work4bike

I signal right before the light changes green.

rekmeyata

If you are in a Left turn lane, then the cyclist should not have passed you on your left, He wouldn't not have done that if he was driving a car would he? Then he shouldn't have done that on his bike either. I noted you were not making any hand signals showing your intentions, while you should have been doing that, the other rider AGAIN should not have passed you as he did. He was an idiot, thankfully you saw the situation happening before you made your turn and the other rider causing an accident.

livedarklions

It's only going to be seen by the cars directly behind and in front of me, so if it's at a light, I hold the arm out, keep it there for a few seconds, then resume to the handlebars to perform the turn when the light changes. If it's a long light, I might repeat the gesture a couple times in case someone else came up to the intersection. I don't bother signaling a right turn from the right lane at all unless there's something unusual about the intersection.

tyrion

I don't hold my arm out but I will put it out for a bit. I also look around at all the surrounding stopped cars - if a new car pulls up I will signal again.

But I try to avoid those kinds of intersections whenever possible.

livedarklions

You would be right if it was a left turn lane, but it wasn't a left turn lane, it was a go straight OR turn left lane. There was a left turn lane to the left of it and a right turn lane to the right of it. If you're in the center lane and don't signal, I wouldn't have guessed you intended to turn left and two bikes in a traffic lane is perfectly acceptable. I don't see how anyone was an idiot in the situation as described.

billridesbikes

I'll add that passing on the left was the correct thing to do in this situation. If you expected the cyclist ahead of you to go straight you probably also expect them to veer to the right as they cleared the RH turn lane to be as far right as possible exiting the intersection, so passing on the right would be improper in this case. I think the second cyclist should have rang his bell or announced he was passing but I don't think he was an idiot. OP also wasn't an idiot either, but in retrospect maybe could to something different next time indicating his turn.

rekmeyata

Sorry but I see an idiot. Even if the lane was a dual purpose lane, either turn left from it or go straight ahead, the other cyclists should have treated it like he was in a car, would he had passed a car setting there? NO, nor should he had passed a cyclist. It's just basic rules of the road that apply to motorists the same way it applies to cyclists using the road.

livedarklions

Nonsense. It's far more normal for a bike to pass another bike to the left in the same lane. Actually,, if I was sitting in the same part of the lane that OP was, I'd say there's a pretty good probability that a car going straight would pass me if I didn't signal the turn.

I don't buy the notion that we have to pretend we're riding underpowered cars and I never will. We're going to get passed in lanes, if you can't handle that, don't take the lane. I'd need to actually see the intersection before I could be sure whether or not I would've passed, I'm certainly not calling someone an idiot for doing so.

Clyde1820

^ This.

Patience is a virtue. There's good reason for that saying existing.

Being "non-virtuous" in a vehicle situation on public roads can be a deadly thing.

Far safer, more transparent (in intentions) and reasonable to simply be patient and await the clearing of the queue ahead. Particularly important in a mixed-direction type lane as described in the scenario. Passing rapidly and unexpectedly simply creates great potential for a crash that needn't exist.

Occupying a mixed-mode mixed-speed public street really isn't all that difficult. But it can get particularly difficult when people "push" like that.

Paul Barnard

I don't know of any states that imbue cyclists with "rights." The question is does your state law allow that kind of pass? Have you mentioned what state you are in and have you read your cycling laws? I have a hunch it is not permissible under the law. I certainly wouldn't pass a cyclist on the left under similar circumstances. I won't sit at a light with my arm extended either. I'll signal just before or as I start moving.

Clyde1820

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Barnard

I don't know of any states that imbue cyclists with "rights." The question is does your state law allow that kind of pass? Have you mentioned what state you are in and have you read your cycling laws? I have a hunch it is not permissible under the law. I certainly wouldn't pass a cyclist on the left under similar circumstances. I won't sit at a light with my arm extended either. I'll signal just before or as I start moving.

Though, inherently, I do believe every U.S. state has (like the "basic speed law" requiring driving no faster than conditions warrant) traffic law that essentially acknowledges the basic right of way / right to exist in the lane for slower-moving vehicles. IOW, just due to impatience or lateness a person can't simply disregard the risk inflicted upon others with a rushed pass, with aggressive tailgating/threats, with not making room for someone already there in the lane. (Beyond any outright statutes existing, say, barring pedestrian or slow-movers from highways, etc.)

livedarklions

It's permissible under NH law: ".A person propelling a bicycle may pass a slower-moving vehicle in the same lane provided such movement can be made with reasonable safety. A person propelling a bicycle may pass a stationary or stopped motor vehicle on the right." I don't believe there's any per se rule defining a pass in the intersection as not being "reasonably safe". And yes, NH defines "vehicle" as including bicycles.

work4bike

I've read my bike laws a lot, but not since this thread was opened. I'm not sure, but my state law probably says something similar to the above^.

However, laws don't address every possible situation. They probably never considered a cyclist passing another in an intersection where the lane is designated as both a straightway and left turning lane. Like I said above, I would not have passed if I were the guy in the rear, until after we made it thru the intersection, not so much because it was an intersection, but because I would have anticipated the cyclist turning, because most cyclists don't signal and many cars don't also. That's why when I'm approaching a car and they're going slow enough to turn, I just take the lane behind them....basically the same thing.

