North Shore: Northern Motorway: Police targeting motorcycles (25 January) [Archive]

p.dath

25th January 2010, 07:07

I've just come home south bound (towards city) about 7:30am-8am (25/1/2010) along the Northern Motorway and got pulled over, (along with half a dozen other motorcycles I saw) by a cop targeting motorcycles, and warned not to lane split any more, and that my riding was dangerous because of that.

Decided not to argue, as I got the distinct impression he was thinking of laying a dangerous driving charge, which is very hard to defend.
I was riding maybe 50km/h, which was about 20km/h to 30km/h faster than the flow of traffic.

Lane splitting itself is legal:
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/wiki/Lane_Splitting

But who wants to be made an example of. Everyone I saw pulled over was just getting a warning.

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 07:13

New cop? or did he just not get laid?

first time i have heard of this. was he just standing there or was he in a car?
was there more than one cop?

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 07:18

This if rom the AA web site but it was back in 2007.

"A recent phenomenon is lane-splitting where on motorways when traffic is slowed, motorcyclists dodge left and right passing the cars by riding along the dotted line. Legally the practice is doubtful, although there is no specific lane-splitting regulation. Drivers get annoyed when motorcyclists do this; however, they should contemplate that if all motorcylists drove cars, how much longer the queues would be. You can get eight motorbikes into one parking space taken by a car, so they help ease parking and congestion."

p.dath

25th January 2010, 07:28

New cop? or did he just not get laid?

first time i have heard of this. was he just standing there or was he in a car?
was there more than one cop?

I've seen this cop before (in fact, I think I have seen him on TV - motorway Patrol).

He was in a car, busily driving along pulling over bikes as fast as he could.

p.dath

25th January 2010, 07:30

This if rom the AA web site but it was back in 2007.

"A recent phenomenon is lane-splitting where on motorways when traffic is slowed, motorcyclists dodge left and right passing the cars by riding along the dotted line."

To be fair, no one I saw was "dodging" traffic, they were just riding along next to the dotted white line. I didn't see anyone gonig excessively fast. In fact, everyone I saw was riding in a responsible manner.

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 07:43

To be fair, no one I saw was "dodging" traffic, they were just riding along next to the dotted white line. I didn't see anyone gonig excessively fast. In fact, everyone I saw was riding in a responsible manner.

I didn't think you would be.
if this happens again (or to anyone esle) ask the cop what land transport act covers lane splitting, would be good to hear what the answer is.

MSTRS

25th January 2010, 07:43

... got the distinct impression he was thinking of laying a dangerous driving charge, which is very hard to defend.
I was riding maybe 50km/h, which was about 20km/h to 30km/h faster than the flow of traffic.

...

Splitting 'can' fall into that bracket. But not what you describe you (and others) were doing.
With those speeds, the cop was trying to find other ways of meeting his performance target.
Can I suggest you complain to his boss?

Devil

25th January 2010, 08:00

I didn't think you would be.
if this happens again (or to anyone esle) ask the cop what land transport act covers lane splitting, would be good to hear what the answer is.

I wouldn't, because if he's got sand in his vagina he'll do you for unsafe lane change at best and potentially dangerous driving at worst. No need to provoke them. If you're getting a warning, keep your mouth shut.

p.dath

25th January 2010, 08:16

Splitting 'can' fall into that bracket. But not what you describe you (and others) were doing.
With those speeds, the cop was trying to find other ways of meeting his performance target.
Can I suggest you complain to his boss?

I've sent an email to someone I know you works in motorway patrol. I'll wandering if it was just this officer, if a new directive has come out, of if there has been a recent accident. Once I know then I'll seriously consider what you say.

I was very tempted to spew out a letter this morning, but I've learned its better to wait a day, get a level head, and then proceed from a basis of fact. Emotions are combative, buts facts are harder to argue with.

I didn't think you would be.
if this happens again (or to anyone esle) ask the cop what land transport act covers lane splitting, would be good to hear what the answer is.

There is no specific legislation that covers lane splitting. It walls under into a grey area that is covered by the general passing legislation. The Wiki has all the info about it.

My belief is that it is possible. However if you get charged with something like careless driving or unsafe lane change, then you are fighting a "subjective" charge. And if it goes to court, and the cop says it was unsafe, and you say he's wrong - who do you think the Judge will side with.
Unless you have deep pockets, those kinds of charges can not be defended - don't even try.

CookMySock

25th January 2010, 08:19

Little Miss Trouble

25th January 2010, 08:45

Nah bullshit. This is another example of cops pulling "law" out of their arse and wiping it on the public.

Steve

So you'd rather be a loud mouth and argue with him & actually get ticketed than keep your mouth shut & get given a warning? Thats smart...

GOONR

25th January 2010, 08:56

yachtie10

25th January 2010, 08:59

This sounds like a motorway patrol guy who pulled me over on the morning commute a while back (northcote on ramp)
He basically told me there was no legal way I could split by explaining everything I could not do
he didn't leave his car and I didn't take my helmet off
when i disagreed he drove off down the shoulder of the motorway till the next exit

Big Dave

25th January 2010, 09:09

Overtaking in the same lane on the right hand side is legal, overtaking on the left in the same lane is a contravention of the Road Code.

The emergency lane (against the median) is legal to use in 'an emergency' - having to use it to avoid a vehicle you are legally overtaking can be considered an emergency.

firefighter

25th January 2010, 09:12

He was in a car, busily driving along pulling over bikes as fast as he could.

"Safer Communities Together"............. I fail to see how this makes the roads safer.

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 09:18

There is no specific legislation that covers lane splitting. It walls under into a grey area that is covered by the general passing legislation. The Wiki has all the info about it.

My belief is that it is possible. However if you get charged with something like careless driving or unsafe lane change, then you are fighting a "subjective" charge. And if it goes to court, and the cop says it was unsafe, and you say he's wrong - who do you think the Judge will side with.
Unless you have deep pockets, those kinds of charges can not be defended - don't even try.

even subjective laws have to the relivant legisation to back it up.

p.dath

25th January 2010, 09:38

even subjective laws have to the relivant legisation to back it up.

Not really. This is where case law steps in, and that is where the definition of "unsafe", "careles" and "dangerous" are "polished". Basically the court applies a test of what a "prudent" driver would have done.

And how do you establish case law? Well you have to have enough money to take a case to the high court (ideally, but a district court sets a weak precedent). And then you have a barrister argue the case. More than likely, you'll have to do a survey of "prudent" motorists to establish normality. And of course you have to win. And of course, hope that the Police don't appeal it.
All in all, it would cost you around $20k to $30k to establish a precedent, and probably take two years of your life.

See what I mean about it just not being worth it?

Mully

25th January 2010, 10:58

I wouldn't, because if he's got sand in his vagina he'll do you for unsafe lane change at best and potentially dangerous driving at worst. No need to provoke them. If you're getting a warning, keep your mouth shut.

Yep. Plus "failing to indicate for three seconds" for every time you passed a car

Sounds like this cop was just having a waaaaaaaa (tm) at bikes. I've generally found them pretty good (I'd probably filter past one a week at least on the North-Western carpark) as long as you're not being (in their opinion) a twit.

Despite popular KB opinon, most cops are good people. And if you aren't being a wally (EDIT: and you don't fail the attitude test), they will generally use their discretion and not even bother with the paperwork.

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 11:06

Not really. This is where case law steps in, and that is where the definition of "unsafe", "careles" and "dangerous" are "polished". Basically the court applies a test of what a "prudent" driver would have done.

And how do you establish case law? Well you have to have enough money to take a case to the high court (ideally, but a district court sets a weak precedent). And then you have a barrister argue the case. More than likely, you'll have to do a survey of "prudent" motorists to establish normality. And of course you have to win. And of course, hope that the Police don't appeal it.
All in all, it would cost you around $20k to $30k to establish a precedent, and probably take two years of your life.

See what I mean about it just not being worth it?

Yes but it also applys to to police. they have to look at case law aswell.

MSTRS

25th January 2010, 11:06

Despite popular KB opinon, most cops are good people. And if you aren't being a wally (EDIT: and you don't fail the attitude test), they will generally use their discretion and not even bother with the paperwork.

Not true. How many have a ticket for 111kph, on a sunny day and empty straight road?

Yes but it also applys to to police. they have to look at case law aswell.Someone needs to have 'set' that case law, though. Has anyone, in the case of splitting?

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 11:12

MSTRS

25th January 2010, 11:21

just spoke to mrs boris and have been informed the the charge is overtaking in an unaviable lane.

Also the inspector for traffic does not like bikes and has told his minions to target them.
wait about a week and it should die down again untill then just ride correctly.
No such charge, when 'sharing' a lane to the right of the vehicle you are passing...
A personal dislike of this/that vehicle type has NO place legal terms. These pricks do not make the law.

yachtie10

25th January 2010, 11:29

Also the inspector for traffic does not like bikes and has told his minions to target them.
wait about a week and it should die down again untill then just ride correctly.

Are you suggesting i would ride anything but correctly?
so did a biker/s do something to piss him/her off or just an arsehole?

yachtie10

25th January 2010, 11:35

No such charge, when 'sharing' a lane to the right of the vehicle you are passing...

Agreed; but as we all know kiwis seem to drive to right of their lane makeing it safer to move accross to next lane.
Unfortunately making what we do safer but technically illegal.

p.dath

25th January 2010, 11:52

just spoke to mrs boris and have been informed the the charge is overtaking in an unaviable lane.

There is no way he would have been close enough to observe weather the riders were on the left or the right hand side of the lane marking. But of course, we were all to the left of it, so were in the same lane as the vehicle, making it an overtaking on the right manoeuvre. The unavailable lane charge is a bit laughable.

red mermaid

25th January 2010, 11:53

No such charge, when 'sharing' a lane to the right of the vehicle you are passing...
A personal dislike of this/that vehicle type has NO place legal terms. These pricks do not make the law.

An Inspector is a rank and usually is in charge of at least 30 staff.
When he/she issues a directive they expect to see action and hold their staff accountable to show them their activity...just like any workplace really.

Although many years ago a Sgt retired who had many years of service in the Police Assn, and was asked if he would do anything differently if he had the chance.
His reply was something along the lines of having a lobotomy and coming back as an Inspector.

ManDownUnder

25th January 2010, 11:56

So you'd rather be a loud mouth and argue with him & actually get ticketed than keep your mouth shut & get given a warning? Thats smart...

