Originally Posted by
greatbasin
While my wife didn't express contempt for cyclists that "get in her way," she did say she wished they didn't ride there because they make it hard for her. That cyclists or anyone else on the road make it harder, however much or little, for motorists is probably objective fact if the motorist is willing to give regard to the cyclist, pedestrian or other motorist. Yes, additional effort is demanded from the motorist to exercise due care.
Something I wish got more attention is that the details of how motorists passing cyclists is actually supposed to work a fairly undefined grey area.
At best, drivers are told what they can't do. But never instructed on what they
can.
And what if any social or legal obligation the overtaken cyclist has, is also unclear.
It would in some ways be a drop in the ocean, but I really wish a state DOT would put a page in the manual with a half dozen cartoon diagrams, things like:
"This stretch of road is narrow and curving, so the motorist will have to wait before passing the cyclist"
"Here the road is wider, the cyclist should move over to facilitate passing"
"Here the road is narrow, but though visibility is insufficient to pass another car, in [this state] the driver may legally enter the other lane to pass a cyclist, though that is not permitted in other states"
"Here the road is wide, but there's a garbage can / tree branch / drain gate blocking it, the cyclist can't move over and the motorist must wait"
And potentially (though no one really knows if it's true) "Here the road is narrow, but there are so many vehicles behind the cyclist that they'll need to momentarily stop on the unpaved margin"
There are next to no official statements of these things, so everyone is left to figure it out on their own, and easily gets frustrated with others who refuse to play by their personal interpretation of the rules.
And I don't just mean the utterly bogus interpretations, I mean the wide range of interpretation that are not inconsistent with the actual laws.