Lemond1985

In California, the legislature has created an awful conundrum for car and truck drivers.

Yes, there is a "3 foot" law, fine is $35 (never seen it enforced). It is California Vehicle Code section 21760. But there is also a law against crossing a double yellow line (California Vehicle Code § 21460). Fine for that is $234.

So a driver approaches you from behind, on a narrow mountain road with a double yellow line. They have a choice of doing a close pass and risking a $35 fine, or crossing a double yellow line and risking a $234 fine. Which law would you break, if given such a choice?

Well, I can tell you which law most drivers choose to break. Thank you California legislature, for not creating a safe haven for people trying to obey the "3 foot law".

Speedway2

On the other hand.....when I'm in my "cage" I've seen my share of dumba$$/irresponsible cyclists who don't obey the rules of the road. eg. running stop signs/lights, cutting across lanes diagonally, jumping on/off sidewalks, etc., etc.

I can see why non-cycling Cagers don't give a ratz re cyclists. That said it doesn't make it OK that the safety of others should be ignored.....

indyfabz

+1. I toured southern Spain for 7 weeks back in the day. The day before I flew home I was tooling around the 'burbs outside of Sevilla. An inattentive motorist leaving a parking lot did something stupid and almost hit me. He was so apologetic I thought he was going to get out of his car, get down on his knees and beg for forgiveness. Other than that, the trip was uneventful motorist-wise.

Same back in 2013 when I was riding in Italy for two weeks. The only close call came when some people in our group ignored the law and entered a traffic circle while a car was already negotiating it. (I did not.) Many people think Italians are maniac drivers. Truth is is that they are very skilled. It takes a lot more education and practice to get a license there. Our host, who has been running a cycling camp there for decades, explained that motorist drive with the expectation that cyclists will obey traffic laws. I live in Philly. The best way to avoid a car-bike collision is to drive with the expectation that cyclists will not obey traffic laws. Same when you are walking. A few years ago a pedestrian crossing the street legally while heading to his train after work was hit by a cyclist. The pedestrian fell to the ground, hitting his head. He slipped into a coma and later died, leaving behind a wife and a couple of kids. Witnesses say the cyclist got up, straightened his handlebars and rode off. He has never been identified.

Razorrock

In my area they are adding these unprotected bike lanes everywhere. (don't pay attention to parked car, first picture I could find) I feel that these cause cars to forget the 3 ft law. They will buzz right past you without even slowing down.
I would much rather ride on an unmarked road and take the lane when necessary.

burnthesheep

I gave a cop crap (politely) for parking with no lights on in a bike lane to clock speeders once. I was getting squeezed into pretty busy traffic. His response, just shoulder shrug. Not even a verbal response. I filed a complaint, knowing I'd never hear anything and nobody would do anything.

He could have had a better hiding spot anyway sitting at the t-jn of the neighborhood street 25 feet away. Go figure.

Hypno Toad

I was discussing this very issue with a local bike advocacy group leader - he said they are pushing our state (Minnesota) to require changing lanes to pass a person on bike. This makes it 'easily' enforceable and matches existing laws about passing emergency personal on the road.

There are ways to enforce the 3-foot law, but Austin is an exception going to this level of enforcement - https://www.kxan.com/news/apd-using-...e-to-bicycles/

livedarklions

Wow, no thanks on the change lane. There's lots of busy roads where I have plenty of room to the right of the right-most traffic lane, and now my mere presence is going to have the effect of closing one of the lanes of a already congested street? Seriously, think through the political implications of that. Where I live, the main street in town is often a state highway with two lanes either way, with breakdown lanes. Put a law like that into effect, and a bike at rush hour = instant traffic jam. Without that law, I won't even cross the cars' path.

Hypno Toad

Cause cars never create traffic jams during rush hour ... except every single day.

When driving my car, I will always change lanes to give a full lane to a rider in the traffic lane. It's never created a traffic jam. This obviously doesn't apply when there's a bike lane or a shoulder for the person on a bike. I understand and acknowledge roads are different throughout the US (& rest of world); in Minnesota, many roads have 3 to 6 foot shoulders and therefore don't require vehicles to change lanes. However, local roads that don't have a shoulder are typically 4-lane roads, making very easy for traffic to change lanes without waiting for a break in on-coming traffic.

livedarklions

Yes, cars cause traffic jams, no, that's not a good reason to make bikes do it for no purpose.