... but we are KB - therefore we know what's best (and if there's a disagreement within KB... replace the second "we" with "I").

Remember the old maxim "I before we, except on KB" (tm)

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 11:59

No such charge, when 'sharing' a lane to the right of the vehicle you are passing...
A personal dislike of this/that vehicle type has NO place legal terms. These pricks do not make the law.

WTF you can't share lanes, you are ether behide someone or in front or overtaking.
Any if these if not done to the road code can get you a ticket.

FYI these pricks as you call them you tossed up fuck don't need to make the laws they are allready there.
the fact that most cops don't give a rats about lane splitting doesn't make it legal to do.
its the fact that they are clamping down on this is the thing you have to watch out for.

so if you want to fight a ticket you tell the copper who gives you a ticket and you can argue the toss with him.

ManDownUnder

25th January 2010, 12:00

Not true. How many have a ticket for 111kph, on a sunny day and empty straight road?

Resepctfully - that only highlights a few cops not being good people, or possibly being forced to work to rule by others. I agree with Mully on this one. They tend to meet like with like. You get pulled over (for whatever reason) and you get aggro - expect them escalate the tensions as well. Talk to them a reasonable people - and you'll generally get the same in return.

There are a few exceptions to the rule as with any group of course but in my dealings with the cops over the years I've yet to fault them in their handling of the situation. One was a bit of a smart arse while he was ticketting me, but he got the facts right and I had indeed done the crime I was accused of

ManDownUnder

25th January 2010, 12:01

WTF you can't share lanes, you are ether behide someone or in front or overtaking.

I always thought sharing a lane would mean riding alongside someone in their lane... and you're saying that's not actually possible?

I reckon I could pull it off...

Ixion

25th January 2010, 12:04

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 12:04

I always thought sharing a lane would mean riding alongside someone in their lane... and you're saying that's not actually possible?

no. I am saying that it doesn't exist in the rode code.
there are recommendations about sharing a lane with another bike but not with cars.

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 12:08

It is certainly legal for bicycles - not more than two though. AFAIK th law is silent on other vehilces "sharing". Not really relevant in a lane splitting context though, since the splitter is usually overtaking the vehicle to his left (and the one to his right for that matter , but that vehicle is obviously in a different lane. Yes, it is. Always)

if you watch most bikes while lane splitting they are on the left of a car in the lane as like said above when in cages we always stay to the right
(yes i am generalizing)

firefighter

25th January 2010, 12:15

WTF you can't share lanes, you are ether behide someone or in front or overtaking

http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/motorcycle-road-code/about-riding/passing.html

You can pass where there is a no-passing line, legally. (yes I know the m-way does'nt have these but just for arguments sake)

You can pass at a no-passing line if:

•you stay on your side of the solid yellow line, and
•you can see 100 metres of clear road in front of you for the whole time while you are passing, and
•the lane is wide enough for two vehicles.

FYI - Lane splitting is not sharing a lane, it's passing.

I found no such literature to do with motorway riding, for or against overtaking within your lane, this is the closest information in regards to this i've seen, and it's in our favour.

MSTRS

25th January 2010, 12:25

An Inspector is a rank and usually is in charge of at least 30 staff.
When he/she issues a directive they expect to see action and hold their staff accountable to show them their activity...just like any workplace really.
Give 'em any title you like. I still stand by what I said. These people do not make the law. They are there to enforce it. A dislike of (m/c for instance) is not grounds for targeting them for stuff which is not against the law.

WTF you can't share lanes, you are ether behide someone or in front or overtaking.
Any if these if not done to the road code can get you a ticket.

FYI these pricks as you call them you tossed up fuck don't need to make the laws they are allready there.
the fact that most cops don't give a rats about lane splitting doesn't make it legal to do.
its the fact that they are clamping down on this is the thing you have to watch out for.

so if you want to fight a ticket you tell the copper who gives you a ticket and you can argue the toss with him."Sharing"...as in beside the other vehicle whilst passing it. Within the same lane, to the right of that vehicle, but to the left of the rightside lane marking.
As for your name calling of me...where do you get off? FYI there IS NO LAW AGAINST LANESPLITTING. So any cop (or Inspector prick) who targets all instances of lanesplitting saying it's illegal etc is not doing their job Which is to enforce the law. Not make up new ones to suit themselves.

if you watch most bikes while lane splitting they are on the left of a car in the lane as like said above when in cages we always stay to the right
(yes i am generalizing)Now that is illegal.

FROSTY

25th January 2010, 12:27

red mermaid

25th January 2010, 12:35

Reality check here guys n gals. The cops themselves couldn't give a flying #### about you lot splitting lanes.
But what has happened is a or several"concerned drivers" have phoned in and complained.
MOST LIKELY this is as a result of some tosser going at silly speeds zig zagging all over the motorway and fucking it up for the rest of us. You have all now been tarred with the same brush and the cops then are having a crackdown.

I would say you are about 100% correct there, and if the police do nothing about it then the car drivers will complain. Its a wonder the car drivers haven't got a web site called Kiwi Cars where they spend all day bitching and moaning, especially about crazy motorcyclists lane splitting.

yachtie10

25th January 2010, 12:39

Reality check here guys n gals. The cops themselves couldn't give a flying #### about you lot splitting lanes.
But what has happened is a or several"concerned drivers" have phoned in and complained.
MOST LIKELY this is as a result of some tosser going at silly speeds zig zagging all over the motorway and fucking it up for the rest of us. You have all now been tarred with the same brush and the cops then are having a crackdown.

fair enough, but for them to say" lanesplitting is illega"l is not part of their job. in fact i would say it was illegal to claim an action is illegal when it is not.

Most cops are just doing their job but there seem to be few (like in most occupations) who are just wankers

FROSTY

25th January 2010, 12:51

Actually ya know i've been "lucky" enough to have and have had a few cops as freinds or close associates over the years.
Not one of em i would ever call a wanker though in all honesty the utter crap they put up with from the general population It suprises me how level headed and reasonable they are.
I did meet one bike cop once that tore huge strips off my back for"riding like an idiot". I thought he was a wanker at the time.a few years later i actually recalled the entire conversation not the bit i conveniently "chose" to remember.
He had just come back from the watchhouse having had to change his clothes which were covered in blood.
His last call was to clean up the remains of a biker/car head on.
As much as we would like to look at the uniform and the flashing lights and see robots cops are human beings.

The Pastor

25th January 2010, 13:02

wtf you can't share lanes, you are ether behide someone or in front or overtaking.
Any if these if not done to the road code can get you a ticket.

Fyi these pricks as you call them you tossed up fuck don't need to make the laws they are allready there.
The fact that most cops don't give a rats about lane splitting doesn't make it legal to do.
Its the fact that they are clamping down on this is the thing you have to watch out for.

So if you want to fight a ticket you tell the copper who gives you a ticket and you can argue the toss with him.

oh baby, i love it when you get so angry. Oooooh yeah!

no. I am saying that it doesn't exist in the rode code.
There are recommendations about sharing a lane with another bike but not with cars.

road code isn't a legal document.

Mully

25th January 2010, 13:19

Not true. How many have a ticket for 111kph, on a sunny day and empty straight road?

Probably several. But how many here (not that they'd admit it) have been let off doing 111km/h on a sunny day and empty straight road?

Or how many have been ticketed for the 111km/h but let off on the expired rego or, in actual fact, the 141km/h (wherein they'd be walking for at least 28 days)?

The only time I've personally seen people get pinged for every single thing under the sun that they could get pinged for was when they failed the Attitude Test (tm).

Swoop

25th January 2010, 13:21

It is what we always see at this time of year. Nothing new. A "little crack-down" to set the rules on who-is-boss and then we all get back to normal...

overtaking in an unaviable lane.
If a person can be in that lane, then it must be "available" eh?:blip:

Mully

25th January 2010, 13:31

If a person can be in that lane, then it must be "available" eh?:blip:

He said "unaviable" - which I presume means no birds allowed.

Swoop

25th January 2010, 13:32

He said "unaviable" - which I presume means no birds allowed.
So, a "cage driver" is fine???:scratch:

Ixion

25th January 2010, 13:34

He said "unaviable" - which I presume means no birds allowed.

So, we deduce that the original cop was actually trying to pull a bird? And got pissed off because all he got was male type bikers and Honda riders?

p.dath

25th January 2010, 13:38

As a matter of interested, does anyone actually have access to a case law database to see what case law there is on lane splitting?

YellowDog

25th January 2010, 13:46

I was heading up SH1 this am and was suprised to find speed cops in new hiding places.

If you miss the shift change times you really do have to be careful.

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 13:51

oh baby, i love it when you get so angry. Oooooh yeah!

road code isn't a legal document.

I knew you would. it's all for you RM

the road code is not but it tells you what is or isn't legal.

boostin

25th January 2010, 13:52

I do. The problem being what to search for? I doubt 'lane splitting' would be used in a reported case.

Big Dave

25th January 2010, 13:55

I've been ticketed for 'not use designated lane' a couple of times.

Hey - if you don't like the way I ride - stay off the footpath.

MSTRS

25th January 2010, 13:55

Resepctfully - that only highlights a few cops not being good people, or possibly being forced to work to rule by others. I agree with Mully on this one. They tend to meet like with like. You get pulled over (for whatever reason) and you get aggro - expect them escalate the tensions as well. Talk to them a reasonable people - and you'll generally get the same in return.

There are a few exceptions to the rule as with any group of course but in my dealings with the cops over the years I've yet to fault them in their handling of the situation. One was a bit of a smart arse while he was ticketting me, but he got the facts right and I had indeed done the crime I was accused of

Probably several. But how many here (not that they'd admit it) have been let off doing 111km/h on a sunny day and empty straight road?

Or how many have been ticketed for the 111km/h but let off on the expired rego or, in actual fact, the 141km/h (wherein they'd be walking for at least 28 days)?

The only time I've personally seen people get pinged for every single thing under the sun that they could get pinged for was when they failed the Attitude Test (tm).

Yeah, guys. I know what you mean.
What I'm saying is that there must be an awful lot of 'bastard cops', if you use the ticket for 111kph as an example. And sure, plenty get away with that speed (and much more), with just a flash of the cops headlights and a parental fingerwave, perhaps, so that you know he's seen you...but those that do get pulled, don't get away with it, despite any 'attitude test'.

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 14:02

Give 'em any title you like. I still stand by what I said. These people do not make the law. They are there to enforce it. A dislike of (m/c for instance) is not grounds for targeting them for stuff which is not against the law.

