<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Guide to Improving Laws</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bicycledriving.org</link>
	<description>Cycling skills, good roads, public awareness.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:26:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Schimek</title>
		<link>http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws/comment-page-1#comment-7294</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Schimek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2010 03:15:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws#comment-7294</guid>
		<description>I have never come across a state law, or even a local law, that requires bicyclists to ride facing traffic.  However, every state, I believe, requires pedestrians to walk facing traffic if there is no sidewalk or shoulder. This is, I suspect, the source of some of the confusion. I have heard several reports that Boston teachers used to advise children to bicycle facing traffic, and I am sure there are other such examples.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have never come across a state law, or even a local law, that requires bicyclists to ride facing traffic.  However, every state, I believe, requires pedestrians to walk facing traffic if there is no sidewalk or shoulder. This is, I suspect, the source of some of the confusion. I have heard several reports that Boston teachers used to advise children to bicycle facing traffic, and I am sure there are other such examples.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed</title>
		<link>http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws/comment-page-1#comment-7275</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:48:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws#comment-7275</guid>
		<description>This seems to be a fairly common theme in the random letter-to-the-editor: &quot;...I am from a state where bicyclists face traffic, and I have more than once avoided an erratic driver by...&quot;

http://blog.cazbike.org/2010/06/letter-bicyclists-should-ride-facing.html

I assume it is totally false that there is any state where this is the case -- but I wonder if it were ever true?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This seems to be a fairly common theme in the random letter-to-the-editor: &#8220;&#8230;I am from a state where bicyclists face traffic, and I have more than once avoided an erratic driver by&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://blog.cazbike.org/2010/06/letter-bicyclists-should-ride-facing.html" rel="nofollow">http://blog.cazbike.org/2010/06/letter-bicyclists-should-ride-facing.html</a></p>
<p>I assume it is totally false that there is any state where this is the case &#8212; but I wonder if it were ever true?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon M</title>
		<link>http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws/comment-page-1#comment-5371</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 22:43:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws#comment-5371</guid>
		<description>MD law is mostly characterized correctly above.
However, it says &quot;practicable and safe&quot; for the ride right rule which still is interpreted as &#039;possible&#039;

Also I&#039;ve been told 6 states have a shoulder use requriement - MD, AK, HI, CO, ND and WY.

When was the last time this site was updated - its very helpful - but perhaps in need of a refresh?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MD law is mostly characterized correctly above.<br />
However, it says &#8220;practicable and safe&#8221; for the ride right rule which still is interpreted as &#8216;possible&#8217;</p>
<p>Also I&#8217;ve been told 6 states have a shoulder use requriement &#8211; MD, AK, HI, CO, ND and WY.</p>
<p>When was the last time this site was updated &#8211; its very helpful &#8211; but perhaps in need of a refresh?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh Putnam</title>
		<link>http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws/comment-page-1#comment-4681</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh Putnam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:11:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws#comment-4681</guid>
		<description>One other note on Washington, the road positioning specified in our law is the right edge of the right &lt;i&gt;through lane&lt;/i&gt;, so again no &lt;i&gt;exception&lt;/i&gt; is needed for right-turn-only lanes -- the cyclist is specifically directed to use a through lane rather than a turn lane.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One other note on Washington, the road positioning specified in our law is the right edge of the right <i>through lane</i>, so again no <i>exception</i> is needed for right-turn-only lanes &#8212; the cyclist is specifically directed to use a through lane rather than a turn lane.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh Putnam</title>
		<link>http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws/comment-page-1#comment-4680</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh Putnam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:01:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws#comment-4680</guid>
		<description>On keep-right rules for motorists, Mass. is not the only state to require motorists to keep to the right lane except when passing.  The language in Washington may have more clarity in the exceptions, but the basic language is the same:

&lt;blockquote&gt;
(2) Upon all roadways having two or more lanes for traffic moving in the same direction, all vehicles shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, except (a) when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction, (b) when traveling at a speed greater than the traffic flow, (c) when moving left to allow traffic to merge, or (d) when preparing for a left turn at an intersection, exit, or into a private road or driveway when such left turn is legally permitted. On any such roadway, a vehicle or combination over ten thousand pounds shall be driven only in the right-hand lane except under the conditions enumerated in (a) through (d) of this subsection.&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On keep-right rules for motorists, Mass. is not the only state to require motorists to keep to the right lane except when passing.  The language in Washington may have more clarity in the exceptions, but the basic language is the same:</p>
<blockquote><p>
(2) Upon all roadways having two or more lanes for traffic moving in the same direction, all vehicles shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, except (a) when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction, (b) when traveling at a speed greater than the traffic flow, (c) when moving left to allow traffic to merge, or (d) when preparing for a left turn at an intersection, exit, or into a private road or driveway when such left turn is legally permitted. On any such roadway, a vehicle or combination over ten thousand pounds shall be driven only in the right-hand lane except under the conditions enumerated in (a) through (d) of this subsection.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh Putnam</title>
		<link>http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws/comment-page-1#comment-4679</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh Putnam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 20:54:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws#comment-4679</guid>
		<description>Your article incorrectly states that Washington&#039;s ride-to-the-right law lacks a speed exception.  No &lt;i&gt;exception&lt;/i&gt; is listed for speed because the law applies only to bicycles moving slower than traffic.  You can&#039;t except someone from a law that didn&#039;t apply in the first place.

&quot;Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway &lt;i&gt;at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic&lt;/i&gt; at the particular time and place shall ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe....&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your article incorrectly states that Washington&#8217;s ride-to-the-right law lacks a speed exception.  No <i>exception</i> is listed for speed because the law applies only to bicycles moving slower than traffic.  You can&#8217;t except someone from a law that didn&#8217;t apply in the first place.</p>
<p>&#8220;Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway <i>at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic</i> at the particular time and place shall ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe&#8230;.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jerry Foster</title>
		<link>http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws/comment-page-1#comment-2693</link>
		<dc:creator>Jerry Foster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:58:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws#comment-2693</guid>
		<description>FYI - NJ&#039;s helmet law now requires them for persons under age 17.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FYI &#8211; NJ&#8217;s helmet law now requires them for persons under age 17.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Terry McAfee</title>
		<link>http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws/comment-page-1#comment-1969</link>
		<dc:creator>Terry McAfee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 00:57:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws#comment-1969</guid>
		<description>A bicyclist who is at fault in a car / bike collision and damages the car is typically covered by his homeowner or renter insurance. If the bicyclist adds a small motor to his bicycle, he is not covered. He needs to get a rider for his homeowner policy or his auto insurance policy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A bicyclist who is at fault in a car / bike collision and damages the car is typically covered by his homeowner or renter insurance. If the bicyclist adds a small motor to his bicycle, he is not covered. He needs to get a rider for his homeowner policy or his auto insurance policy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed Beighe</title>
		<link>http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws/comment-page-1#comment-1950</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed Beighe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:48:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws#comment-1950</guid>
		<description>In Idaho, cyclists may treat a stop like a yield sign, apparently for a looong time (1982).

Now similar legislation is pending in Arizona, Montana, and Oregon.
http://azbikelaw.org/blog/bicycle-stop-sign-changes-proposed/

Idaho also more recently allow cyclists to proceed through a red signal after a full stop is no traffic is present. None of current pending legislation has this feature.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In Idaho, cyclists may treat a stop like a yield sign, apparently for a looong time (1982).</p>
<p>Now similar legislation is pending in Arizona, Montana, and Oregon.<br />
<a href="http://azbikelaw.org/blog/bicycle-stop-sign-changes-proposed/" rel="nofollow">http://azbikelaw.org/blog/bicycle-stop-sign-changes-proposed/</a></p>
<p>Idaho also more recently allow cyclists to proceed through a red signal after a full stop is no traffic is present. None of current pending legislation has this feature.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed Beighe</title>
		<link>http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws/comment-page-1#comment-1645</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed Beighe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:37:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bicycledriving.org/law/guide-to-improving-laws#comment-1645</guid>
		<description>Paul,
There&#039;s been a veritable explosion of passing-distance laws, 12 by my count. I think i have them all listed here:

http://azbikelaw.org/blog/three-foot-passing-laws/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul,<br />
There&#8217;s been a veritable explosion of passing-distance laws, 12 by my count. I think i have them all listed here:</p>
<p><a href="http://azbikelaw.org/blog/three-foot-passing-laws/" rel="nofollow">http://azbikelaw.org/blog/three-foot-passing-laws/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
