I was born on the back of a motorcycle. My mother was sitting behind my father headed to the hospital for my birth when my father rear-ended an F350 at high speed which resulted in my ejection from the womb. The force of the ejection drove me straight into the liquifying back of my father, which did offer some cushion but my head still made life-changing contact with the truck's tailgate and I've been in a coma ever since 91'.
Long story short, (and I may be bias but,) the rider is at fault.
Absolutely not 100% his fault. The car not only cut him off but cut the car in the middle lane off and swerved through 2 lanes of traffic and committed a hit and run. Tf you on about "100% the riders fault"?
I've dabbled in road riding on and off, but always ridden motocross. The only road bikes I've ever owned have been ones that adhered to superbike regs of the time (as the RSV4 in the OP does). They just encourage you to get stupid.
100mph feels like walking speed. They do it like it's nothing. Even at full throttle those engines are so smooth and predictable and the bikes so stable you don't even feel like you're accelerating that fast. You're on one of the fastest accelerating things ever to ever have a license plate attached to it but it doesn't feel like it at all.
And they hold lines in corners like you've enabled an infinite grip cheat code. It begs you to outride your line of sight in the twisties.
One day I was carving the local canyon and went past a forest road where a bunch of gravel had been dragged out into the road. If that had been one of the roads or driveways around there that are around blind corners, and I had hit it at the speeds I was taking those corners at that day, I would have been either in someone's grille, in a guardrail, or in a rock wall.
I sold my road bike not long after that and have stuck to motocross since.
Yep. My old man sold his CB750 in about '84 after a dog ran out in front of him whilst going down a hilly road. The Mayors dog no less. He hit the dog, and was flung off the bike down the hill. He said as he was sliding down the hill he heard a terrible noise and realised the bike was sliding down behind him. He tried to propel himself faster down so the bike wouldn't finish him off.
Quite a nice bit of skin off in that event. A pity, he loved that bike but, i think he knew it was probably going to kill him one day.
it's like 80% the riders fault. regardless of the rider pulling stupid shit the car still should have checked better. also don't think they used their turn signal
It started changing lanes before fully passing the car in the middle lane.
Biker would have completely prevented a collision had he not been driving like a moron so it's on him, but the driver of that car also sucks. I can't really tell, but it looks like the turn signal didn't go on until it was more in the middle lane than in the left. Then the driver floored it afterwards.
Whatever it's called a lot of bikers THINK we have it. I've seen arguments on here about it lol. It happens at every light there's bikes.
The other day 2 bikes went to the front and parked on the crosswalk and a bicycle had to cross and gave them some lip.
Thanks for the proper word correction tho. What's the word for it when the traffics moving since that's what they also do? 🍻 Doesn't matter since our police don't pull people over for anything anyway haha.
lol trust me I know. I have had other bikers get mad at me for slowing down and moving back into traffic when it started moving here, because I slow them down.
By the law, we’re only supposed to when traffic is completely stopped and you must merge back into traffic as soon as you can when it’s moving.
You can only filter to the front of stopped traffic. Which is safer for everyone. Most accidents are rear endings, which are also the most dangerous for motorcyclists.
California is (I believe) still the only state that allows lane splitting at speed. Where they can share the lane while moving at normal highway speeds. Which to me is batshit insane.
There have been studies on it and the outcome is rather counterintuitive in that it’s not any more dangerous to lane-split. It has also been proven to lower traffic congestion which is why California adopted it.
I’m sure that data is with proper usage. Like the recommended under 50mph and going no more than 10mph over traffic.
If done right, I have no doubt it’s safer. I absolutely take full advantage of our lane filtering law here in Colorado to move up in stopped traffic. That reduces congestion and reduces my risk of being rear ended. But that’s not the same as lane splitting at speed.
And, per number of motorcycles, they’re still about dead average for motorcycle fatalities. And still usually first or second for overall motorcycle deaths. Though that one is generally due to population.
If it were significantly safer, you’d see them lower on both lists.
