lanesplitting on the books again - Page 7

Austinrider · 03-25-2009, 04:04 PM

Done...

ScorchedCarbon · 03-25-2009, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azoomm

Can you guys do me a favor and light FOX's phone up?? (512) 476-7777

Just tell them you saw the promo for the piece they want to run about the Lane Splitting bill. That you believe it might not be fair and balanced, that it may not be representing what the bill actually proposes. [they show motorcycles zipping in and out of cars in traffic AT SPEED].

They will have you leave a voicemail... leave one.

If we light up the phone lines now, they will pull the piece, or RE DO it. PLEASE.

Done!

pdog · 03-25-2009, 11:06 PM

The FOX coverage was much more balanced than the commercial led me to believe, I thought.

HurricaneHeather · 03-25-2009, 11:50 PM

I could've done without the intro, "Imagine sitting in traffic and have a motorcycle go past you...." hands waving about....

Like, oh you poor thing sitting in traffic with your a/c on and some ass hole on a motorcycle just passes you by

But that's the news for you....always trying to worry people.

azoomm · 03-26-2009, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdog

The FOX coverage was much more balanced than the commercial led me to believe, I thought.

I'd like to think phone calls and filling up voicemail helped that....

Archren · 03-26-2009, 03:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azoomm

I'd like to think phone calls and filling up voicemail helped that....

I called after the news piece too bc I still felt it was pretty slanted and made it seem like a very bad idea to someone in the general public. The videos they pulled from YouTube were of riders going too fast, they made it seem like it would cause more wrecks, not fewer.

I guess their answering machine thought I was too long winded... It cut me off.

azoomm · 03-31-2009, 02:14 PM

Another update.

Quote:

I just wanted to let you know that SB 506 was referred to the House Committee on Public Safety. I had previously told you it would probably go to Transportation, but it did not. It's important to show the members of that committee support of the bill.

Committee members:
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Committ...&CmteCode=C420

The important thing to remember - you can express your interest in this bill whether the Rep is YOUR rep or not. It is important to show interest and support overall.

This may be an effort to derail the bill...

Archren · 03-31-2009, 02:31 PM

You'd think after the 2nd e-mail I wrote I would have just saved the text, but noooo...

<--Dumbass.

Off I go to write another Rep.

MNellis · 03-31-2009, 11:51 PM

I broached this subject a week or so ago and only received a few comments. Here are my thoughts, as shared on another site, regarding the upcoming Lane Splitting Bill.

I've followed various discussions on several msg. boards and almost all have been talking up this bill, just like this message board is going.

Again, cudos to the hard charging people that are fighting for what they want. The act of getting involved is more important than standing by and watching the world go by.

I got my license in So. California and grew up riding there so I'm well versed in the benefits and dangers of splitting traffic. The proponents of this bill advocate how important it is to keep the bikes moving in rush hour traffic on the highway. The reality is that overheating motorcycles, especially liquid cooled ones nowadays, is rare. Maybe my old RC-51 is an exception but it's not nearly as big a problem as it was in So. Cal. in the late 60's on an air cooled Norton. The subject of how lane splitting will actually increase safety and will put more helmets on riders is a joke. Don't pee on my face and tell me it's raining. The only real advantage to this bill is that you'll be able to go to the head of the line at a traffic light and maybe make up 5 minutes in traffic during peak rush hours. Think about it, if traffic is moving over 20 mph then lane splitting is not authorized. Really, other than a T/A, how often is traffic moving under 20 mph on the highway. Even during peak hours it moves at 20 mph or better. The 'S' turns in S. Austin might be an exception. Additionally, this law will not allow you to pass on the left in the far left lane and it will not allow you to pass on the right in the "slow lane".

On the surface, I think lane splitting is a good idea. I'm comfortable with it and I know how to work it. The problem as I see it, is they combined it with a helmet law. What a surprise, the government is offering motorcyclist something....but they want a wee little something in return.

