• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Lane Splitting Legislation introduced in CA

Just talked to the Senator's office--I can't quote the legislative aide I talked to, but from what I could gather, SB350 as it is now is a "spot bill," a kind of legislative place holder that allows them to schedule hearings on the issues. I guess they had to slap something together to hold a place in the calendar, which is why it has so much vague language in it. Expect to not see much movement on this for the next year--the CA legislature has 2-year sessions.

I have a call in to the actual press secretary for Sen. Beall (pronounced "Bell") and will keep you updated.

Glad to hear you got some info. I haven't received my promised call back, and the staffer I talked to wouldn't tell me anything.
 
Expect to not see much movement on this for the next year--the CA legislature has 2-year sessions.

I have a call in to the actual press secretary for Sen. Beall (pronounced "Bell") and will keep you updated.

The session is described as two years because thats the length of term for all Assembly seats and when one-third of state senate seats are up for election. I believe all bills introduced this year only have until Sept. 13 (of this year) to make it through committees, any revisions, be passed in both houses and sent to the Governor who then has until October 13 to sign or veto all bills passed by the legislature in 2013.

I don't think the bills have a two-year life. Anything that doesn't get passed by the legislature this year has to be re-introduced after the legislature re-convenes next January.
 
One thing to never, never forget is that we're seriously outnumbered and if the subject ever goes to the voters for a vote, we're screwed!
......
You can copy and paste this post over and over on barf and elsewhere. I am always amazed when motorcyclists don't realize what a precarious position we have, especially in California. The voting public could virtually legislate us out of existence with smog, safety, and splitting laws. Or they could just ban two-wheeled vehicles, all together.
 
You can copy and paste this post over and over on barf and elsewhere. I am always amazed when motorcyclists don't realize what a precarious position we have, especially in California. The voting public could virtually legislate us out of existence with smog, safety, and splitting laws. Or they could just ban two-wheeled vehicles, all together.

Never happen. Motorcycling issues will never be placed on the ballot as an initiative (or measure at the local level). All motorcycle-related concerns will be decided in the legislature where you don't need to worry about the will of the majority of the voting public. No one in the legislature wants the potential lobbying money and campaign contributions going elsewhere. The helmet law didn't go before the voters and neither did the recent sound regulations. When was the last time the voters decided anything to do with the automotive industry or construction equipment or similar industries?

The economic downside of severely impacting the motorcycle industry in California outweighs whatever the general public may perceive as a nussance or safety issue.
 
Why do we have legislation to legalize something that's already legal? :wtf

Because it's not.

That is to say (you should already be aware of this) that there are no laws specifically permitting it, just a liberal interpretation of lane usage laws.

The lane usage laws in Oregon are worded nearly identcally to those in California, but the police and courts interpreted them differently, and you can get a ticket up here.
And, apparently since we started talking about the similar wording between Oregon and California versions of the laws, the Oregon legislature decided to "fix" things by codifying lane splitting here as not allowed.
 
Inside info says bill is DOA.

After all the work CA Mission 12 did on this via the guidelines and the public awareness outreach it sure is a kick in the you know where to see a bill discussed so quickly.

So did some politician suddenly become it was not illegal because of it and now needs to address it.. Or is it an opportunity to slap your name on an issue for ..well you know.
 
Never happen. Motorcycling issues will never be placed on the ballot as an initiative (or measure at the local level).
Ah, you take my words too literally. The huge majority votes legislators into office. They also have huge numbers of complainers to drown out our minuscule voices.

Helmet laws passed, DESPITE enormous amounts of time and money spent to stop it. Sound laws passed, despite the aftermarket lobby. CARB has ruined several SEMA companies in the car market. Legislators control the direction of rules along with making laws. This is representative government. You vote for people to do what you want and pressure them to do it.

You don't need a referendum to change things. As a slightly different example, MADD had very few, but very persistent founders, with very little money. Their success is particularly informative about what can be accomplished without actual direct public votes.
 
Ah, you take my words too literally.

Next time I'll just guess what you're talking about from reading exactly what you wrote. :teeth

I didn't say the legislature wouldn't make it more difficult, just that the industry as a whole won't be severly impacted.
 
I ordered some stickers & magnets from you last night... Thanks! (in advance)

I don't want to sound like a Monday morning quarterback... but after quietly lane-splitting in California for the past 30+ years with zero problems, I predict all this recent publicity will not end well for us. Leaving it as the "grey area" it was, may have been the best choice.

I think all the effort has been for all the right reasons, and again, I support the cause... but I can't help wondering how long it will be before I get my first improper lane-splitting ticket?
 
Inside info says bill is DOA.

Sweet. DOA is good - but DOA because the bill was really poorly written and pointless and response was swift and powerful, or because all the legislators hate splitters and someone is going to introduce another bill to ban?

I ordered some stickers & magnets from you last night... Thanks! (in advance)

I don't want to sound like a Monday morning quarterback... but after quietly lane-splitting in California for the past 30+ years with zero problems, I predict all this recent publicity will not end well for us. Leaving it as the "grey area" it was, may have been the best choice.

I think all the effort has been for all the right reasons, and again, I support the cause... but I can't help wondering how long it will be before I get my first improper lane-splitting ticket?

Thanks! :thumbup All yesterday's orders went out this morning.
 
Sweet. DOA is good - but DOA because the bill was really poorly written and pointless and response was swift and powerful, or because all the legislators hate splitters and someone is going to introduce another bill to ban?

.

Sure anything could happen, but it being banned I think is unlikely now. My fear is a bill to control the practice like this one.

Hearing other states kicking the can is good. We are safer and more efficient when we apply lane splitting. Not being dickwads on the road and on target to keep our voice heard it what is best for us too keep this available to us.
 
Sure anything could happen, but it being banned I think is unlikely now. My fear is a bill to control the practice like this one.

Hearing other states kicking the can is good. We are safer and more efficient when we apply lane splitting. Not being dickwads on the road and on target to keep our voice heard it what is best for us too keep this available to us.

:thumbup Agree 100% with not being dickwads and keeping our voice heard. I joined ABATE last night - bookends nicely with my AMA membership.
 
I ordered some stickers & magnets from you last night... Thanks! (in advance)

I don't want to sound like a Monday morning quarterback... but after quietly lane-splitting in California for the past 30+ years with zero problems, I predict all this recent publicity will not end well for us. Leaving it as the "grey area" it was, may have been the best choice.

I think all the effort has been for all the right reasons, and again, I support the cause... but I can't help wondering how long it will be before I get my first improper lane-splitting ticket?

This
 
I'm glad to see the AMA using such positive language about lane splitting. Is this a sign of them changing their tune on splitting?
 
I'm glad to see the AMA using such positive language about lane splitting. Is this a sign of them changing their tune on splitting?

I believe the AMA's California lobbyis...Governmental Affairs Specialist has always mentioned lane splitting favorably in press releases. He's had to go through this several times thanks Alan Lowenthal's office popping out bills to prohibit lane splitting over the last several years.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top