• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

This thread is now about broken door mirrors...

Status
Not open for further replies.
JulesMaximus

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
I like hitting mirrors and lopping them off. They make a nice popping sound and it is funny watching them dangle there on the side of the car.

220px-Broken_Wing_Mirror.JPG



Closed since the OP deleted the original material and changed the topic.
admin allisolm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I understand why you're posting this after the last thread.... but that article in itself is fairly inappropriate.

I doubt very many people who drive on the roads believe it is a game. In addition, the rather unconcerned way the author treats contact with other people's property (their cars) at a potential high rate of speed (it's just a clack...) is wrong.

It's this attitude that gets many motorcyclists in trouble. However, considering the ego many motorcyclists sport, it's not surprising that one wrote an article like that.

A far more accurate article would have been "Lane splitting, illegal in nearly every state, but not in California!".
 
Pulsar said:
I doubt very many people who drive on the roads believe it is a game.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct. Most people treat it far far more lightly than even a game. Games require focus and thought for the most part. Driving seems to be barely worth more attention than sleeping based on the level of attention I see motorists paying to the task.
 
Last edited:
i would be very very unhappy if someone "clacked" my mirror. I agree with pulsar. riding and driving are not "games" one can play. i do believe this can be done in a safe manner, but this artical does not advocate safety.

also. speed limits should still apply, unlike most people doing this seem to think. rolling through traffic at a much higher speed is dangerous for everyone.
 
Last edited:
FuzzyDunlop said:
there is some intense videos on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cQvcZlo2yo
amazing
Click to expand...

since that video is sped up, it's hard to tell how fast he's actually going. but there are definitely some spots where a car had an opening and could have merged into his lane, which is what scares the crap outta me with regards to lane splitting.

i think i'd only split if traffic were virtually stopped. i've gotten stuck a couple of times on highways or other highly trafficked routes and lane splitting would have put me in the front.
 
Fenixgoon said:
since that video is sped up, it's hard to tell how fast he's actually going. but there are definitely some spots where a car had an opening and could have merged into his lane, which is what scares the crap outta me with regards to lane splitting.

i think i'd only split if traffic were virtually stopped. i've gotten stuck a couple of times on highways or other highly trafficked routes and lane splitting would have put me in the front.
Click to expand...


ya, but still pretty crazy. It looks like there were a couple of people who even tried to corwd him a little.
 
JulesMaximus said:
Even though lane-splitting is legal in some states, whether you'll get pulled over by the police is dependent on whether or not they feel what you are doing is safe. The catch, of course, is that each patrolman has a different criteria for what constitutes "safe." Ride in a manner which you feel is safe for you. If you get ticketed, plead not guilty and take it to a jury. The ticket is a judgment call. Obviously, you are in the right or you wouldn't have been lane-splitting. Was it safe? Hell, yes! The fact that you're standing in court with all your limbs intact is proof of that. At any rate, keep an eye out for the cops just in case.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

That bit is so wrong that it's just not funny.

(1) Lane splitting is not "legal in some states." It's illegal in 49 states. Only California allows lane-splitting.

(2) You don't get a jury trial for traffic infractions. You get a judge. A judge who is used to dealing with motorcyclists like this guy. Which brings us to the next point.

(3) There's not a judge in this country who's going to accept this moron's "I didn't have an accident so it must have been safe" theory.

I've got no problem with lane splitting when legal or with filtering, but even in CA where it's legal the LEO guidance documents I've seen tend to suggest that officers should ticket if traffic is moving more than 25-30 mph OR if the motorcyclist is moving more than 5 mph faster than the speed of traffic (e.g. in stopped traffic a motorcycle can only go 5 mph). Granted these aren't codified laws, but what the author is suggesting is well beyond what any of the official guidance on the subject suggests.

Lastly, I'm completely with Pulsar on the author's apparent total disregard for other people's property. Hit someone's car? Doesn't matter, it's "just" a clacking noise. Absolutely ridiculous.

ZV
 
what ever happened to driving (riding in this case) is a privilege and not a right? Games?

Everytime I see a bike pass me I'm looking for his buddy to zoom past me too. They are fun to ride, sure, but they are also a nuisance.
 
Driving is indeed a "game", based on how stop signs seem to mean "the closer or faster someone is coming, the more motivation you have to peel out and run the stop sign to 'beat' them" around here. People speeding up and trying to stop you from passing, using other cars to block you or scrape you off, jack rabbit starting at lights and trying to be in front, etc.

There is a whole psychological complex to how people drive and it's disgusting.
 
Zenmervolt said:
That bit is so wrong that it's just not funny.

(1) Lane splitting is not "legal in some states." It's illegal in 49 states. Only California allows lane-splitting.

(2) You don't get a jury trial for traffic infractions. You get a judge. A judge who is used to dealing with motorcyclists like this guy. Which brings us to the next point.

(3) There's not a judge in this country who's going to accept this moron's "I didn't have an accident so it must have been safe" theory.