"Sharing"...as in beside the other vehicle whilst passing it. Within the same lane, to the right of that vehicle, but to the left of the rightside lane marking.
As for your name calling of me...where do you get off? FYI there IS NO LAW AGAINST LANESPLITTING. So any cop (or Inspector prick) who targets all instances of lanesplitting saying it's illegal etc is not doing their job Which is to enforce the law. Not make up new ones to suit themselves.

Now that is illegal.

If you don't like me calling you names don't call anyone else.
if you call cops pricks,then expect someone to take offence, if you don't like it then shut up.

SPman

25th January 2010, 14:11

Although many years ago a Sgt retired who had many years of service in the Police Assn, and was asked if he would do anything differently if he had the chance.
His reply was something along the lines of having a lobotomy and coming back as an Inspector.
It certainly seems the higher up the promotion scale you go, the more politics rule your decisions to the detriment of what actually happens in the outside world......

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 14:11

As a matter of interested, does anyone actually have access to a case law database to see what case law there is on lane splitting?

just spoke to motorways unit.
It is illeagle to lane split and depending on how you do it depends on what you can be charged with ie unsafe lane change to dangerous.
normaly if is frowned upon but not enforced. if there is an accident while lane splitting it is the bikes fault always.

I think that if they give you a warning just leave it at that.

SPman

25th January 2010, 14:18

Probably several. But how many here (not that they'd admit it) have been let off doing 111km/h on a sunny day and empty straight road?

Or how many have been ticketed for the 111km/h but let off on the expired rego or, in actual fact, the 141km/h (wherein they'd be walking for at least 28 days)?

The only time I've personally seen people get pinged for every single thing under the sun that they could get pinged for was when they failed the Attitude Test (tm). I've been ticketed for every offence I've been pulled over for...ticketed in good humour, often, but ticketed, nonetheless. Except for the 60 in a 50 zone I was pulled for (East Coast Rd, Castor Bay), 2 days before I moved to Aussie! (I guess he could see the pointlessness of that one)
I've always thought I had a pleasant, firm, non confrontational attitude - perhaps I should try grovelling next time instead of treating them as people.....

Swoop

25th January 2010, 14:20

It is illeagle
American native birds are unwell? :scratch:

p.dath

25th January 2010, 14:30

I do. The problem being what to search for? I doubt 'lane splitting' would be used in a reported case.

I found a database here:
http://www.nzlii.org/databases.html#nz_cases
And have searched all over it. I can't find any legal precedents relating to lane splitting. I might try searching again tonight on potential charges.

There are only two appealed "unsafe lane change" charges I can even find, and neither relate to a motorcycle. All the "motorcycle" ones seem to do with disputes over defects in motorcycles when purchased.

just spoke to motorways unit.
It is illeagle to lane split and depending on how you do it depends on what you can be charged with ie unsafe lane change to dangerous.
normaly if is frowned upon but not enforced. if there is an accident while lane splitting it is the bikes fault always.

I think that if they give you a warning just leave it at that.

I would like to know why they think it is illegal. I've seen no acts of parliament to suggest this is the case (refer to the Wiki if you want to read them yourself). I'm going to read up on the charge of "unsafe lane change".

MSTRS

25th January 2010, 14:34

just spoke to motorways unit.
It is illeagle to lane split and depending on how you do it depends on what you can be charged with ie unsafe lane change to dangerous.
normaly if is frowned upon but not enforced. if there is an accident while lane splitting it is the bikes fault always.

I think that if they give you a warning just leave it at that.
The subject of lanesplitting has been done over and over on KB. THERE IS NO LAW AGAINST IT!!!!! Show us the law that says it is illegal. Doesn't exist.
There are certain parameters one needs to stay within, else it becomes careless or dangerous (as a charge). Done 'correctly', it is not illegal.
And I referred to a nameless entity in the police as a prick for making up his own rules as to what is legal or not. I did not go all Rambo on your arse because you seem to be 'one of them'...

Mully

25th January 2010, 14:48

What I'm saying is that there must be an awful lot of 'bastard cops', if you use the ticket for 111kph as an example. And sure, plenty get away with that speed (and much more), with just a flash of the cops headlights and a parental fingerwave, perhaps, so that you know he's seen you...but those that do get pulled, don't get away with it, despite any 'attitude test'.

I think we're getting into the "quota" territory now. If I'm doing 111km/h and happen to get caught, well that's my bad luck. Unfortunately, the quota system often interferes with the "descretion" system - which TBH, is probably where a lot of the cop's respect has gone - draconian enforcement of the letter of the law as dictated by their masters.

My point was some people that get pulled for 111km/h also get away with no Reg/WOF with a "warning" if they pass the test. Then they come on KB and bitch about the "unfair bastard" cop who just let them off an additional $400 worth of fines.

The subject of lanesplitting has been done over and over on KB. THERE IS NO LAW AGAINST IT!!!!! Show us the law that says it is illegal. Doesn't exist.
There are certain parameters one needs to stay within, else it becomes careless or dangerous (as a charge).

Yay!! A lanesplitting thread. Never had one of them before.

Can we please have a "waving" thread next?

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 14:52

The subject of lanesplitting has been done over and over on KB. THERE IS NO LAW AGAINST IT!!!!! Show us the law that says it is illegal. Doesn't exist.
There are certain parameters one needs to stay within, else it becomes careless or dangerous (as a charge). Done 'correctly', it is not illegal.
And I referred to a nameless entity in the police as a prick for making up his own rules as to what is legal or not. I did not go all Rambo on your arse because you seem to be 'one of them'...

OK again we are talking symantics.
As above you are ticketed for an unsafe lane change, undertaking, dangerous or what ever the cop saw you do not for lane splitting.

p.dath

25th January 2010, 14:53

I've had a read up on the "unsafe lane change". The charge is covered in:
http://interim.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/1999/0099/19.0/whole.html#dlm280560
and is called "Unsafe passing". The maximum fine is $150 and 35 demerits (for an individual). To get it you need to break the rules in section 2.6(1):
http://interim.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/DLM303048.html?search=ts_regulation_Land+Transport _resel&p=1#DLM303048
Only provisions (a) and (b) apply (because you are in the same lane as the car).

That means to get a ticket you have to violate these two road rules:

A driver must not pass or attempt to pass another vehicle moving in the same direction unless—

* (a) the movement can be made with safety; and

* (b) the movement is made with due consideration for other users of the road; and

So unless there is some case law to refine this (and I can't find it), I don't see how the charge could be upheld.

MSTRS

25th January 2010, 14:55

I think we're getting into the "quota" territory now. If I'm doing 111km/h and happen to get caught, well that's my bad luck. Unfortunately, the quota system often interferes with the "descretion" system - which TBH, is probably where a lot of the cop's respect has gone - draconian enforcement of the letter of the law as dictated by their masters.

My point was some people that get pulled for 111km/h also get away with no Reg/WOF with a "warning" if they pass the test. Then they come on KB and bitch about the "unfair bastard" cop who just let them off an additional $400 worth of fines. There's plenty of anecdotal evidence of tickets handed out for 111kph, one after another, by the same cop - who can show you the radar reading (but no proof it was you, or when it was locked on). YT was a client of one...and if she says she wasn't going that fast (!) I believe her.

Yay!! A lanesplitting thread. Never had one of them before.

Can we please have a "waving" thread next?
Oh - I know...a 'how many bikes have you got' or 'what do you do for a living' or something about Skiddie...

MSTRS

25th January 2010, 14:57

OK again we are talking symantics.
As above you are ticketed for an unsafe lane change, undertaking, dangerous or what ever the cop (SAYS HE) saw you do not for lane splitting.

Semantics. Right?
I have no problem with anyone being ticketed for zipping in and out of traffic, passing on the left (in the same lane), passing at speed differentials that are ridiculous, etc. But any biker sitting in the rightside of the lane that is passing another vehicle at (say) 15/20kph faster when that other vehicle is travelling relatively slowly is doing nothing wrong in law. And a cop on the shoulder is not going to see where that bike is if it's in the middle or median lane, is he?

p.dath

25th January 2010, 14:57

OK again we are talking symantics.
As above you are ticketed for an unsafe lane change, undertaking, dangerous or what ever the cop saw you do not for lane splitting.

In this case, the police officer was pulling over every single motorcyclist and giving them a warning. They surely couldn't all be undertaking, dangerous, or whatever.

I think I'll wait one more day, and then write into the District Commander and ask why she/he believes lane splitting to be illegal (unless someone from BRONZ is keen to do this ... it kinda is a biker rights thing).

peasea

25th January 2010, 15:00

fair enough, but for them to say" lanesplitting is illega"l is not part of their job. in fact i would say it was illegal to claim an action is illegal when it is not.

Most cops are just doing their job but there seem to be few (like in most occupations) who are just wankers

I could name a few.

red mermaid

25th January 2010, 15:06

I've had a read up on the "unsafe lane change". The charge is covered in:
http://interim.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/1999/0099/19.0/whole.html#dlm280560
and is called "Unsafe passing". The maximum fine is $150 and 35 demerits (for an individual). To get it you need to break the rules in section 2.6(1):
http://interim.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/DLM303048.html?search=ts_regulation_Land+Transport _resel&p=1#DLM303048
Only provisions (a) and (b) apply (because you are in the same lane as the car).

That means to get a ticket you have to violate these two road rules:

So unless there is some case law to refine this (and I can't find it), I don't see how the charge could be upheld.

You have misread this piece of law.
Because of the use of the word 'and' at the end of subsection (b) there has to be another subsection and the ingredient of that section must also be present to make the offence valid.

p.dath

25th January 2010, 15:08

You have misread this piece of law.
Because of the use of the word 'and' at the end of subsection (b) there has to be another subsection and the ingredient of that section must also be present to make the offence valid.

Click on the URL I provided. I quoted only the relevant section. I explained why the following section doesn't apply.

Ixion

25th January 2010, 15:08

In this case, the police officer was pulling over every single motorcyclist and giving them a warning. They surely couldn't all be undertaking, dangerous, or whatever.

I think I'll wait one more day, and then write into the District Commander and ask why she/he believes lane splitting to be illegal (unless someone from BRONZ is keen to do this ... it kinda is a biker rights thing).

It is difficult to argue about someone being charged with lane splitting, when no one was charged . Mainly because ,as noted below, there is no specific charge of "lane splitting" (some overseas jusrisdictions do have such a charge): and a charge on other legislation that might conceivably apply would depend very much on the circumstances.