For this law to do more good than harm, it's going to have to have a bunch of exceptions--don't need to if there's a shoulder, if both lanes are congested, in business districts, etc. The real reason for the move-over laws for police was on interstate freeways, this is just a really bad fit in most places where cyclists ride in large numbers.

Sorry, but it's just nutty to invite the political backlash this would cause. Advocates really need to take a hard look at how the politics of things are starting to turn:
https://www.citylab.com/transportati...e-lane/559934/

teejaywhy

New here. What is a "cager?"
A derogatory term for the driver of a motor vehicle?

Hypno Toad

Safely passing a person riding a bike on the road is a purpose.

The current 3-foot passing laws are only enforceable with signification investment and effort by local PD. I'd like to understand your opinion on ways to make the roadways safer for people using bikes, and have enforceable punishment for people that fail to yield safe space while driving a vehicle.

BTW - The move-over laws for emergency responders is not limited to highways or simply police.

• When traveling on a road with two or more lanes, drivers must keep over one full lane away from stopped emergency vehicles with flashing lights activated — ambulance, fire, law enforcement, maintenance, construction vehicles and tow trucks.
• Reduce speed if unable to safely move over a lane.

reference - https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/ots/mov...s/default.aspx

TiHabanero

Hypno Toad, yes, "cager" comes from my time riding motorcycles, and is derogatory as people lose half their IQ when they climb in behind the wheel. Cagers are dangerous, never trust them, even when making eye contact. Expect them to do the dumbest, most selfish thing possible at all times. Expect no respect from them. They are cagers.

Car R Coffins.

Hypno Toad

(reference @teejaywhy post)

I didn't call you out for "cagers" - not my preferred term, but I'm not calling you out.


https://carsrcoffins.com/

Also, you can go with the "mouth-breather" reference too, still not my preferred term ... but I understand it.

TrojanHorse

Law or no law, IME drivers here in SoCal are GENERALLY courteous and GENERALLY give me a decently wide berth, if there's room. However, not one single driver I've ever come across will slow down if there isn't room. Wait 10 seconds to pass safely? Nope, just buzz the cyclist.

Given my observations of drivers in CA in general, the laws on the books don't really impact people's daily drive so they're not doing that cross the double yellow / don't cross math in their heads.

livedarklions

The three foot rule requires significant enforcement but the move over law wouldn't? Is that what you're claiming?

I would advocate enforcement of the three foot rule, adopting a draconian law that would be even more unenforceable (you can almost always talk your way out of the move over by claiming there was someone in the left lane, btw) is too ridiculous to warrant much discussion. I'd also advocate better education of drivers about the need to yield to bikes when the bike must take the lane.

I should have said "emergency responders", and yes, the move over laws apply to other roads, but my experience is they're generally not enforced anywhere where the traffic is slow. The primary target was definitely interstates where cops getting hit on stops and at accidents is a relatively routine accident, unfortunately.

No, I don't have a magic bullet that will make us safe, but that doesn't mean I have to keep quiet when I see a crackpot proposal.

Daniel4

The only thing you can do is to move into the car lane. Just make sure you're taking the lane so you won't be squeezed with close passes. Impatient drivers behind you will just have to wait until you find a clear spot in the bike lane in which to return.

Recently, when I do see cars in the bike lane, I also see their occupants finish doing what they do to get out of the lane before I get there.

Hypno Toad

No need to be rude, nothing crackpot about it. You don't like the idea, cool! You don't live in Minnesota, so it's not an issue what we do in fly-by land.

It is easy to observe and enforce if a vehicle changes lanes to pass - OTOH, with out investing in tech, there's no way to measure 3 feet on a road with a bike and vehicle both in motion.

indyfabz

I enjoyed the two weeks I spent in MN while riding across the country. Except for the mosquitoes.

Hypno Toad

These little guys?

Leisesturm

Seriously? Since when do vehicle statutes concern themselves with how cyclists treat curbs? Etc. etc.? Running red lights/stop signs is all you've got and on another forum there is a rapidly growing thread about a motorist that blew a stoplight, hit another motorist who was speeding through the intersection, who then spun and killed a cyclist that was waiting for the light to change. I can't tell you that in almost a half century of vehicular cycling I've ever heard of a scofflaw cyclist causing that much damage from their actions. There are intersections around here where on EVERY light cycle one or two cagers are blasting through the fresh red because they don't want to wait through another complete cycle. I don't see any cyclists doing that. And there are plenty of cyclists here.

