[MNellis]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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