An invitation to the polcie to say that "lane splitting is legal" is almost certain not to produce positive results. And a complaint that "motorcyclists were being warned for lanesplitting" will probably be rebutted by waffle to the effect that it is a dangerous practice and the office was acting in the interests of safety by warning motorcyclists of the danger they ran.

The fact that noone got a ticket for anything certainly indicates that the police realise that they are not on clear cut ground.

In general BRONZ will complain where motorcyclists are being specifically singled out for police attention (we have the same rights as any other road user). But, since only motorcycles can lane split, it is difficult to object to their being singled out in this case.

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 15:10

Semantics. Right?
I have no problem with anyone being ticketed for zipping in and out of traffic, passing on the left (in the same lane), passing at speed differentials that are ridiculous, etc. But any biker sitting in the rightside of the lane that is passing another vehicle at (say) 15/20kph faster when that other vehicle is travelling relatively slowly is doing nothing wrong in law. And a cop on the shoulder is not going to see where that bike is if it's in the middle or median lane, is he?

I think it's semen tactics.

See that's the ticket you get, not lane splitting. you will always find someone who will go to the letter of the law and some will use discretion.
Just one of those things. I have not heard of meny people getting a ticket for this anyway, used to in the old days when it was more a speed issue but not now.
Supose it was just one of those days.

Ixion

25th January 2010, 15:11

I've had a read up on the "unsafe lane change". The charge is covered in:
http://interim.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/1999/0099/19.0/whole.html#dlm280560
and is called "Unsafe passing". The maximum fine is $150 and 35 demerits (for an individual). To get it you need to break the rules in section 2.6(1):
http://interim.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/DLM303048.html?search=ts_regulation_Land+Transport _resel&p=1#DLM303048
Only provisions (a) and (b) apply (because you are in the same lane as the car).

That means to get a ticket you have to violate these two road rules:

So unless there is some case law to refine this (and I can't find it), I don't see how the charge could be upheld.

Possibly

A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle

could be used by a zealous cop- though he would need to show that the splitting was unsafe, which sort of brings back in a circle

p.dath

25th January 2010, 15:13

It is difficult to argue about someone being charged with lane splitting, when no one was charged . Mainly because ,as noted below, there is no specific charge of "lane splitting" (some overseas jusrisdictions do have such a charge): and a charge on other legislation that might conceivably apply would depend very much on the circumstances....
In general BRONZ will complain where motorcyclists are being specifically singled out for police attention (we have the same rights as any other road user). But, since only motorcycles can lane split, it is difficult to object to their being singled out in this case.

So noted.

I will still contemplate writing a letter. For a defeaning silence from one group (motorcyclists) met only by the complaints of a few car users can only result in one action - the noisy party being listened to.

Mikkel

25th January 2010, 15:20

Overtaking in the same lane on the right hand side is legal, overtaking on the left in the same lane is a contravention of the Road Code..

...in most cases. However, if the traffic is stationary, Bob's your uncle.

just spoke to motorways unit.
It is illeagle to lane split and depending on how you do it depends on what you can be charged with ie unsafe lane change to dangerous.
normaly if is frowned upon but not enforced. if there is an accident while lane splitting it is the bikes fault always.

I think that if they give you a warning just leave it at that.

Bullshit. I hope you got his badge number, you all know where this shit is going...
And you'd have to be rather loose for him to make a dangerous charge stick - after all, he'd have to substantiate that it is beyond both careless and reckless.

I have no problem with anyone being ticketed for zipping in and out of traffic, passing on the left (in the same lane), passing at speed differentials that are ridiculous, etc. But any biker sitting in the rightside of the lane that is passing another vehicle at (say) 15/20kph faster when that other vehicle is travelling relatively slowly is doing nothing wrong in law. And a cop on the shoulder is not going to see where that bike is if it's in the middle or median lane, is he?

He must, by necessity, be in the left lane - after all there will be no space in the right-hand lane since traffic is always keeping left. (Oh, and it must be legal for you to use bike paths as well - I see cars do it all the time!)

I will still contemplate writing a letter. For a defeaning silence from one group (motorcyclists) met only by the complaints of a few car users can only result in one action - the noisy party being listened to.

You should indeed write a letter - and a formal complaint. Police officers are not allowed to mislead a citizen, and ignorance is no excuse.

Ixion

25th January 2010, 15:25

So noted.

I will still contemplate writing a letter. For a defeaning silence from one group (motorcyclists) met only by the complaints of a few car users can only result in one action - the noisy party being listened to.

I think it is very valid for you to write , as a directly affected party. You can ask why you were stopped, make the point that you WERE riding safely (which cannot easily be rebutted, since if you were not, the cop could scarcely have allowed you to proceed ticketless). You can object to specifics (because you were there); it is harder for BRONZ to object to the general principle.

p.dath

25th January 2010, 15:26

This seems to be the man in charge of the Auckland area:
http://www.police.govt.nz/district/waitemata/index.html

Ixion

25th January 2010, 15:27

Yes, he is Cheese-in-Chief. For some strange reason, all motorways come under Waitemata (AFAIK)

red mermaid

25th January 2010, 15:27

A letter could be useful, setting out the circumstances, the points of view, and asking for clarification and the interpretation that Police are relying upon, and any case law that assists that clarification.

Very very disappointing that you have to do this yourself, as BRONZ have turned you down;
"An invitation to the polcie to say that "lane splitting is legal" is almost certain not to produce positive results. And a complaint that "motorcyclists were being warned for lanesplitting" will probably be rebutted by waffle to the effect that it is a dangerous practice and the office was acting in the interests of safety by warning motorcyclists of the danger they ran.

The fact that noone got a ticket for anything certainly indicates that the police realise that they are not on clear cut ground."

On the basis of what would seem to be one persons preconceived and ill judged attitudes, that are not doing motorcyclists any good at all.

red mermaid

25th January 2010, 15:33

The person in charge of Auckland Motorways is Supt John Kelly.

p.dath

25th January 2010, 15:38

A letter could be useful, setting out the circumstances, the points of view, and asking for clarification and the interpretation that Police are relying upon, and any case law that assists that clarification.

Very very disappointing that you have to do this yourself, as BRONZ have turned you down;

That's fine. Ixion does a great job, and they have a charter setting out what they do, and this just doesn't fit neatly into it. Ixion probably realises that this wont result in any positive outcome (that being the Police acknolwedging that lane splitting can be legal). But if you don't ask ...

It's always easier when someone else does the job for you, but sometimes you just have to stand on your own two feet. :)

I'll tell you what, if I had $30k burning a hole in my pocket, and two years of time to spend on it, I'd probably ask to be given a ticket so a precendent could be established. That is what is really needed.

Mully

25th January 2010, 15:39

A letter could be useful, setting out the circumstances, the points of view, and asking for clarification and the interpretation that Police are relying upon, and any case law that assists that clarification.

Very very disappointing that you have to do this yourself, as BRONZ have turned you down;

Without meaning to step on Ixion's delicate toes, this has been covered here before.

Filtering/Splitting/Whatever you want to call it, falls into a legal grey area (as we have seen from this thread) - in some circumstances, it's perfectly legal and in some circumstances it's illegal (although safer). The risk that BRONZ face is that going to Plod and saying "Please clarify" runs the risk of the rule becoming "Illegal in all situations" and the Big Cheese (tm) telling his minions to hammer any and all bikes doing it.

That being said, if cars on the motorway travelled "as far to the left as practicable" in their lane, bikes wouldn't have to cross the line to filter.

caseye

25th January 2010, 15:55

p.dath is on the right track, write the letter and please do ask why it is that their officers are Now so keen to make sure that bikers are doing everything right while letting car drives continue to hog the right hand side of their lane when the road code clearly states"As close to the left as is practicable"
Good luck with that letter p.dath.

JimO

25th January 2010, 16:01

So you'd rather be a loud mouth and argue with him & actually get ticketed than keep your mouth shut & get given a warning? Thats smart...

what you are forgetting is that he is a dangerous basterd

Ixion

25th January 2010, 16:02

Without meaning to step on Ixion's delicate toes, this has been covered here before.

Filtering/Splitting/Whatever you want to call it, falls into a legal grey area (as we have seen from this thread) - in some circumstances, it's perfectly legal and in some circumstances it's illegal (although safer). The risk that BRONZ face is that going to Plod and saying "Please clarify" runs the risk of the rule becoming "Illegal in all situations" and the Big Cheese (tm) telling his minions to hammer any and all bikes doing it.

That being said, if cars on the motorway travelled "as far to the left as practicable" in their lane, bikes wouldn't have to cross the line to filter.

I have stout boots, but they are not needed here. You are correct.

It is quite practical for an individual to write and say " I was stopped and harangued. but I was in fact riding safely, and legally". After all, he was there.

It is much less practical for BRONZ (or any other organisation) to write and say that lane splitting is always safe and legal, because manifestly, sometimes it is neither (and sometimes one or other, and sometimes both). It is a matter of judgement , and circumstances are everything.

And if no-one is charged, then there is little that can be complained of, other than attitude, and for that, once again,one needs to have been there. The police sometimes stop road users (not always motorcyclists) , and deliver little lectures designed to impress upon people the dangers of certain behaviours . Although this may be tiresome it is difficult to say that it is wrong. People do get killed and injured on the roads, and the Police are certainly within their rights to advise road users to take care, and to point out that some things can be dangerous.

Which is really all they seem to be doing in this case.A "warning" nowadays has no official standing. The old time Snakes used to have a system of "official" warnings, but these are long gone.

To ask the Cheeses to declare that lane splitting is always legal would be folly - if pushed into a corner they would certainly say it was never legal rather than it was always legal.

And to complain of them warning motorcyclists that it can be dangerous , and perhaps illegal, would seem unnecessarily argumentative, for someone who was not actually involved.

If I had been stopped I might have written in a personal capacity and complained. Or not. it would all depend on what was said and how it was said.

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 16:48

...in most cases. However, if the traffic is stationary, Bob's your uncle.

Bullshit. I hope you got his badge number, you all know where this shit is going...
And you'd have to be rather loose for him to make a dangerous charge stick - after all, he'd have to substantiate that it is beyond both careless and reckless.

He must, by necessity, be in the left lane - after all there will be no space in the right-hand lane since traffic is always keeping left. (Oh, and it must be legal for you to use bike paths as well - I see cars do it all the time!)

