|
|
|
lane splitting / filtering
- Thread starter mbroyda
- Start date
Last edited:
From my recollection: someone claimed to have talked their way out of every police stop (he only filters/not splits downtown) and one reference was made to someone having been charged with street racing.
Best to post in the law section and give Rob a chance to reply. This topic comes up every year.
Best to post in the law section and give Rob a chance to reply. This topic comes up every year.
Tough one, the HTA does a better job of clarifying "lane splitting", but "filtering" is still open to wide interpretation.
Excerpt that addresses lane splitting: 154. (1) Where a highway has been divided into clearly marked lanes for traffic, (a) a vehicle shall be driven as nearly as may be practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from the lane until the driver has first ascertained that the movement can be made with safety;
however, when we get into filtering it becomes as clear as mud:
150. (1) The driver of a motor vehicle may overtake and pass to the right of another vehicle only where the movement can be made in safety and,
(a) the vehicle overtaken is making or about to make a left turn or its driver has signalled his or her intention to make a left turn;
(b) is made on a highway with unobstructed pavement of sufficient width for two or more lines of vehicles in each direction; or
Regarding filtering, the emphasis here is on both clearly marked lanes, pavement of sufficient width and driven vehicle (indicating a single lane may only be shared by one moving vehicle at a time). So, it would seem that "filtering" (moving between parked vehicles) is not clearly defined as an offence whereas "lane splitting" (moving between moving vehicles) is. That doesn't mean you wont get a ticket for trying it... and at the end of the day, in a jurisdiction like this where drivers are oblivious to us to begin with, adding another "surprise" element into the mix is probably not a good idea...
The other day as I was returning home from a work (from Toronto) on my motorcycle, I decided to take Lakeshore back to the west-end instead of the QEW -- unfortunately traffic was pretty much at a standstill. At every traffic light, there was at least a 2-minute wait before traffic started flowing towards the next red light.
As I was sitting there, I just could not comprehend why I, on my motorcycle, wasn't legally allowed to filter through. There was a clear-cut gap between all the stopped vehicles running all the way to the intersection ahead. Not a single car was able to move, as the traffic was bumper-to-bumper on all three lanes. I have no doubt that I could have very safely and easily drove through traffic, allowing more vehicles to take up the space I was occupying - yet, for some reason, filtering is not permitted.
After reading the threads listed by Baggsy, I have a better understanding as to what is considered legal/illegal when it comes to lane splitting/filtering; but that still does not explain WHY it is not considered “legal”. To me it just seems to make sense to make lane-filtering legal for a number of reasons, best summed up by:
I believe we should have clearly defined legal lane-filtering laws... such as allowing filtering only when the flow of traffic speed is < 50 KM/H.
Congestion does seems to be a big issue in the recent plans set out by Ford:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xfsIj6gYAw&feature=related
As I was sitting there, I just could not comprehend why I, on my motorcycle, wasn't legally allowed to filter through. There was a clear-cut gap between all the stopped vehicles running all the way to the intersection ahead. Not a single car was able to move, as the traffic was bumper-to-bumper on all three lanes. I have no doubt that I could have very safely and easily drove through traffic, allowing more vehicles to take up the space I was occupying - yet, for some reason, filtering is not permitted.
After reading the threads listed by Baggsy, I have a better understanding as to what is considered legal/illegal when it comes to lane splitting/filtering; but that still does not explain WHY it is not considered “legal”. To me it just seems to make sense to make lane-filtering legal for a number of reasons, best summed up by:
-- quote
I believe we should have clearly defined legal lane-filtering laws... such as allowing filtering only when the flow of traffic speed is < 50 KM/H.
Congestion does seems to be a big issue in the recent plans set out by Ford:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xfsIj6gYAw&feature=related
LoneRonin
Well-known member
I've been caught twice...caught a bitching once and a ticket the other. $110 and 3 pts.
Another time me and a HD dude were stuck on the 403 between Mavis and Hurontario.We're were chatting it up and then proceeded to lane split a good distance ahead. The we merged rode in traffic and then I ripped it down the shoulder again, as I was doing that I noticed an OPP SUV. I was like ooohh ****, but I was lucky, the HD dude followed me and he got pulled instead :lmao::lmao::lmao:
It was even more funny because before we did it he was asking the same same question, like whats the legality, the penalty....I'm sure he got the exact answers.
Another time me and a HD dude were stuck on the 403 between Mavis and Hurontario.We're were chatting it up and then proceeded to lane split a good distance ahead. The we merged rode in traffic and then I ripped it down the shoulder again, as I was doing that I noticed an OPP SUV. I was like ooohh ****, but I was lucky, the HD dude followed me and he got pulled instead :lmao::lmao::lmao:
It was even more funny because before we did it he was asking the same same question, like whats the legality, the penalty....I'm sure he got the exact answers.
Last edited by a moderator:
There are numerous threads on this board, that concern splitting and filtering. One member was charged under the racing and stunting laws, but was ultimately found not guilty. There is, however, a valid charge for splitting and filtering under HTA 172 which would result in losing your license and vehicle for a week, potential fines up to $10,000.00 for a first offence (minimum $2,000.00), and the potential for a 6 month sentence in jail.
The usual charge would be "improper driving where the road is divided into lanes."
The usual charge would be "improper driving where the road is divided into lanes."
The discussion is pretty much moot...I think it's safe up to a point but sadly the dumbass drivers around me aren't expecting it and some of them would probably actively try to stop you doing it...dangerously so. I don't do it..I don't want some knob pulling out in front of me to head me off. My brother got knocked off his bike in the UK doing just this but there filtering is legal.
If you don't know why lane splitting is illegal (and dangerous) pay yourself a flight to the city of Rome...Its easier to put lane splitting illegal than to make a rule for every single situation. Over there (rome) scooter and motorcycle are just going crazy on the road, around 90% of motorcycles and cars have scratches...its not for nothing....they also drive|ride like a bunch of idiot but that is a different story!
An additional positive note on that very same story----
The guy who was charged for stunting in that case had to sell his bike to get it out of the impound, I facilitated that sale + transport + hiding and it became a wedding present for my buddy, from his wife. (that's a pretty sweet wedding present IMO).
That FZR400 is still on the road today - literally.
SO that particular lane-splitting case wasn't all bad, all things considered.
Except for the guy who was found not guilty not getting his bike back, of course.
Found not guilty? Not quite. As I recall, it got plea bargained down to a guilty plea for unsafe or improper lane change.
Perhaps, but that means he was not guilty of racing, which was the initial charge. Over charging is a blight on our legal system.
Person is caught speeding at 51 over and is charged under HTA172. Plea-bargains it down to 40 over in court. Does that mean that he was overcharged in the first place? How does g4getmoney's situation really differ?
I thought you were going to bring your BS statistics to back up your stand, but in this case you're comparing apples and oranges and coming to a faulty conclusion.
His situation was different because he was charged with stunting while he was actually commiting the offence of
as you mentioned. The difference between the 2 cost the defendant more than $1000 and his bike.
The difference between travelling with the flow of traffic and trying to unreasonably push his way through that traffic is what cost Papazov his money and his bike.
One can argue that he committed one or more unsafe or improper lane change offences on his way to committing one or more racing/stunting offences depending on what the cop saw, such as racing:
or alternately stunting:
Sure, the cop could have charged him with a lesser offence at the scene, but so could a cop who catches someone at 51 over the limit and charges that person with HTA172 instead of HTA128.
That either cop chooses not to does not mean that either cop is overcharging. It merely means that the cops didn't see fit to give a roadside break that would just as likely have been challenged in court anyways.
Last edited:
|
|
|
|
|