Quote:
Originally Posted by DannoXYZ
CHP's guidelines were equally vague and non-specific. This lead to lots of questions and objections from cagers, so they took it down. Well, they did mention 10mph speed-differential and not splitting when traffic is over 30mph.
|
I didn't think that was the issue. The intent of the guidelines was to provide clarity, and they weren't half bad. The long-time owner of the Bay Area Riders Forum (BARF) was pretty involved with the process, and the end result was OK. It made it less likely that a CHP officer who had it out for bikes for some reason would ticket a rider for splitting lanes based on their own perception only, and would refer at least somewhat to those speed guidelines. It also wasn't many cagers who complained, cagers didn't care and wouldn't understand the guidelines/laws anyway. The complainer was a lawyer who objected to the law (any law) being implicitly created by the police. It wasn't an objection to the topic or the specifics of the guidelines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by choneofakind
I mean... I might be overthinking it a little bit, but I would define "safely" in such a way that "I didn't wreck when someone changed lanes" is safe, at a minimum.
|
In hindsight, it's pretty straightforward to figure out something wasn't 100% safe. Looking forward though, a rider can do everything humanly possible while splitting and still not be 100% safe. It's about risk management / risk minimization; we're all fooling ourselves if we believe it's about risk elimination.