You should indeed write a letter - and a formal complaint. Police officers are not allowed to mislead a citizen, and ignorance is no excuse.

no matter what you think the law is or what it should be, the laws are there. if some police choose to enforce these and some don't it is because of discretion.
all the name calling under the sun does not change the fact it is illegal to pass on the left (unless you are in a seperate lane) even if the traffic is stationary.
if you don't think this is true then just carry on riding like you are and don't complain if you get a ticket.

MSTRS

25th January 2010, 16:51

Ixion

25th January 2010, 17:03

no matter what you think the law is or what it should be, the laws are there. if some police choose to enforce these and some don't it is because of discretion.
all the name calling under the sun does not change the fact it is illegal to pass on the left (unless you are in a seperate lane) even if the traffic is stationary.
if you don't think this is true then just carry on riding like you are and don't complain if you get a ticket.

The law disagrees

Passing on left

(1) A driver must not pass or attempt to pass on the left of another vehicle moving in the same direction except in accordance with this clause.

(2) In any case in which the movement referred to subclause (1) may be made,—
(a) the 2 vehicles must be in different lanes; or
(b) the overtaken vehicle must be stationary or its driver must have given or be giving the prescribed signal of that driver's intention to turn right; or
(c) if the overtaken vehicle is a light rail vehicle moving in the same direction, the light rail vehicle must not be—
(i) signalling an intention to turn left or to stop; or
(ii) stationary for the purposes of allowing passengers to alight or board.

(3) If the roadway is marked in lanes, the driver may make the movement referred in subclause (1) only if the driver's vehicle does not encroach on a lane that is unavailable to a driver.

p.dath

25th January 2010, 17:52

BoristheBiter

25th January 2010, 18:03

GOONR

25th January 2010, 18:23

.... the fact it is illegal to pass on the left (unless you are in a seperate lane) even if the traffic is stationary.
if you don't think this is true then just carry on riding like you are and don't complain if you get a ticket.

ok to all here is the land transport act, read into it what you will, i'm off for tea.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/DLM302188.html

i stand by what i have said and that you can get a ticket for lane splitting.

if you want to dissagree than fine don't care. i have tried to be helpfull so if you do get a ticket then fight it you just might make case law or maybe not.

You can pass stationary traffic on the left.. from following the link that you posted I found this (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/DLM303050.html#DLM303050). (As posted by Ixion earlier (post #85))

Edit: ..although I would call this filtering rather than splitting.

MSTRS

25th January 2010, 18:23

i stand by what i have said and that you can get a ticket for lane splitting.

And we all stand by what we've said. And quoted the relevant sections of the Transport Act.
Lane splitting, provided it is done within the parameters of the law, is legal.

FROSTY

25th January 2010, 18:30

ok to all here is the land transport act, read into it what you will, i'm off for tea.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/DLM302188.html

i stand by what i have said and that you can get a ticket for lane splitting.

if you want to dissagree than fine don't care. i have tried to be helpfull so if you do get a ticket then fight it you just might make case law or maybe not.
Boris Ive been commmuting on Aucklands motorways for 25 years. I have NEVER in all that time had a ticket for lane splitting nor have i recieved a warning for the same. My daily commute for a number of years was a rush hour traffic 30km each way trip every day 6 days a week.
Have I been "lucky"??

shafty

25th January 2010, 19:00

p.dath, you may wish to include the AA's reference to reducing congestion........

Maha

25th January 2010, 19:01

Boris Ive been commmuting on Aucklands motorways for 25 years. I have NEVER in all that time had a ticket for lane splitting nor have i recieved a warning for the same. My daily commute for a number of years was a rush hour traffic 30km each way trip every day 6 days a week.
Have I been "lucky"??

Well have ya Punk?
I would assume that you (as MSTRS said above) ''provided it is done within the parameters of the law'' lane split using this technique?

piston broke

25th January 2010, 19:10

they had wellsford blocked off both ways this morning.
seemed like they made a few $

FROSTY

25th January 2010, 20:00

I've "mostly" alwaystried to be as non threatening as possible. I do accept TOTAL personal responsibility for what happensto me whilst splitting lanes.

Maha

25th January 2010, 20:22

they had wellsford blocked off both ways this morning.
seemed like they made a few $

Fuck I know mate, I saw the rego/warrant check point, had a quick look at my warrant and it expired mid December.....:gob:

They waved me through though.....:shifty:

Van booked in on Wednesday.

Mikkel

25th January 2010, 20:53

no matter what you think the law is or what it should be, the laws are there. if some police choose to enforce these and some don't it is because of discretion.
all the name calling under the sun does not change the fact it is illegal to pass on the left (unless you are in a seperate lane) even if the traffic is stationary.
if you don't think this is true then just carry on riding like you are and don't complain if you get a ticket.

I think the others covered it quite well, you are indeed mistaken.

i stand by what i have said and that you can get a ticket for lane splitting.

if you want to dissagree than fine don't care. i have tried to be helpfull so if you do get a ticket then fight it you just might make case law or maybe not.

Now listen, no one here have said that you can not get a ticket for lane splitting.
It's merely been noted that it is not - per definition - illegal in all circumstances. If you by "i stand by what i have said" mean you still argue that it is illegal to pass stationary traffic on the left - then by all means stand by it, wrong as you are, at least you won't get into trouble for not passing stationary traffic on the left.

tide

25th January 2010, 21:20

Yeah, so who was the guy that got pulled over just in front of me at the Constellation Drive over pass SH1 southbound... Yellow BMW... guy on the BWW looked like he got a bit of a fright when he saw the cop car, proceeded to wobble a bit then tuckin behind the car in the right lane, then seems to go fuckit and start splitting again... I was at this stage about a car or 2 behind him and about level with the cop slowing down going wtf, cop then proceeded to pull him over... not surprised he looked very unsure about whether he should or shouldn't be splitting... wonder what happened, did he warn ya... or ticket ya...

Cracker

25th January 2010, 21:50

PrincessBandit

25th January 2010, 22:12

Everyone knows the South Auckland police are more "earthy"

I have been observed doing well over 100 mph twice by patroling police trafic units in last 2 weeks in the sweeping bits of the Mercer exspressway. No chace, despite me slowing down.

I don't regard that as unsafe on a beautiful bit of safe road, I quess they thought the same.

Well over 100 mph? I usually travel comfortably over 100kph through there and have never been ticketed, somehow I think if it truly were mph a ticket would be a forgone conclusion...

Qkkid

25th January 2010, 22:14

I commute everyday over the bridge and have talked to most of the cops over the last 5 yrs for one reason or another ,but have never been ticketed for lane splitting . They have all said a common thing, as long as you are not doing dangerous manouvers and weaving they will tolerate it. The only concerns they have is on wet days they prefer you to stay with the flow of traffic. They will tolerate about 20kms faster than the traffic. I myself stick by this rule and do pass traffic/cops and motorbike cops every morning without hassle. You have nothing to worry about if you go about it in a sensible manner.

jeffs

25th January 2010, 22:56

It's always easier when someone else does the job for you, but sometimes you just have to stand on your own two feet. :)

Once again Pdath good on you. Yes since you have first hand knowledge and experience of being pulled, while traveling ( in you mind ) in a safe manner ( irrespective of what people on KB think the the law is or is not ).
This would be a good opportunity to ask for clarification.

Asking the cop at the side of the road, could be deemed provocative, so explain in you letter that you did not pursue the question in case you exasperating your situation.

Cracker

25th January 2010, 23:01

Well over 100 mph? I usually travel comfortably over 100kph through there and have never been ticketed, somehow I think if it truly were mph a ticket would be a forgone conclusion...

Princess,

You would of thought so. Maybe he is the Pommie Gezzer cop I've run across at Pukekohe track days.
Anyway, my bike is in MPH and I look at it when I see the police.
Truth is, modern bikes are the jet fighters of the highways and car. truck speed limits just don't apply unless your cornered.

p.dath

26th January 2010, 07:17

p.dath, you may wish to include the AA's reference to reducing congestion........

Do you have a URL to this? Otherwise I'll try and find it.

p.dath

26th January 2010, 07:23

Well I'm pleased to say that every bike I saw this morning was still lane splitting despite the issue yesterday.

I saw only one Police car, and I was going to stop and talk to him. When I got along side I noticed that it wasn't the same officer, and he didn't seem to mind the other bikes who were lane splitting, so I carried on.

If you got pulled over this morning (26/1/2010) though, please let us know.

I'll probably start on my letter after lunch. Having though about it overnight, I still feel there is value in writing to the District commander. It's simple a matter of making some respectful noise to help set the direction of decisions.

nawtyfroggie

26th January 2010, 07:31

I was pulled over yesterday just after the Constellation Drive over pass SH1 southbound - :Police: said it was for passing on the left of a car, which is illegal and that I should read the road code. Harsh warning, just because others do it, etc and then said I was lucky for not getting a $150 fine so early in the morning and sent me on my way ... saw 'him' pull over another guy minutes later.
This morning while I was sitting in the traffic with all the cars and their fumes, wondering whether or not to start lane splitting ... I saw someone had been pulled over by a cop - different guy.
I certainly hope this is just something that they are enforcing this week, then we can all go back to normal again.

BoristheBiter

26th January 2010, 07:44

Mully

26th January 2010, 07:48

NO REALLY!!
I hoped you told the cop that he didn't know what he was talking about because everyone on this thread said is was legal to do that so it must be right.

No they didn't.

BoristheBiter

26th January 2010, 07:53

No they didn't.

i think we must be reading two different threads.

MSTRS

26th January 2010, 07:54

NO REALLY!!
I hoped you told the cop that he didn't know what he was talking about because everyone on this thread said is was legal to do that so it must be right.

You really should quit while you're ahead...

Pascal

26th January 2010, 07:55

I had an interesting experience yesterday. Turning onto Dominion Rd, by the Mitre 10, I noticed a boy in blue behind me. Being a big old wuss, I moderated my riding, etc. and turned off onto a side street. He followed, which seemed a bit odd. The rest of my way home I did a whole snaky way back home, keeping it to the back roads, doubling back, etc. until I got to our little cul-de-sac. And guess who was still behind me? He drove to the bottom, did a u-turn and carried on his merry way with me parked in the garage and watching him.

Maybe I'm just paranoid.

bogan

26th January 2010, 07:57

i think we must be reading two different threads.

to clarify:

Passing on left (in same lane) of stationary vehicles is OK
Passing on the right (in same lane) of moving vehicle (or stationary) is OK, though a good idea to keep the speed differential down
Passing on left (in same lane) if other vehicle is turning right OK
Passing on left (in same lane) if other vehicle is moving and going straight ahead NOT OK
Riding like a numpty, NOT OK

Mully

26th January 2010, 07:58

i think we must be reading two different threads.

