Lane splitting banned in France

[DataDan]

DataDan alluded to the biggest potential problem with this study on the first page of this thread. If the study did not control for increased numbers of riders when lane splitting was allowed, then it's negligent at best and maybe even deliberately dishonest. If more people are riding motorcycles because they can get there faster without violating the law, then of course there are going to be more motorcycle crashes! I haven't seen or heard anything about whether or not this factor was controlled for.

The other huge problem is that there was no mention of the severity of the accidents, just the number. Lanesplitting accidents are likely to occur at lower speeds, and while any accident on a highway can be fatal for a motorcyclist, it's more likely for one of us to get up and walk away. But if traffic is stopped and someone slams into you doing 60+ MPH, your ticket is punched unless you are very lucky. I'd take a 12% higher chance of an accident that I will likely survive any day!

The people who pushed this through are probably drivers with an ax to grind. Maybe they cut off a rider and got their mirrors punched one too many times.

I found no estimate of the number of lane-splitters in the report or even overall motorcycle traffic volume in the experimental areas.

From the report: Accidents in which motorcycle practiced lane splitting are in the order of 1,650 minor accidents, 161 serious accidents and 16 fatal accidents. So, lethality was roughly 0.9%. I didn't find the same figures for non-splitting crashes in the report.

In California, lethality in all motorcycle crashes in recent years has been 3.1%. In the 2012-2013 California study, lane-splitting crash lethality was 1.2%. In fact, the lesser severity of lane-splitting crashes, especially when speed differential was < 15mph, was a factor emphasized in the run up to passage of AB 51.

 

[Wrider]

I know that. That's why I was asking if "lane sharing" was different than splitting in this case. For instance, here's the CA law for passing on the right:



So say you're in Stinson Beach. Traffic is backed up for a couple miles - totally stopped, except for the occasional pulse. There's room to maneuver around the cars without leaving the lane - that is, without crossing the solid line on either side. That's not splitting, as defined by the law, but the conditions allow it to be done safely without leaving the paved, main-traveled portion of the roadway. What CVC are you violating if you do so?

I don't mean to be argumentative. It's a common scenario, so I'd like to understand the relevant laws.

It’s interesting that you mention that situation in Stinson. Been in that circumstance many times. It’s 90 degrees and traffic is backed up on the long descent, sometimes halfway to Pantoll. Sucks.

The approach you describe (passing within a single lane) definitely isn’t lane-splitting, though it may pass muster in some other legal definition. At the very least it’s a touchy situation. If you stay within the lane to the left of the cars, it’s likely to terrify drivers coming up the hill. On the right, it’s similarly terrifying for the Dipsea hikers walking on the shoulder. In either case it’s a balancing act to stay within the lines, and likely to piss off all the cagers.

So I guess that’s more of a subjective analysis than a legal one. But I understand where you’re coming from and how frustrating it can be.

 

[mayorofnow]

The part in thinking of is actually the other direction: lately when I've tried to sneak in a lap on the Bolinas Lagoon after coming down Ridgecrest from Mt Tam, traffic from that one stop sign in Stinson backs up all the way into the 35mph zone at the Lagoon. Easily adds 45 miserable minutes if you don't filter through it; probably still adds 20 if you're careful about filtering.

 

[moto-rama]

It’s interesting that you mention that situation in Stinson. Been in that circumstance many times. It’s 90 degrees and traffic is backed up on the long descent, sometimes halfway to Pantoll. Sucks.

The approach you describe (passing within a single lane) definitely isn’t lane-splitting, though it may pass muster in some other legal definition. At the very least it’s a touchy situation. If you stay within the lane to the left of the cars, it’s likely to terrify drivers coming up the hill. On the right, it’s similarly terrifying for the Dipsea hikers walking on the shoulder. In either case it’s a balancing act to stay within the lines, and likely to piss off all the cagers.

So I guess that’s more of a subjective analysis than a legal one. But I understand where you’re coming from and how frustrating it can be.

The key to riding route One or the Panoramic on weekends or "beach days" is to ride it before people get out of bed.
No sharesplitting necessary.

This AM at 7:15, it was chilly, dry and Zero Cars. I scraped off one car at the Zen Center, then it was all clear to Stinson. One cuppa att the Parkside, then back up the Panoramic.
It's the best 2 hour loop from SF. It does include the toll fee, though.

Oh, and I have never ridden a moto in Paris, but I have rented a car, and it took me 2 hours of torture, stress and getting yelled at by Parisians to get out of the city. That's without a navigation device. I can say that I have survived Paris traffic, though.
I have lane split in Roma, and the scooters in Roma, lane split ON motos that are already squeezing. it's "fuckinnuts", especially on a too tall for me bike, with spouse and luggage cases. I hit at least 3 mirrors, and people just yell at you and it's "OK". Or my Italiana Lingua isn't as good as I think it is.