and in 1st gear... aside from even putting yourself in such a situation, would people here filter?

 

[jonpurdy]

I don't see anywhere in the HTA where it says it is legal, that being said, i would it's reasonable to assume so since no one is at risk and there are laws about opening your door into oncoming traffic. The question is though...what if its in the same lane? Shouldn't the parked car have the right to space in his lane??

Cars can share a lane with a parked car if there's space.

Regarding motorcycles passing in the same lane....why should i have to endure the anguish if i hit him changing lanes because some moron wants move through traffic illegally? It's like those people who are so possessed texting while walking that i have to watch out for them when i'm walking....they end up on their ***.

If a motorcyclist is not doing much over the rate of speed then you won't hit him if you check your mirrors and blind spot. And if you do hit him then the fault is the same as if you changed lanes and hit a car in the next lane. And anyone who whips by at much higher rates of speed would be at fault.

The system works really well in countries where it's legal; I've witnessed it first hand. I hope this helps.

Also thanks to those in the thread who stay civil during discussions and don't threaten to run motorcyclists over.

 

[awyala]

So couldn't it fall under the HTA 172?

I filter at jogging pace, not unsafe, and not exceeding the ability to the bike to brake even faster than a bicycle.

No police officer has ever threatened to quote 172 to me. I repeat I do not filter in moving traffic.

 

[awyala]

Can you pass a moving car in the same lane?

That's lane splitting. I am referring to filtering. The issue of moving vehicles invokes another HTA law about passing an (approaching) vehicle within 30 m of a pedestrian crossing, which would be illegal.

A cop tried to imply passing a stopped and closed street car at a red light was illegal until I correct his memory....an APPROACHING streetcar or vehicle.

Cops often incorrectly quote or incorrectly interpret HTA clauses.

 

[OpenGambit]

Its illegal,

people have been convicted for it.

People have been convicted under 172 for it.

You can read the HTA as much as you want and argue till you are blue in the face, but nothing will change the above, and as long as people can get convicted for it, its illegal.
Its really that simple. No lawyering required.

I personally don't think much of it, filtering or splitting. You can do it if you want, it doesn't bother me, just know that you can get a ticket for it, and in some cases a really fat one. I take the same view of people running from the cops.

 

[awyala]

I don't see anywhere in the HTA where it says it is legal, that being said, i would it's reasonable to assume so since no one is at risk and there are laws about opening your door into oncoming traffic. The question is though...what if its in the same lane? Shouldn't the parked car have the right to space in his lane??

Regarding motorcycles passing in the same lane....why should i have to endure the anguish if i hit him changing lanes because some moron wants move through traffic illegally? It's like those people who are so possessed texting while walking that i have to watch out for them when i'm walking....they end up on their ***.

Read again.

Attempt to cause me bodily harm with a deadly weapon and you face criminal charges. Succeed and you're the sort of scum that just ran down a long border.

Threaten like that again and you reveal your psychopathic nature. You need an education and psychiatric help.

 

[OpenGambit]

I don't see anywhere in the HTA where it says it is legal, that being said, i would it's reasonable to assume so since no one is at risk and there are laws about opening your door into oncoming traffic. The question is though...what if its in the same lane? Shouldn't the parked car have the right to space in his lane??

Regarding motorcycles passing in the same lane....why should i have to endure the anguish if i hit him changing lanes because some moron wants move through traffic illegally? It's like those people who are so possessed texting while walking that i have to watch out for them when i'm walking....they end up on their ***.

You have issues, internet tough guy.

 

[awyala]

Its illegal,

people have been convicted for it.

People have been convicted under 172 for it.



You can read the HTA as much as you want and argue till you are blue in the face, but nothing will change the above, and as long as people can get convicted for it, its illegal.
Its really that simple. No lawyering required.

I personally don't think much of it, filtering or splitting. You can do it if you want, it doesn't bother me, just know that you can get a ticket for it, and in some cases a really fat one. I take the same view of people running from the cops.

Its not, and citing the case of Mr. Bund again doesnt change that. We went over this Gambit. Bund squeezed by, wiggling his bike in a single lane. He admitted there wasn't sufficient room.

172 mongering is getting real old.

 

[OpenGambit]

Clearly you didn't read it well enough. I don't feel like repeating myself, people can believe who they want.

Maybe you can set up a hotline for when people get pulled over and they can call you to argue about it.

Whats getting really old is you beating a dead horse and giving people wrong information about whats legal and whats not.

PS. its Bunda.

 

[fastar1]

I guess I should have mentioned that by using a different term for it, the long term intention was a hope that it may be made legal in the future.

No, I think you were very clear that you were trying to encourage the use of a more positive term in the context of advocacy. I don't know how people misunderstood that but as I've come to learn; if they don't understand something the result is that they instantly and vociferously hate it. Welcome to the idiocracy.

 

[AF4iK]

No, I think you were very clear that you were trying to encourage the use of a more positive term in the context of advocacy. I don't know how people misunderstood that but as I've come to learn; if they don't understand something the result is that they instantly and vociferously hate it. Welcome to the idiocracy.

^ +1

As far as the legality of it, I don't know. But not a single one of the OP's opponents have stated anything that even resembles an intelligent counterpoint. Although I'm not convinced, the OP at least made a proper case with citations that have yet to be factually refuted.

I, for one, don't care whether it's legal or not. I'll do what I choose to do if I feel it's safe and reasonable to do so. At the end of the day, rules mean nothing. It comes down to individual choice. Most of the time that choice is in agreement with the rules but sometimes it's not. When it's not, be prepared to accept the consequences of not following the letter of the law even if you've abided by it's spirit. Those who choose to adhere unquestionably are free to do so as well, the rules were made for them.

 

[OpenGambit]

^ +1

As far as the legality of it, I don't know. But not a single one of the OP's opponents have stated anything that even resembles an intelligent counterpoint. Although I'm not convinced, the OP at least made a proper case with citations that have yet to be factually refuted.

Because it has been discussed at length before ? how many times does it have to be posted?

read this carefully.

http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highli...on/oncj/doc/2009/2009oncj620/2009oncj620.html

 

[AF4iK]

Because it has been discussed at length before ? how many times does it have to be posted?

read this carefully.

http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highli...on/oncj/doc/2009/2009oncj620/2009oncj620.html

That's interesting, Bunda was convicted under section 3.8 of HTA 172. "Stunt" driving (sheesh!). I did notice the judge decided the right-hand pass was not permitted because he couldn't verify that all cars intended to turn left. So filtering is legal only on the right side and if the conditions outlined in the HTA are met?

Anyway, like I said, I don't really care in the end. I was making a point about people bashing the op without evidence. The existence of similar threads is irrelevant. Your link does provide an argument though, I'll give it that.

 

[OpenGambit]

That's interesting, Bunda was convicted under section 3.8 of HTA 172. "Stunt" driving (sheesh!). I did notice the judge decided the right-hand pass was not permitted because he couldn't verify that all cars intended to turn left. So filtering is legal only on the right side and if the conditions outlined in the HTA are met?

Anyway, like I said, I don't really care in the end. I was making a point about people bashing the op without evidence. The existence of similar threads is irrelevant. Your link does provide an argument though, I'll give it that.

I don't care what you do, I only tell people what the law is. ignore at your own risk.

Next week it'll be the same thread all over again anyway.

 

[silverbullet132]

So couldn't it fall under the HTA 172?

Possibly could, if you changed lanes multiple times. Riding in one lane at low speed would disqualify it from a 172 based on what you quoted .

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2