Must be - cos the thread I was reading didn't have "everybody" (your word) saying it was legal to filter.

In fact, I posted in that thread saying it was a grey area (and sometimes legal and sometimes not) - unless you're saying I'm a nobody??

You really should quit while you're ahead...

While??

BoristheBiter

26th January 2010, 08:02

You really should quit while you're ahead...

why? because what i had wrote yesterday is correct? or you don't want to say you you might have got it a bit wrong.
i will say I apologise for having a go at you, was uncalled for.
I know what the law says, interpration is what makes case law and as no one gets a ticket for "lane splitting" as i said before, therefore no case law.
I know these threads have been done to death but it doesn't change the fact that some police will ignore it, give you a warning or give you a ticket those are the powers of discretion.

Mully

26th January 2010, 08:05

to clarify:

Passing on left (in same lane) of stationary vehicles is OK
Passing on the right (in same lane) of moving vehicle (or stationary) is OK, though a good idea to keep the speed differential down
Passing on left (in same lane) if other vehicle is turning right OK
Passing on left (in same lane) if other vehicle is moving and going straight ahead NOT OK

Yeah - what he said.

Except that the "NOT OK" bits can vary from officer to officer. Depends if you're being a wally or not.

bogan

26th January 2010, 08:07

Yeah - what he said.

Except that the "NOT OK" bits can vary from officer to officer. Depends if you're being a wally or not.

yeh probably should hav added:

Riding like a numpty NOT OK

BoristheBiter

26th January 2010, 08:10

to clarify:

Passing on left (in same lane) of stationary vehicles is OK

this is the area of most contention. if the vehicle you are passing is on a main single lane road OK. but where this falls down is when you pass on the left of stopped vehicles and they move, you are then breaking the law and this is the ticket most handed out.

bogan

26th January 2010, 08:13

this is the area of most contention. if the vehicle you are passing is on a main single lane road OK. but where this falls down is when you pass on the left of stopped vehicles and they move, you are then breaking the law and this is the ticket most handed out.

indeed, but if its a multi laned road and you stay between the two moving lanes, keeping in the left most lane (on rhs of car), or at least appearing to do so :shifty: then no ticket can be issues, which is how I lane split. Splitting down the left most lane seem to be asking for someone to turn out unexpectantly.

BoristheBiter

26th January 2010, 08:18

indeed, but if its a multi laned road and you stay between the two moving lanes, keeping in the left most lane (on rhs of car), or at least appearing to do so :shifty: then no ticket can be issues, which is how I lane split. Splitting down the left most lane seem to be asking for someone to turn out unexpectantly.

And what do you do when the car infront is too close to the line?

Mikkel

26th January 2010, 08:18

You really should quit while you're ahead...

Too late for many posts now...

bogan

26th January 2010, 08:22

And what do you do when the car infront is too close to the line?

it depend on how close the other car is to that one, move into rh lane if traffic is stopped (you get a lot of warning before they move again), stop splitting, or split illegally. What I'm saying is that if you are aware of the laws, you can split legally.

Pascal

26th January 2010, 08:23

And what do you do when the car infront is too close to the line?

Wait? Pull in just behind him at a slight angle to merge back into the lane and wait.

GOONR

26th January 2010, 08:28

And what do you do when the car infront is too close to the line?

I find that mostly two lines of traffic move like ski's, so one lane is usually moving ahead of the other one (if you know what I mean).. So, personally, I wait for a gap in the right hand lane and move in to that, if you do it right and indicate most car drivers will hang back and make the gap a little bigger for ya to move in to.

MSTRS

26th January 2010, 09:09

why? because what i had wrote yesterday is correct? or you don't want to say you you might have got it a bit wrong.
i will say I apologise for having a go at you, was uncalled for.
I know what the law says, interpration is what makes case law and as no one gets a ticket for "lane splitting" as i said before, therefore no case law.
I know these threads have been done to death but it doesn't change the fact that some police will ignore it, give you a warning or give you a ticket those are the powers of discretion.

What you are failing to do, is recognise that lane splitting is covered by the laws pertaining to overtaking. Done within the legal parameters of overtaking, there is nothing illegal about 'lane splitting'. And no cop can ticket you for following the law.

Dealer

26th January 2010, 14:04

MSTRS

26th January 2010, 14:15

Yeah, but unfortunately overtaking on the left is illegal, unless the car is indicating to turn right, or stationery.
As there is the most room on the left hand side of the fast lane, thats where most people do their split laning.
I've just started using the right hand side of the slow lane, as the cars there tend to keep left, and its easier to argue the legalities if i get pulled over.

Once again, for the terminally stupid. Passing within a lane, but to the left of the other vehicle is illegal. Unless that vehicle is stopped, or indicating to turn right. Pass this side in a motorway situation, you are likely to get pinged.
The ONLY legal way to lane split is within a lane, to the right of the other vehicle. The grey area comes in when speeds is taken into account. If the other vehicle is doing 50 in a 100 zone (say) and you pass at 65, then ok. But make those speeds 85 and 100...or the difference to be 40...likely to get pinged.

Maha

26th January 2010, 14:17

Could you explain that one more time please Sir, I dont quite get it.

MSTRS

26th January 2010, 14:20

Could you explain that one more time please Sir, I dont quite get it.

Fuck off, you dirty non-smoker.

GOONR

26th January 2010, 14:26

p.dath

26th January 2010, 14:38

Here the draft of my letter. I plan to send it at 5pm today. I have to say, I quite like it.

Maha

26th January 2010, 14:39

How does this one work...

If I'm in the car on the motorway in the far right hand lane, look in the mirror and see a bike approaching. I indicate right, even though there is nowhere for me to go, can he pass me on the left? I would have thought that if you follow the letter of the law then yes he can pass.

Trickey one really.
I am not in the habit of passing on the inside where double lanes are in use.
Unless, I have eyeballed the car in the right hand lane for short while (judging his/her skill level and intention) then and only then will pass on the inside.

Ngatea striaghts, three bikes, me in front on a 600, ZX9 and Hyosung behind me. I pull out to pass a line of 3-4 cars, I get back into the left hand lane and move to the left to give room for the other bikes, but fuck me! the Hyosung is coming up the inside. I dont whether he passed the cars on the left or he got in behind me and thought it a good idea to pass me on the left, either way, not a good habit to get into.

GOONR

26th January 2010, 14:44

Trickey one really.
I am not in the habit of passing on the inside where double lanes are in use.

Ok, move this to one of the clip on's on the Harbour bridge, I'm in the right hand lane (in a car), see a bike coming up.. I indicate right, can he legally pass on my left. I'm not saying it would be smart to or whatever, just curious.

Pascal

26th January 2010, 14:45

Here the draft of my letter. I plan to send it at 5pm today. I have to say, I quite like it.

Good, well written letter with facts to back it up. And nice and polite. Should you use a more formal mode of address though? E.g. Dear Mr Searl or Dear [Title] Searl?

p.dath

26th January 2010, 14:50

Good, well written letter with facts to back it up. And nice and polite. Should you use a more formal mode of address though? E.g. Dear Mr Searl or Dear [Title] Searl?

It's just that the top police officer is called "Bill". I thought it sound funny, "Dear Bill". Call it a private joke.

Maha

26th January 2010, 14:50

Ok, move this to one of the clip on's on the Harbour bridge, I'm in the right hand lane (in a car), see a bike coming up.. I indicate right, can he legally pass on my left. I'm not saying it would be smart to or whatever, just curious.

I would say yes, it happens everyday by thousand I would imagine. You can change lanes on the Harbour Bridge and I dont beleive anyone has be ticketed for going a little quicker in a lane where they pass on the left. So long as you stay on 80K's. Theres no need to indicate on the Harbour Bridge, that would cause confusion.

GOONR

26th January 2010, 14:50

Here the draft of my letter. I plan to send it at 5pm today. I have to say, I quite like it.

Nice work!

Swoop

26th January 2010, 14:57

Here the draft of my letter. I plan to send it at 5pm today. I have to say, I quite like it.
Perhaps suggesting that if they really want to keep bikers out of traffic, then permitting the use of the bus lanes on the northeren, might be an option?

GOONR

26th January 2010, 14:59

I would say yes, it happens everyday by thousand I would imagine. You can change lanes on the Harbour Bridge and I dont beleive anyone has be ticketed for going a little quicker in a lane where they pass on the left. So long as you stay on 80K's. Theres no need to indicate on the Harbour Bridge, that would cause confusion.

I don't think that you are catching my drift, maybe I'm not making sense. If a bike is splitting due to heavy traffic in both lanes could I make it legal for him to 'undertake me'.

If I'm not making sense then it's about time I take myself off to the pub!

Maha

26th January 2010, 15:06

I don't think that you are catching my drift, maybe I'm not making sense. If a bike is splitting due to heavy traffic in both lanes could I make it legal for him to 'undertake me'.

If I'm not making sense then it's about time I take myself off to the pub!

I do know what you mean really I do, and the answer is no, you as a car driver cant make it legal by indicating.

The splitting bike should however, use its indictor.
Most do, some dont, but it seems to be safer and 'legal' way.

Mully

26th January 2010, 15:28

I don't think that you are catching my drift, maybe I'm not making sense. If a bike is splitting due to heavy traffic in both lanes could I make it legal for him to 'undertake me'.

If I'm not making sense then it's about time I take myself off to the pub!

I agree with Maha - the rule is "......indicating to turn right". If you have your indicator on and you can't turn right, then you aren't helping.

S'all academic anyway - I filter to the left and right on the motorway, past cops, and cos I ride like a little pig-tailed girl, they leave me along.

Mully

26th January 2010, 15:32

Here the draft of my letter. I plan to send it at 5pm today. I have to say, I quite like it.

Nice letter:

1. I agree with the name thing - s/be "Dear Supt" not "Dear Bill"
2. It's "yours" not "your's" sincerely

yachtie10

26th January 2010, 15:34

good letter Phil
keep it simple and about saftey

p.dath

26th January 2010, 15:36

Nice letter:

1. I agree with the name thing - s/be "Dear Supt" not "Dear Bill"
2. It's "yours" not "your's" sincerely

Done.