Paul Barnard

Thanks for the info. I am the dog expert here, not the same turning lane passing law expert!

njkayaker

The "fundamental" law for bicycling in Louisiana:
​​​​​
https://law.justia.com/codes/louisia...tle32/rs32-194

And every state has, as far as I have seen, the same law.

He's misleading you.

Think what you'd do if you were driving.

If you are a careful driver, you wouldn't choose to pass in this situation. The "rights and duties" law says you should do the same thing when on a bicycle.

njkayaker

No. It's only permissible only if it can be done "with reasonable safety". It's not clearly reasonable to pass at an intersection.

No careful, reasonable driver would do such a thing. No careful, reasonable driver needs an explicit law telling them it's not safe.

It doesn't matter at all whether bicycles are vehicles.

Every state (as far as I know) has the "fundamental" bicycle law.

Including NH.

https://www.fosters.com/news/2019070...-use-full-lane
Note that this law talks about bicyclists (not bicycles, whether or not the state happens to legally define them as vehicles, which doesn't matter anyway).


​​​​

njkayaker

It's the wrong question.

Whether or not they had the right, they did it anyway.

You need to take more control of the situation. Don't expect or rely on the other person to do the proper thing.

• Use better lane positioning. If you are in a left/straight lane, you should be on the left(ish) side of it.

​​​

• Before you move left, look to see if it's clear.

​​​​

base2 

Am I the only one here wondering why the OP was just standing at an intersection on his bike waiting for a car to show up so he could continue his journey?

Stop first. Wait. Proceed after the light proved it didn't detect, then...Go, man. Go!












(Look at your own states laws, of course.)

AdkMtnMonster

So do I, but the one I see wasn’t in the turn lane that day.

mdarnton

You'll never be disappointed in life if you assume everyone is an idiot and act accordingly. People who turn without signaling are idiots; people who pass them on the left in left turn lanes are idiots. There's no shortage of idiots in life, so act accordingly. It's just common sense, really.

livedarklions

You're on my ignore list, but I couldn't help but peek because I knew you'd claim that I was wrong. Actually you are quite wrong. I am only going to respond once because the reason you're on my ignore list is because you'll simply repost your incorrect assertions again and again in response and life is too short to get caught in one of your endless loops.

The passing in the same lane law I quoted specifically applied only to bicyclists ."A person propelling a bicycle may pass a slower-moving vehicle in the same lane provided such movement can be made with reasonable safety." Who in their right mind would read a statute that explicitly only applies to cyclists to mean that the considerations in that safety calculation are exactly those of a driver of a motor vehicle?

I said very carefully that there was no per se rule forbidding the passing of another cyclist in an intersection and I'd have to see the intersection before I'd make a judgment whether a pass in that particular intersection could be made with reasonable safety. Your assertions to the contrary, I don't think it's an unusual practice. Maybe it is in NJ. I don't ride there.

My mention that a bicycle is a vehicle was to make clear that "slower-moving vehicle" included bicycles. So yes, it does matter in this instance in the interpretation of what you as a cyclist can and can't do in regards to other cyclists, unless you're taking the absurd position that it's legal to pass the bicycle but not the bicyclist on the bicycle.

By the way, I ride in NH, you don't. I can tell you it's quite normal for a car to pass me in an intersection when I'm on my bike, so I really have no idea why you think anything you've said makes sense. You put into bold an absurd statement. If I'm going straight in a FRAP position (as required by NH law), there is no inherent reason why a car three feet or more to my left can't or won't pass me in the intersection. It's why I move to the center of the left-most lane and signal my turn when I'm going left--I'd be an idiot to ignore the rather obvious likelihood that a driver behind me is going to assume otherwise that I'm going straight..

njkayaker

You don't seem to realize that drivers are allowed to pass other vehicles too.

The driver laws also apply to cyclists in NH.

There are lots of things that are not per se in the law that you can still get a ticket for.

In this case, the rider left-passed another vehicle waiting to make a left turn. Is that legal in NH?

The "fundamental" law says that "bicyclists" (people in the act of riding a bicycle) is legally equivalent to a "driver of a vehicle".

The understanding of "slower moving vehicle" doesn't have anything to do with bicycles being vehicles or not.

It would be absurd if a bicyclist was allowed to pass a car but not a bicycle (based on the definition of "vehicle").

The bold statement was talking about drivers (that word is in the text!) If you drive like this, please stop.

The OP wasn't talking about riding FRAP.

Pay attention.

njkayaker

No.

He was left-passing a vehicle that was making a left turn.

Even if it wasn't clear you were making a left turn, the other rider should have assumed that you might.

Medium Size Dog

IMO. Left turn, right turn, straight, signaled, didn't signal? So what? If an intersection is busy enough to have 3 lanes going in one direction and likely 3 lanes going the opposite direction and probably multiple lanes on the cross street, that's a lot of places for the car driven by a distracted, speeding, whatever driver to come from that could easily crunch a cyclist who is unwisely blowing through an intersection no matter what color the lights are.

livedarklions

Wait, what?! Are you saying you need to stop or crawl through such an intersection even if you have the green light? You're going to need to define "plow" because I don't think there's anything inappropriate about maintaining your speed as long as you're doing the normal cross street scan as you get there. The number of lanes has nothing to do with that.