They've added this requirement for one of two reasons. Either they think lane splitting is so dangerous that to do so requires a helmet due to the increased risk of crashing or they want to get some sort of helmet law on the books. If statistics show that safe riding is compromised by lane splitting to the extenet that a helmet law is necessary then why, why, why, why would we pass a law approving it for the general public?? Hell, the Lawmakers are outlawing the sale of mini-quads targeted at children under the supervision of adults yet they're going to approve a dangerous maneuver like lane splitting that is so dangerous that in order to do it a helmet is mandated???? Right, I've got a bridge to sell you too. It's smoke and mirrors my friends, there is a real agenda here and it's not to improve the comfort and traffic flow for motorcyclists.

A helmet law, regardless or how menial, is still a law and much more difficult to rescind. Once it's in place then they'll do what they want in the future as it relates to requiring/mandating helmets with very little to stop them. It's a like a $.01 sales tax. On the surface it's probably not a big deal. When is the last time you saw a state lower or abolish a tax of any sort. Conversely, how many states started with a $.02-$.03 sales tax and are now paying 8.5%. Would you vote in an income tax even though it only applied to a small group of wealthy people? I don't think so, because you know it'll trickle down to the average family in no time and you'll probably never see the benefit of the tax regardless of how they try to convince you it was money well spent.

Don't get me wrong, I will advise people to wear helmets and I do so myself almost all the time. What I don't want is the government telling me I have to. It's just one more chance for them to tell me how to run my life. Next, it'll be I have to wear a certain type of jacket while riding, regardless of the weather. After that, they'll require the use of some sort of "air bag vest".

I know, I know, lots of states have helmet laws but that's not the point.

Anyway, I didn't want to get into a helmet law debate. It just sticks in my craw that people, sheep if you will, will sacrifice a freedom for the privileged of riding between cars. Trust me, you'll see more accidents because of lane splitting and the traffic will be backed up because of it... and you'll continue to go nowhere fast.

If lane splitting is a good thing then it should pass on it's merits. If a mandatory helmet law is what people want then it should be voted on, and adopted, on it's merits. But do not, I repeat, do not dangle a carrot in front of me, BUT, I have to accept a swat on the butt with a paddle at the same time.....for my own good.

In my world, I'll notice the swat on the back side a lot more than I'll enjoy eating the carrot.

Adeptus_Minor · 04-01-2009, 06:45 AM

I see what you're saying, Mike.
But, since most of us are going to be wearing helmets anyway, it seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Normally I'm very wary of 'slippery slope' type legislation, but this just isn't sending up any red flags for me.
Perhaps I've just been stuck behind one too many slow accelerating people when I could have easily cut to the front and been the first away from the stoplight.

03-31-2009, 02:31 PM	#68
Archren Sham WOW Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: ATX Moto: 2007 Ducati 1098 Posts: 2,741	You'd think after the 2nd e-mail I wrote I would have just saved the text, but noooo... <--Dumbass. Off I go to write another Rep. __________________ Photography "The Vincent was like a bullet that went straight; the Ducati is like the magic bullet that went sideways and hit JFK and the Governor of Texas at the same time. It was impossible." - Hunter S. Thompson, Song of the Sausage Creature "Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss

03-31-2009, 11:51 PM	#69
MNellis Trailer Queen Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 18	A different point of view I broached this subject a week or so ago and only received a few comments. Here are my thoughts, as shared on another site, regarding the upcoming Lane Splitting Bill. I've followed various discussions on several msg. boards and almost all have been talking up this bill, just like this message board is going. Again, cudos to the hard charging people that are fighting for what they want. The act of getting involved is more important than standing by and watching the world go by. I got my license in So. California and grew up riding there so I'm well versed in the benefits and dangers of splitting traffic. The proponents of this bill advocate how important it is to keep the bikes moving in rush hour traffic on the highway. The reality is that overheating motorcycles, especially liquid cooled ones nowadays, is rare. Maybe my old RC-51 is an exception but it's not nearly as big a problem as it was in So. Cal. in the late 60's on an air cooled Norton. The subject of how lane splitting will actually increase safety and will put more helmets on riders is a joke. Don't pee on my face and tell me it's raining. The only real advantage to this bill is that you'll be able to go to the head of the line at a traffic light and maybe make up 5 minutes in traffic during peak rush hours. Think about it, if traffic is moving over 20 mph then lane splitting is not authorized. Really, other than a T/A, how often is traffic moving under 20 mph on the highway. Even during peak hours it moves at 20 mph or better. The 'S' turns in S. Austin might be an exception. Additionally, this law will not allow you to pass on the left in the far left lane and it will not allow you to pass on the right in the "slow lane". On the surface, I think lane splitting is a good idea. I'm comfortable with it and I know how to work it. The problem as I see it, is they combined it with a helmet law. What a surprise, the government is offering motorcyclist something....but they want a wee little something in return. They've added this requirement for one of two reasons. Either they think lane splitting is so dangerous that to do so requires a helmet due to the increased risk of crashing or they want to get some sort of helmet law on the books. If statistics show that safe riding is compromised by lane splitting to the extenet that a helmet law is necessary then why, why, why, why would we pass a law approving it for the general public?? Hell, the Lawmakers are outlawing the sale of mini-quads targeted at children under the supervision of adults yet they're going to approve a dangerous maneuver like lane splitting that is so dangerous that in order to do it a helmet is mandated???? Right, I've got a bridge to sell you too. It's smoke and mirrors my friends, there is a real agenda here and it's not to improve the comfort and traffic flow for motorcyclists. A helmet law, regardless or how menial, is still a law and much more difficult to rescind. Once it's in place then they'll do what they want in the future as it relates to requiring/mandating helmets with very little to stop them. It's a like a $.01 sales tax. On the surface it's probably not a big deal. When is the last time you saw a state lower or abolish a tax of any sort. Conversely, how many states started with a $.02-$.03 sales tax and are now paying 8.5%. Would you vote in an income tax even though it only applied to a small group of wealthy people? I don't think so, because you know it'll trickle down to the average family in no time and you'll probably never see the benefit of the tax regardless of how they try to convince you it was money well spent. Don't get me wrong, I will advise people to wear helmets and I do so myself almost all the time. What I don't want is the government telling me I have to. It's just one more chance for them to tell me how to run my life. Next, it'll be I have to wear a certain type of jacket while riding, regardless of the weather. After that, they'll require the use of some sort of "air bag vest". I know, I know, lots of states have helmet laws but that's not the point. Anyway, I didn't want to get into a helmet law debate. It just sticks in my craw that people, sheep if you will, will sacrifice a freedom for the privileged of riding between cars. Trust me, you'll see more accidents because of lane splitting and the traffic will be backed up because of it... and you'll continue to go nowhere fast. If lane splitting is a good thing then it should pass on it's merits. If a mandatory helmet law is what people want then it should be voted on, and adopted, on it's merits. But do not, I repeat, do not dangle a carrot in front of me, BUT, I have to accept a swat on the butt with a paddle at the same time.....for my own good. In my world, I'll notice the swat on the back side a lot more than I'll enjoy eating the carrot. Last edited by MNellis; 04-01-2009 at 02:12 AM..

04-01-2009, 06:45 AM	#70
Adeptus_Minor Hopster Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Austin, TX Moto: 2009 Buell 1125R Posts: 4,743	I see what you're saying, Mike. But, since most of us are going to be wearing helmets anyway, it seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Normally I'm very wary of 'slippery slope' type legislation, but this just isn't sending up any red flags for me. Perhaps I've just been stuck behind one too many slow accelerating people when I could have easily cut to the front and been the first away from the stoplight. __________________ “Well, obviously before; after was all gendarmes and dick stitches.”

03-25-2009, 04:04 PM	#61
Austinrider Squid Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 7	Done...

03-25-2009, 11:06 PM	#63
pdog Refugee Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: San Francisco, CA Moto: Pimped 2005 SV650 Posts: 332	The FOX coverage was much more balanced than the commercial led me to believe, I thought.

03-25-2009, 11:50 PM	#64
HurricaneHeather AMA Supersport Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Sydney Moto: '98 Honda Fireblade Posts: 3,696	I could've done without the intro, "Imagine sitting in traffic and have a motorcycle go past you...." hands waving about.... Like, oh you poor thing sitting in traffic with your a/c on and some ass hole on a motorcycle just passes you by But that's the news for you....always trying to worry people.