....

p.dath

26th January 2010, 16:02

Final version of letter about to be posted. Cosmetic grammar changes only.

Lucy

26th January 2010, 16:08

R6_kid

26th January 2010, 16:11

Go D'Ath Vader!

GOONR

26th January 2010, 16:22

I agree with Maha - the rule is "......indicating to turn right". If you have your indicator on and you can't turn right, then you aren't helping.

S'all academic anyway ......

Yeah, I figured in the real world it would just add confusion I was just curious about the law.

Ragingrob

26th January 2010, 16:44

I've never lane splitted. If I had the misfortune to be in rush hour traffic when I lived in Auckland, I'd take the scenic route through millions of suburbs. Lots more bends, corners and roundabouts which were way more fun.

No way is it more fun to spend an extra 30mins stuck in traffic with roundabouts and lights than to cruise between the cars for a quick trip on the motorway!

Lucy

26th January 2010, 16:47

No way is it more fun to spend an extra 30mins stuck in traffic with roundabouts and lights than to cruise between the cars for a quick trip on the motorway!

I didn't ride on roads that were stuck with traffic. I had a free flowing twisty ride, which, for me, was more fun than the motorway. You don't have to agree, we are allowed different opinions.

Toaster

26th January 2010, 18:34

Ragingrob

26th January 2010, 18:49

I didn't ride on roads that were stuck with traffic. I had a free flowing twisty ride, which, for me, was more fun than the motorway. You don't have to agree, we are allowed different opinions.

Wow what area of Auckland was this??

Ragingrob

26th January 2010, 18:49

Lucy

26th January 2010, 20:05

Wow what area of Auckland was this??

I was about to try and type up my route, but then realized you are being sarcastic, so I'll just put you on my ignore list and not bother you again ok?

caseye

26th January 2010, 21:53

jeffs

26th January 2010, 23:18

Here the draft of my letter. I plan to send it at 5pm today. I have to say, I quite like it.

I hope they you get a constructive response, as opposed to a " we don't care we are right" response.

It would be nice to see a constructive safety minded dialog, not a dismissive reply, if any at all.

Good luck, and good on you.

Because with out line splitting, there is no real gain to commuting on a bike.

After pricing us off the road, this could be stage 2 in getting bikes of the road. If you make commute times the same for bike as for cars, by enforcing the over taking rules in this way. People might as
well drive cars. Ie less bikes.

Berries

27th January 2010, 07:38

If you make commute times the same for bike as for cars, by enforcing the over taking rules in this way. People might as well drive cars.
Got to agree with that. If I am going to have to sit in traffic I'd rather do it in a comfy chair, radio on, coffee in one hand, fag in the other etc.

p.dath

27th January 2010, 08:19

Well written leter there Philip.Am looking forward to the reply.Seriously, I am, this will at least give us all a clear indication o fwhat the Police are trying to achieve.of course that does depend on them actually telling you/us the truth in their reply.
Again I believe that you have done yourself and those of us who are happy to be represented by you and your letters proud.Keep up the good work and any assistance that I can render, don't hesitate to ask.

Thanks. Lets keep our fingers crossed for a reply written by a human, as opposed to a form letter response.

I have to say, I had a laugh when I discovered more riders have an accident riding in a straight line than lane splitting. Makes you wonder what we are doing wrong when riding in a straight line.

Ragingrob

27th January 2010, 08:48

I was about to try and type up my route, but then realized you are being sarcastic, so I'll just put you on my ignore list and not bother you again ok?

Hmmm wrong time of month? I seriously wanted to know where in Auckland one could avoid the motorway and get to work via nice corners + no traffic.

Lucy

27th January 2010, 22:44

Hmmm wrong time of month? I seriously wanted to know where in Auckland one could avoid the motorway and get to work via nice corners + no traffic.

Oh, ok then. I used to go from Beachlands through Howick, Panmure, Glen Innes, round the bays or thereabouts. Not even on the main roads of them, but through side roads etc, kind of knew my way around from a previous driving job. Might be getting the names of some suburbs wrong. There were hardly any lights, lots of windy roads and roundabouts. I was on my learners and quite happy going slow. I'm not on my learners anymore, but am still happy going slow.

MarkH

28th January 2010, 14:22

New cop? or did he just not get laid?

Sorry guys - this is all my fault I'm afraid.

You see, I met this hot chick on the shore and she told me she was horny, apparently her husband couldn't satisfy her sexually because he had a penis less than 2" long and no tongue skills at all. So I went back to her place and had her writhing in pleasure for a few hours (cause I'm a helluva stud, of course) then we fell asleep exhausted. Next thing you know she wakes me up and tells me that I'd better get out of there in a hurry because her husband would soon be home. I gear up and get out of there, as I come out of the driveway on the bike I see a car approaching, as I pass the car I can see it is a police car and in my rear view mirrors I see it pull into the driveway that I had just came out of. I didn't hang around to see what might happen, I got the hell outa there as fast as I could.

Yeah, so if all you guys could just take the warning calmly and not rat me out then it would be much appreciated. And have some sympathy for the poor cop, it can't be easy living with a <2" penis and being unable to satisfy your missus.

MarkH

28th January 2010, 14:25

Yeah, but unfortunately overtaking on the left is illegal, unless the car is indicating to turn right, or stationery.
As there is the most room on the left hand side of the fast lane, thats where most people do their split laning.

This is very true and this is how I lane split - completely illegal unfortunately. I have been lucky though and not yet been pulled over even for a warning. I also almost never indicate lane changes either when I am splitting. I am pretty sure that the majority of splitting is done the same way - illegally. One day I will care - when I get ticketed and have to pay a fine, until then I'll just carry on breaking the law.

Pixie

28th January 2010, 22:41

This seems to be the man in charge of the Auckland area:
http://www.police.govt.nz/district/waitemata/index.html

I read the first line with all the woggy greetings,then the word "stakeholders" caught my eye.Well that was enough for me.
Fuggin' wanker.

Pixie

28th January 2010, 22:50

And what do you do when the car infront is too close to the line?

Stop the nearest cop and point the driver out to him.
He'll want to enforce the "must keep as far to the left as possible" rule,and will thank you for telling him.

Pixie

28th January 2010, 22:55

Sorry guys - this is all my fault I'm afraid.

You see, I met this hot chick on the shore and she told me she was horny, apparently her husband couldn't satisfy her sexually because he had a penis less than 2" long and no tongue skills at all. So I went back to her place and had her writhing in pleasure for a few hours (cause I'm a helluva stud, of course) then we fell asleep exhausted. Next thing you know she wakes me up and tells me that I'd better get out of there in a hurry because her husband would soon be home. I gear up and get out of there, as I come out of the driveway on the bike I see a car approaching, as I pass the car I can see it is a police car and in my rear view mirrors I see it pull into the driveway that I had just came out of. I didn't hang around to see what might happen, I got the hell outa there as fast as I could.

Yeah, so if all you guys could just take the warning calmly and not rat me out then it would be much appreciated. And have some sympathy for the poor cop, it can't be easy living with a <2" penis and being unable to satisfy your missus.

I suspected it was something like that

BoristheBiter

29th January 2010, 06:20

Stop the nearest cop and point the driver out to him.
He'll want to enforce the "must keep as far to the left as possible" rule,and will thank you for telling him.

I wish it was that easy, all he will say is "oh thanks for telling me" then wind his window back up.

I wish the motorway and traffic cops would start targeting the idiots that i see everyday be that cars or bikes. Like this morning gap of about 1 car infront, guys comes across two lanes jams in front of me then slams on his brakes. i just tooted the horn to remind him that there are other cars on the road and he went all psyico leaning out his window giving me the bird then pulled into the outside lane and slowed down, what a fuckwit.
then while sitting at the lights at gt south/ south eastern, our lights turn green and there are still cars turning (4). I know there are traffic cops who read these threads so get out and target these fucks.
but we are not allowed to pass on the left. makes you wonder sometimes.

my daily rant over.

Swoop

29th January 2010, 19:01

Stop the nearest cop and point the driver out to him.
He'll want to enforce the "must keep as far to the left as possible" rule,and will thank you for telling him.
:rofl:
Like a policeman knows how to keep left? The fuckwit kiwi road users don't even know that rule!!!!

p.dath

9th February 2010, 09:59

I got the attached response from the Police today about lane splitting.

Basically they say there was no coordinated targeting of motorcycles, but individual officers may choose to do so.

They don't say that lane splitting is legal, but they do say that lane splitting is "not an offence".

Of note is that they consider lane splitting at 30km/h faster than traffic in the same lane as you are in as "too great", but don't elaborate on what an acceptable "overtaking" speed might be. They do say that the other guidelines I stated in my letter "form a pretty sound and common sense base".

He mentions some other facts, but it is pointless to debate them.

To those who haven't been following this thread, these are the guidelines I suggested to the Police for lane splitting:

You must remain in the same lane as the vehicle you are “passing”, specifically, this means you need to be on the left hand side of the central lane marker on the motorway (so that you are passing on the right hand side)
You should not exceed the speed of the vehicles you are splitting by more than 20km/h to 30km/h.
You should be travelling in a straight and predictable path, and not weaving in and out of traffic.
And then there are the basics, such as having 100m of visibility at all times, etc.

MarkH

9th February 2010, 11:36

I got the attached response from the Police today about lane splitting.

That attachment is really hard to read.

p.dath

9th February 2010, 11:44

That attachment is really hard to read.

Are you referring to the prose, or the fact it is scanned?

yachtie10

9th February 2010, 11:47

I had no problems reading it

I see there quoting the 16 times more likely crap again

MSTRS

9th February 2010, 12:03

I had no problems reading it

I see there quoting the 16 times more likely crap again

Let me also
remind you that motorcyclists are around 16 times more likely to be killed or injured in a
crash.
I'm not so sure that that is crap...it was the 16x more likely to be in an accident that was crap.

R6_kid

9th February 2010, 14:22

The report identifies that there were zero motorcycle fatalities in 2008 as a result of overtaking or lane changes on open roads, and just 47 injury crashes, accounting for a mere 3.5% of all injury crashes.

Let me contrast this with the number of injuries cause by a loss of control on straight roads of 3.8%. Certainly if safety was the issue then riding in a straight line should be targeted more so than lane splitting.

You are playing the same statistics game as the government, and just like them - losing.

If you want to contrast something, then look at this way: The number of accidents involving lane splitting bikes vs the number of lane splitting bikes; contrasted against: The number of accidents involving loss of control on a straight road vs the number of motorcycles that travel straight roads (all of them?).