I've got no problem with lane splitting when legal or with filtering, but even in CA where it's legal the LEO guidance documents I've seen tend to suggest that officers should ticket if traffic is moving more than 25-30 mph OR if the motorcyclist is moving more than 5 mph faster than the speed of traffic (e.g. in stopped traffic a motorcycle can only go 5 mph). Granted these aren't codified laws, but what the author is suggesting is well beyond what any of the official guidance on the subject suggests.

Lastly, I'm completely with Pulsar on the author's apparent total disregard for other people's property. Hit someone's car? Doesn't matter, it's "just" a clacking noise. Absolutely ridiculous.

ZV
Click to expand...

Right before that part you quoted he states the following:

You probably shouldn't ride between vehicles at more than 10 to 15 mph faster than they are traveling. If they're stopped, they are traveling 0 mph.
Click to expand...

Which I agree with.

I have touched a mirror by accident once or twice. Never caused any damage though.
 
JulesMaximus said:
You are absolutely correct. Most people treat it far far more lightly than even a game. Games require focus and thought for the most part. Driving seems to be barely worth more attention than sleeping based on the level of attention I see motorists paying to the task.
Click to expand...
If not a game, then a competition. People will make crazy maneuvers just to get one spot ahead in a long string of traffic that's moving at the speed of the fully-loaded dump truck 50 cars ahead, on a road that narrows to one lane in either direction.
"Congratulations, your stunt just netted you about 0.6 seconds. You're so awesome now!"

I see it a lot driving to work. For example, some of my coworkers also drive on portions of the same route that I take, and a few of them go a bit nuts with rapid accelerations and do 15mph+ over the limit when possible. Frequently, I'll still end up right behind them at a traffic light farther down. Either way, I drive to get to a destination. I don't drive to win a race.
 
JulesMaximus said:
Right before that part you quoted he states the following:

You probably shouldn't ride between vehicles at more than 10 to 15 mph faster than they are traveling. If they're stopped, they are traveling 0 mph.
Click to expand...

Which I agree with.
Click to expand...

Is "10-15 mph" the same as "5 mph"? Didn't think so. He's recommending double or triple the speed differential that governmental commentary has suggested is the currently prevailing agency interpretation of "safe and prudent manner."

ZV
 
Zenmervolt said:
Is "10-15 mph" the same as "5 mph"? Didn't think so. He's recommending double or triple the speed differential that governmental commentary has suggested is the currently prevailing agency interpretation of "safe and prudent manner."

ZV
Click to expand...

I do it all the time. 10-15mph is not dangerous IMO.

I've lane split past CHP at 10mph many times.
 
I was in Brazil last week and the lane splitting there is beyond insane. A bike will fly through stopped traffic doing 40-50mph honking the whole time. I was concerned enough to not stick my hand out of the window for fear it would be taken off.
 
JulesMaximus said:
I do it all the time. 10-15mph is not dangerous IMO.

I've lane split past CHP at 10mph many times.
Click to expand...

The point is that the legal test is not, and has never been, whether the accused thought the action was dangerous. The guy's attempt at advice for how to handle the ticket and his recommendation of speeds is not an accurate reflection of official statements.

If he'd said, "officially the state has implied X, but in practice most people get away with Y" that would be different. But he's not saying that. He's saying that if you get stopped, the fact that you're not injured is going to be enough to prove it was safe (which is beyond absurd) and he's completely failing to point out that most LEO commentary talks about staying within 5mph of the traffic speed, which is something that people should at least be aware of.

Overall, the "article" reads like some hack's forum post. The writer has clearly not done any research at all and the entire tone is "I've gotten away with X so X must be OK." It's piss-poor writing. The advice isn't awful in practice (aside from his idiotic nonchalance about potentially damaging other people's property if you hit a car mirror), but it's not well-written and it's certainly not anything even remotely close to well-researched.

ZV
 
"Gee, officer, I was stopped, opened my door a crack to throw up---I'm sick---and some stupid fuck runs right into it!"
 
Zenmervolt said:
The point is that the legal test is not, and has never been, whether the accused thought the action was dangerous. The guy's attempt at advice for how to handle the ticket and his recommendation of speeds is not an accurate reflection of official statements.

If he'd said, "officially the state has implied X, but in practice most people get away with Y" that would be different. But he's not saying that. He's saying that if you get stopped, the fact that you're not injured is going to be enough to prove it was safe (which is beyond absurd) and he's completely failing to point out that most LEO commentary talks about staying within 5mph of the traffic speed, which is something that people should at least be aware of.

Overall, the "article" reads like some hack's forum post. The writer has clearly not done any research at all and the entire tone is "I've gotten away with X so X must be OK." It's piss-poor writing. The advice isn't awful in practice (aside from his idiotic nonchalance about potentially damaging other people's property if you hit a car mirror), but it's not well-written and it's certainly not anything even remotely close to well-researched.

ZV
Click to expand...

I can tell you that from a technical standpoint, as someone who has done it for years, the piece is fairly spot on.

The rest of it you can take with a grain of salt of course.

If you don't like it or live in a state where it is illegal then don't read it but if you live in CA and want to try it the technical part of his advice is decent. I added my 2 cents to his advice above and I stand by that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top