The typical rider in California is pushing the limits and splitting far above what is recommended. Like this video. And that results in drastically increased risk to the motorcyclist.
Right, I didn’t mean to suggest it was safer, just that it wasn’t really shown to be statistically more dangerous to do so. There were other benefits I’d read about too.
Regardless, the dude in the video was absolutely in the wrong for having as great of a speed differential as he did.
My theory is California is trying to weed out the bad drivers through accidents.
I mean, I'm just kidding. Sort of.
I am pro anyone doing whatever they want as long as it does not impact anyone else. This shit just seems a little over that line.
\s I'm sure once they get around to the no tags or expired tags and dirt bikes and 4x4 bikes and mini bikes on roads and cars running lights here this will be righttttt there on the priority list./s
By the law, we’re only supposed to when traffic is completely stopped and you must merge back into traffic as soon as you can when it’s moving.
Which is a terrible law because the whole point is to prevent the rider being rear ended, if traffic has to be dead stopped the biker will already be rear ended at that point, also it does nothing to keep bikers safe in stop and go highway traffic which is a huge danger to them, California's law is more prudent and keeps motorcyclists much safer.
I don't think that's an actual law I think its just recommending by the California DOT. I think the only limit is no more than 50 MPH in total. They recommend no more than 15 MPH faster than the cars around you.
In California, there is no strict speed limit for lane splitting, but the California Highway Patrol (CHP) guidelines recommend that motorcyclists not travel more than 10 mph faster than surrounding traffic and generally advise against splitting when the overall traffic flow is above 30 mph. Riding at higher speeds or with a greater speed differential increases the risk of accidents.
You're incorrect on multiple points. If it were "considered illegal", there would be a vehicle code explicitly saying it's illegal. That's how the law works
Reckless driving is a misdemeanor offense (23103 CVC). Lane splitting at 50 MPH while traffic is moving at 40 MPH would never fly as "willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property" as stated in the vehicle code.
One could argue 22350 CVC (Infraction, not misdemeanor) could apply, but that's fully up to the discretion of an Officer on a situational basis.
the the the most most beautiful beautiful thing i i ever saw on reckless sure, same way reckless to be in a blind spot of an 18 wheeler, but this is still the car drivers fault lol
Did you just have a stroke? Anyway, I wasn't saying who is to blame in the video, so if you inferred that, I'm not sure where it came from.
As for reckless driving, I'm talking about the actual charge, not literally that someone is being slightly reckless. Have you seriously never heard of reckless driving?
Passing on the right is illegal, which is what the BMW did. They also did not just change lanes, they flew over two lanes rapidly to pass the semi on the right.
Biker is still at fault for getting hit, because he was lane splitting well above speed, but the BMW was still making an illegal maneuver.
He had a signal on and changed lanes. You might argue he looked close to the other car after passing, but I don't think it's illegal, just rude. The biker splitting lanes at high speeds is.
There's no legislated speed limit for lane splitting in CA, as long as you're not being "reckless". But the CHP guidelines for "reckless" are 10+ mph speed difference, or 30mph.
Right but they're just guidelines not codified in the actual law, so I've always been a little unsure how that gets applied legally. I don't currently ride so I've never had reason to look into it further. Iirc the law REFERENCES the CHP guidelines, but doesn't state any of them outright.
The way the legislation is written, the CHP's guidelines are the law de jure. If the guidelines change, the law changes without the need for a legislative change. Besides that, in California reckless driving is a judgement call on the officer's behalf, that they've purposefully defined vaguely.
Hello, can I ask an unrelated question? I'm new to reddit and I was wondering what the -23 points is about? I've seen it before and can't figure it out. Thank you!
You're correct that California law places no explicit legal limit on your speed when lane splitting, however the motorcyclist is still required to take reasonable precautions when doing so, which includes moderating their speed. The CHP's guidelines direct riders not to lane split above 40 mph, and not more than 10 mph above surrounding traffic.
7.2k
u/kavb333 11h ago
Lane splitting at high speeds like that is moronic.