I think what you will find that lane splitting will be shown to be more dangerous, even if only marginally.

In saying that, I've been riding for 7 years now. For at least 5-6 of those years I've lane split on a near daily basis and never had an accident, and only 2 or 3 "close calls". Compared to other riders I've seen I would seem to be one of the quicker lane splitters, but tend to pull in with traffic sooner, I'm also always constantly looking for an 'exit point' should a vehicle pull out suddenly as is usually the case - If I don't feel confident then I don't take the risk. I also plan my trip so that I have enough time to get there without lane splitting, that way I don't feel pressured to maintain a certain speed or that I have to lane split the whole time. I'm not saying I'm the worlds greatest lane splitter, but I have the feeling there are a number of people on motorcycles that don't put enough thought into it and tend to use the gap as just another lane which is where major problems start to occur.

You can imagine how much traffic on the North Shore would back up on an average Mon-Fri morning if a lane splitter vs car fatality occurred. Not only that, but once you're out of control in that sort of situation it usually isn't just one bike and one car, at a guess you could immediately affect up to four other vehicles as a minimum so automatically two lanes are blocked. Fuck being the cop that has to deal with that mess first thing in the morning.

Devil

9th February 2010, 16:08

I'm satisfied with that response.

red mermaid

9th February 2010, 16:25

Looks like someone got it wrong, again.

If I was paying any subs to BRONZ I would stop immediately.

An invitation to the polcie to say that "lane splitting is legal" is almost certain not to produce positive results.
In general BRONZ will complain where motorcyclists are being specifically singled out for police attention (we have the same rights as any other road user). But, since only motorcycles can lane split, it is difficult to object to their being singled out in this case.

MarkH

9th February 2010, 17:00

Are you referring to the prose, or the fact it is scanned?

The fact that it is scanned - I might just try a different pdf reader and see if it is more readable.

jamiey

9th February 2010, 21:35

Awesome work Phil for putting in the time and effort with your letter and getting some kind of clarification on this.

KAWA Z

15th February 2010, 13:35

Hi the p.dath !
Right, lane splitting is obviously legal, but it is certainly very very dangerous, especially here in NZ ! People here, and especially motorists and passengers in cars, are gifted with some of the most irresponsible, unpredicatable, dumb and stupid behavioral patterns one can encounter on the road.
They DO OPEN DOORS and PULL OUT OF THEIR LANE without any consideration of other traffic, especially whats behind them. I have seen it happen too many times and thank god, I was saved from harm through this instinctive "thinking ahead and for the opponent" !
I try to avoid rides in any parts of the country, especially the Auckland area, where it comes to traffic congestion and if I by any chance get into a jam, I turn around and head elsewhere !
Maybe a wise decision if you are free to do so, but if you're stuck in the thick of it and got no way back, especially on the motorway, you should just go to the next offramp and leave it behind instead of risking a serious crash with one of the morons on the road that.
The cop could have booked you for dangerous riding because that's what it is, but decided not to do so because he was actually right for a change and tried the educational measure befor the executional one.
Ever seen a guy hitting a car door @ 60KM/H on a bike ? I did once, he died ! Broke his neck on the window, frame ! Speed doesn't kill, obsticles do when they suddenly appear !

p.dath

15th February 2010, 16:52

The cop could have booked you for dangerous riding because that's what it is, but decided not to do so because he was actually right for a change and tried the educational measure befor the executional one.

Perhaps you missed the response I got from Superintendent John W Kelly, the Strategic Road Policing Manager in post #166?
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/117478-North-Shore-Northern-Motorway-Police-targeting-motorcycles-%2825-January%29?p=1129641502#post1129641502
Where he says it is not an offence to lane split and that there is no strategy to target motorcycles for this?

And did you miss his comment about the guidelines I suggested "... to form a pretty sound and common sense base". If the man in charge at the Police says lane splitting is ok I think its probably ok ...

GOONR

15th February 2010, 17:49

....... If the man in charge at the Police says lane splitting is ok I think its probably ok ...

p.dath, do you think he would have mentioned his train of thought to his "little people".

Just curious that's all.

p.dath

15th February 2010, 18:00

p.dath, do you think he would have mentioned his train of thought to his "little people".

Just curious that's all.

He says in the letter that he believes his officers are suffciently educated on the finer points of the law with regard to lane splitting. There will of course always be exceptions, but usually the bosses rules will filter down to his staff below.

tide

15th February 2010, 18:41

He says in the letter that he believes his officers are suffciently educated on the finer points of the law with regard to lane splitting.

:rofl: :eek5: yeah right tui anybody...

aroberts

15th February 2010, 19:02

Good one d.path. Well written letter and a good response that spells it out.

caseye

24th February 2010, 14:37

The writer is correct in saying that the OFFENCE is Overtaking on the left.
If you are passing a car on it's left in it's lane.
However, there is no offence committed if you are passing said car while it is stationary.
Everything to do with lane splitting is dangerous, open to interpretation and problematic to Police Officers who see one motorcyclist lane splitting at slow reasonable speeds and then sees another travelling at warp nine between two rows of moving cars.
Those riders are who we should be beating over the head with brick bats, cause it's them giving the rest of us a bad name and giving the Police the incentive to start actively Policing lane splitting.
Once again p.dath, nice work and a surprising result, a pleasnat surprise for a change.
Red whats yer name, again, if you can't say something nice, Don't bloody well say it.
Haven't seen you in Wellington (both times) nor up here in Dorkland any of the times or with/alongside Ixion, p.dath or any of the other riders who are doing something besides sitting at their console slagging off others.

p.dath

24th February 2010, 14:47

Did you catch the response from the Police all the way back in post #166?
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/117478-North-Shore-Northern-Motorway-Police-targeting-motorcycles-%2825-January%29?p=1129641502#post1129641502

A pleasing result I thought. It's amazing what happens when you just ask. :)

R-Soul

11th February 2011, 10:07

I must say that I thought it was an honest, well reasoned and well thought out response from the cops. It confirmed waht we already suspected - a bit more black and white though.

HOWEVER: It still annoys me that the bikers and the cops have to tiptoe their way around the damn badly written law, in which an inch to the right of the line, or to the left of the line, can make such a difference (while making nopractical difference safety wise) - and that doesnt cover what happens when you are ON the line?

What does it take to find a politician in NZ that has some balls to say either:
- Right we will make lanes plitting LEGAL, and paint mini-lanes between motroway lans, for bikes to follow, and to remind car users to leave space for them OR
- We will make a thin lane to the far right the on motorways that is for bike use only OR
- we wil make use of bus lanes on motorways legal for bikes

If roads are clearly marked to encourage use by bikes, then cars will be constantly reminded to look out for us.
Any of these are no brainers, as it encourages use of bikes to reduce fuel imports, reduces crashes, and decreases traffic and parking congestion. Perhaps if the latest safety initiatives have a useful effect on reducing the number of bike crashes (especially those caused by the bike riders losing control all by themself), the government will feel more confident in encouraging the use of bikes for commuting.

p.dath

11th February 2011, 10:18

What does it take to find a politician in NZ that has some balls to say either:

The problem is you need to find about 50, not one ...

BevanPT

11th February 2011, 12:54

Lane splitting is literally a way of life in Auckland. As long as its done carefully and done when traffic is either stalled or near stalled it was considered okay according to feedback on traffic laws posted in the Herald some time back.

Not all cops are legal gurus. Would be interesting to see case law on the issue in cases where splitting is done as per overtaking rules. Bummer for the poor lamb being sacrifieced in court to set a legal precedent.

Can't say its much fun sitting in 25 degree heat in full gear stuck in smoky exhaust fumed traffic lanes for longer than is necessary. Commonsense and safely executed riding practice should hopefully prevail. Tui....

Not all cops actually know the laws anyway. I got pulled over by a really angry cop a while back for using the bus lane at the end of Lincoln Road (heading towards NW motorway). He eventually had to apologise but his excuse was that he was used to just patrolling the motorway bus lanes and didn't realise there was a difference.

pzkpfw

11th February 2011, 13:00

What does it take to find a politician in NZ that has some balls to say either:
- Right we will make lanes plitting LEGAL, and paint mini-lanes between motroway lans, for bikes to follow, and to remind car users to leave space for them OR
- We will make a thin lane to the far right the on motorways that is for bike use only OR
- we wil make use of bus lanes on motorways legal for bikes

They are lazy, and would just go for option 4 which is to make it clearly illegal.

They don't want to pain extra lanes for us. They'd rather just make us "wait in line" with the cars. Easy. For them.

R-Soul

11th February 2011, 13:32

They are lazy, and would just go for option 4 which is to make it clearly illegal.

They don't want to pain extra lanes for us. They'd rather just make us "wait in line" with the cars. Easy. For them.

I have written to LTNZ asking about motorway busway use by bikes - and just got a lackadaisical response about "bus drivers having had special training" to use teh motorway buslanes. FFS what a cop out. They would rather just let us risk our lives between trucks on the main motorway.

p.dath

12th February 2011, 08:20

I have written to LTNZ asking about motorway busway use by bikes - and just got a lackadaisical response about "bus drivers having had special training" to use teh motorway buslanes. FFS what a cop out. They would rather just let us risk our lives between trucks on the main motorway.

The motorway bus lanes are a special case - LTNZ claim they are not bus lanes but "special purpose lanes".

I have tried to get my hands on the rule ("Transit Bylaw 2002/19") that has declared that they are a special purpose vehicle lanes. However I can not.
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/wiki/Bus_Lanes

If you are keen, write to LTNZ and ask for a copy of this bylaw. It could also be an Auckland City Bylaw I guess.

If this bylaw does not actually exist (as in, they planned for it to be created but it never was) then it is a completely different game.

Toaster

12th February 2011, 10:35

Not all cops actually know the laws anyway. I got pulled over by a really angry cop a while back for using the bus lane at the end of Lincoln Road (heading towards NW motorway). He eventually had to apologise but his excuse was that he was used to just patrolling the motorway bus lanes and didn't realise there was a difference.

Yes well, firstly, they shouldn't pull anyone over unless the reason for the stop is lawful and in your case it was not. Secondly, the training around the finer points of law is seriously lacking. Disappointing... and I say that as an ex-cop, not a cop basher.

I now work with a guy who was ex UK police and we compared training courses and detail.... if only we invested the time and money they do in their on road police training. That is the problem with a small tax base generated from a small population. Per capita we still don't invest enough though.