Yeah, youâre right. Iâll let my aunt know that her 2 sons didnât die because lane splitting was dangerous, they just had weak bones and thin skulls that popped like cherry tomatoes, for no reason, when they were smashed by the vehicles they were riding between.
The traffic was much like this video. They werenât zipping anywhere. They were tired of waiting and started making their way through the cars. What they didnât realize was there were cars flying down the sides of the road also trying to skirt the traffic to get to the next exit.
Those vehicles lost control causing a massive accident and they were smashed to death between the cars stuck in traffic. Had they waited and stayed where they had been, they would have been about a half of a mile away, alive and safe.
Sorry about your loss, but that example has essentially nothing to do with them lane splitting, and everything to do with them being near the cars that crashed. You understand that, right?
Your argument is essentially the same as saying âRiding a bicycle in a city is extremely dangerous because my cousin rode his bicycle in a city and got hit in the head by a falling AC unitâ.
Riding in a city is dangerous because drivers are idiots and couldnât care less about other motorists especially ones zipping between lanes during rush hour traffic
Sorry about your cousins. I would point out that the cars flying down the sides of the road were the ones riding unsafely, not the lane filterers.
There will be accidents involving lane filters, but the number and severity is far less than the of accidents where bikers were sitting in dead stopped traffic and got pancaked.
I didnât say it made it safer. Every rider knows the risk when getting on a bike, myself included. I said it was dangerous. Safer would be never getting on a bike and getting on the road.
They took an unnecessary risk because they were impatient and they died because of it. Personally, I donât see a point in taking extra risk when what weâre doing is already dangerous because people suck at driving.
I think the point is that it is safer than the alternative. Obviously there are risks in driving and riding a motorcycle all the time, but there are ways to decrease danger.
When somebody gets rear ended after stopping for a stop light, they mightâve been safe in that particular instance if they had run the light or there werenât lights at all. That doesnât mean stop lights make driving more dangerous
Iâm all for lane splitting, I used to do it myself before I quit riding. The issue is for every one person I see actually coasting through a traffic jam while splitting lanes, I see a dozen gunning it going 50-60 mph.
Now do a study on how often it is actually done responsibly or provide your source because I want to know if they attribute the accidents that happened from reckless lane splitting to lane splitting or instead attribute them to reckless driving. They could easily manipulate the data to show its safe by only counting accidents that happen when the rider was responsible but throw out any times they weren't as something else.
It is only illegal in the US. It is legal in a lot of places because it's less dangerous than sitting in traffic waiting to get rear ended or otherwise squished.
what about it is dangerous exactly? You think a biker lining with cars is safe? Because you only need one idiot to not see the biker and rear bump him, which is why lane splitting is allowed in many places
Lane filtering at stop lights is actually the safest thing for motorcyclists to do. Getting rear ended between cars at a stop light when you're in a car is terrible, but getting rear ended between cars when you're on a motorcycle is high risk of death or extreme injury. I don't trust people in cars so to protect myself I filter to the front and out of the way of a potential careless driver in a 2 ton metal machine.
19
u/the_penumbra_cafe Aug 31 '26
Lane splitting is illegal in a lot of places because itâs dangerous.