genejockey 

Oh, hey...(a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations:



(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.

genejockey 

That's not what I said. I said when there are 50 cyclists in a group and one car, the cyclists by definition are moving at the speed of traffic.
EDIT: Your deployment of a straw man is noted, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you simply misunderstood me, rather than willfully misinterpreting me.

njkayaker

Yes, you can over take another vehicle. It's a short term thing. Once you have passed the other vehicle, then the earlier (main part) of that law applies.

This stuff isn't that hard. (I hope you don't drive.)

genejockey 

A peloton is a group of riders constantly in the process of overtaking other riders. BTW, this would mean that a rotating paceline can take up the lane because the riders on the side moving up are overtaking the riders on the side falling back.

njkayaker

So what? They aren't necessarily travelling at the speed of all traffic.

They still could be travelling at less than the speed of normal traffic.

So what? Where is the term "peloton" in the CA traffic law?

The law isn't considering passing as something "constant" anyway.

Bizarre.

genejockey 

BTW, I've been driving since 1974, and apart from deer, without incident. But I don't drive in New Jersey, where I assume you are. SO you're safe.

njkayaker

Given your poor understanding of traffic law, you must be very lucky.

genejockey 

Which you admitted above is poorly defined, if defined at all.

A peloton does not need to be defined under law to consist of cyclists passing other cyclists. I'd have thought that was clear.

genejockey 

Or your understanding of my understanding is very poor, which seems much the more likely.

njkayaker

No, no chance at all (I gave ample evidence of your lack of understanding).

A "peloton" doesn't have to have "cyclists passing other cyclists" anyway.

​​​​​​What you are straining to call "passing" might not be legal if it's not on the left. And there's the possible illegality of not maintains a "safe following distance". Riding in pelotons isn't particularly safe. If you want to be allowed to ride in them, you probably don't want the law to look too closely at them.

So, you admit you are pathological. That explains a lot.

genejockey 

Sometime back, I was similarly engaged in a pointless argument with a pointless arguer, who eventually asked why I was still bothering. I replied, "Pathological need to get the last word, but this time, I'll let you have the last word."

He replied, "Thank you!"

I replied, "You're welcome!"

Camilo

Hey, second time today! never get tired of this: https://dai.ly/x2hwqn9

LarrySellerz

If the group rides were illegal they would be stopped, since the city is fully aware of them and no attempts are made at stopping them, they are de facto legal. A few days ago a car overtook a group in a dangerous way that caused a Facebook post with people talking about how we can safely make that turn. It was suggested that riders in the back signal the turn, which makes sense because a peloton is essentially an oversized vehicle and should be treated as such

SpeedyBlueBiker

The only time I ride on a sidewalk is when it connects a short section of a MUP. Otherwise, I'm always out on the road where I belong.

Koyote

Interesting point. Really makes me think.

Two key points for me: my father was killed (traffic accident) by a truck driver who made a serious mistake, and then twenty years later my wife and I were very nearly killed by another driver who was too busy eating a cheeseburger to avoid hitting us at about 45mph. Both events made me a much more thoughtful and careful driver.

Paul Barnard

Y'all sure do make it easy for Larry to get what he wants.

flangehead

And there it is, in a nutshell.

How can we motivate most road users to be thoughtful and careful, without having “events”?

making

I have spent about the last 30 years trying not to get run over, or run over anyone else.

indyfabz

Yep. Cut off its food supply.

mschwett 

i’m glad you quoted that - but this “except” applies to a LOT of situations:

basically, if the lane isn’t wide enough for a bike and a car to safely ride side by side, you do NOT need to ride as close as practical to the right hand curb.

Camilo

Chain lube?

livedarklions

30 cyclists do not equal one driver legally or practically. They take up a lot more room on the road and staying together requires absolute control over the other traffic. If you won't see that drivers would need a permit before 30 of them could block off a road to drive together, I don't think there's any reasonable discussion that can be had. If you think cyclists can do that, it's definitely a right other operators on the road do not have, so yes you are claiming bicyclists have rights superior to drivers.

And racing cars 100 mph on a highway would also be invigorating, fun, companionable, etc. I said no "practical" purpose, you're just saying it's fun.

livedarklions

50-100 vehicles of any kind is a parade. Most places, that requires a permit.

You're describing people who are intentionally being annoying.

And this does involve public safety. Throw emergency vehicles into the mix and there's going to be huge problems.

livedarklions

That's true, but what's being argued here is that by constantly passing each other, bicyclists can expand that "not wide enough" exception and then declare themselves to be the "traffic" whose speed defines the road. That's a ridiculous reading of the statute because that changes that exception to one car plus two or more bikes which is clearly contrary to the plain wording. If all that's happening is groups are taking the lane an individual rider could legally take, then there's really no legal question. What I'm objecting to here is to say that the size of the group can be used as an excuse to take the lane because the cyclists can't safely ride together without doing so.

livedarklions

So by that logic, the car's dangerous pass was de facto legal. Ride as a large peloton in a place where you shouldn't, you're on your own. Your pretending to signal for the group wouldn't matter because legally the group isn't a thing.