In NYC there have been a spate of cyclist fatalities, and the morning host Brian Lehrer of their local call- in show tries to get guests on from the Advocacy Community to speak to whats going on and invites cyclists to have their say but the phone lines get clogged with drivers that want to talk about cyclists running lights. Some try to fool the screeners by claiming to be cyclists (like you) and then launch into Cagerbabble and its so sadly ironic because any cager without half trying will cook more red lights in a year than the average cyclist will in a lifetime. Portland cyclists are absolute SAINTS from my perspective as an ex-NY'er where bikes running reds is as natural as eating and drinking. The motorists here still talk about "those cyclists". SMH. If only they knew. None of the 18 cyclists killed in NYC this year were killed while running through a red light. Just thought I'd put that out there ...

livedarklions

Sorry if I came off as rude, but I also didn't like the sarcasm about cars not causing jams. We didn't start on a good tone, which pains me a bit because I like you and I grew up in Minneapolis. "Crackpot" may be a bit strong, but I really do think this is a terrible idea. In practice the emergency responder one has pretty much been unenforceable because the stopped emergency vehicle that s being protected is the very one most likely to be able to catch the violator. Generally, the driver of that vehicle is busy with something else, which is why he or she is on the side of the road. Frankly, though, I think the enforcement of a move over for bicyclists might actually increase the numbers of pull overs of vehicles right into the lane where we're trying to ride--the cure is likely worse than the disease. I actually find the cops pulled over car into the breakdown lane one of the hardest situations to deal with on a busy fast highway. Almost by definition, the likelihood is that the guy getting pulled over for this is going to end up in the lane ahead of me, not behind me. I'd probably rather get passed at 2 1/2 feet than have to deal with that.

gregf83 

+1. I've done a couple cycling trips in Spain and it's a real eye-opener how respectful drivers are to cyclists. I recall riding up some narrow winding hills and having a truck putter along patiently behind us until it was clear to pass then he would move to the opposite lane, pass and give a big smile and wave. Virtually unheard of over here.

They have a 1.5m passing law in Spain but I think it's mostly the culture that makes the difference. It's much more common for drivers to be cyclists there and they treat the cyclists well.

It's getting better here slowly as the number of people cycling to work gradually increases but it's a slow process with plenty of Neanderthals who will likely never change.

Hypno Toad

Thank you for the response, it's okay that we don't see the issue the same.

To be clear, lane-changing law is something a local advocacy group is lobbying ... I don't hate it, but I'd be cool seeing local PD investing the tech they use in Austin, TX in the story linked. I don't expect to see either thing happen in Minnesota in the foreseeable future.

I honestly do find the objection to bikes on the road as 'causing traffic backups' to be one of the oddest complaints. For years, when somebody says this to me, I ask them about the bikes causing the massive backups on 494 every morning and afternoon and most weekends. The responses are typically deflecting, we in the US have a car-centrist culture and have a hard time seeing cars as the problem.

Moreover, most people fail to acknowledge the motor vehicles that cause many slow downs - a partial list of examples: Many of the above are slower than me on a bike and cause me to slow to maneuver around them. Yet, as a culture, we single out the person on a bike as "the thing" slowing the traffic.

This is a culture thing, I found out 10 years ago while bike-touring in France. We started the morning in Tours and needed to climb a narrow road early in the day, Lisa isn't a climber when warmed up ... so she was slowly grinding up this hill when a delivery truck came up behind us. I was at the back, and based on experiences on the roads in the US, I was on 'red alert'. But the driver calmly idled behind us until the road widened and they could pass safely. They passed at a moderate speed, with generous space. This was the typical interactions we found between people in motor vehicles and people on bikes through our trip. I hope we can make steps towards this level of acceptance for people using bikes on the road.

Troul 

capture gopro footage that provides clear proof for evidence of the drivers disregarding the 3' law. Make sure it shows clearly the vehicles plate...

Then forward that footage on to your congressional leadership.

Leisesturm

It can't have escaped your notice that fractious relationships of all kinds and between all kinds and groups of people have, in the last two years, exploded into naked hostility bordering on and in some cases crossing over into violence. Now is not the time to express even the mildest hope or optimism for anything substantive to change (for the better) in cyclist/motorist relations.