Originally Posted by
pacificaslim
I don't know where this concept came from, other than pure selfishness. I can't think of any other "right" that is enforced in such a manner. Everything else in law, and in common sense, has to comply to the generally accepted standards of the community, not the selfish judgement of one person.
Sure, there are rare situations where a cyclist really does need to take the lane on a highway like this one. But that would be very very rare. I think in 99% of situations I would answer the claim "I didn't feel it was safe to share the road because I'm likely to crash when cars pass close by me" with "then you need to learn how to ride a freakin' bicycle before coming out in public." Your rights to be a ninny do not override the rights of everyone else to carry on with their lives.
Given that as cyclists we have a better view of the road ahead of us and thus can see debris, or cracked or missing pavement easier than someone in a car, does it not make sense that we are in a better position to determine what is and isn't safe for us? Or where it is or isn't safe for us to ride?
That may be how it is where you ride, but where I ride the majority of roads are too narrow for a car and a bicycle traveling in the same direction to safely pass each other. If we do not take the lane motorists will pass us with just inches between them and us. See my post in another thread about the time I had an 18-wheeler pass me trapping me between him and the curb. Had I been further out in the lane he would have had to change lanes (this is/was a road with two lanes for each direction of travel) in order to safely pass me.