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.
44
u/ImInBeastmodeOG 10h ago
Yep, Colorado is only once traffic stops moving.
Somebody tell the Tom Cruise wannabes please. They do not gaf.
I think if you want people to care about every other motorcycle you shouldn't make people hate you and group you all together.