Impeding Traffic CVC 22400

[Gary Cziko]

 

People,

After four trips to traffic court to testify as an expert witness to defend cyclists' full lane rights, I finally got my chance yesterday to testify in Torrance Traffic Court--the first time the ticketing officer (in this case an LA County Sheriff Deputy) showed up.

You'll likely be hearing more about yesterday's two cases, but the bottom line is that defense attorney Seth Davidson got the two cyclists acquitted of violating of 21202(a) in Rancho Palos Verdes last January.

My question today is about the impeding law that was not the subject of yesterday's proceedings, but could have been. It is appended below.

Also appended below is Bill Davidson (via Serge Issakov) reasoning that CVC 22400 does not apply to cyclists moving as fast as they can reasonably travel.

My question: does anyone have knowledge of CVC 22400 being used against cyclists exercising their full lane rights in California, and if so, what has been the legal outcome?

-- Gary

Serge Issakov

3/2/16

San Diego cyclist advocate Bill Davidson recently posted this lucid explanation for why cyclists in California cannot be in violation of impeding traffic (CVC 22400).

Of course, law enforcement and judges may disagree, but the reasoning seems very solid to me.

Serge

----
The state can't require the driver of any vehicle to travel at a speed that is faster than is safe or faster than they are capable of travelling. CVC 22400 assumes that you're capable of maintaining speed when it makes that requirement. It was never meant to require vehicles to go faster than they can go and it makes no provision for what slow vehicles should do when that is the case.

The existence of CVC 21656 implies that slow moving vehicles are expected to be on the road and what they should do when faster traffic cannot overtake.

Similarly, the existence of CVC 21202 specifically implies that bicycles are expected to be on the road and what they should do when they are slower than other traffic.

Furthermore, CVC 21200 exempts cyclists from complying with requirements that make no sense due to the nature of bicycles. You can't require a bike rider to go 35mph on a level road because most can't do it.

At most you could say that CVC 22400 requires cyclists to maintain the fastest speed that they can reasonably maintain up to the speed limit.

Nobody is enforcing 22400 against tractors driven at top speed. Neither are they enforcing it against street sweepers or mobile home movers. It's only cyclists, because some people need a loophole in 21200 to deny cyclists the right to travel on the roadway.

https://www.facebook.com/cabobike/posts/10156595701760344?notif_t=like

CVC 22400

(a) No person shall drive upon a highway at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic unless the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation, because of a grade, or in compliance with law.

No person shall bring a vehicle to a complete stop upon a highway so as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic unless the stop is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law.

(b) Whenever the Department of Transportation determines on the basis of an engineering and traffic survey that slow speeds on any part of a state highway consistently impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, the department may determine and declare a minimum speed limit below which no person shall drive a vehicle, except when necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law, when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected along the part of the highway for which a minimum speed limit is established.

Subdivision (b) of this section shall apply only to vehicles subject to registration.

(Amended by Stats. 1979, Ch. 364.)

--

==================================================

Gary Cziko ("ZEE-ko"), PhD
Professor Emeritus, Educational Psychology
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

CyclingSavvy Instructor (CSI)

Board of Directors, American Bicycling Education Association (ABEA.bike)

Board of Directors, California Association of Bicycle Organizations (CABO)

Expert Witness for Cyclists' Rights

[Gary Cziko]

Jim,

Thanks for that.

The idea of consulting a city attorney for a city police department looks promising.

But how does that work for a city like Rancho Palos Verdes which has no police department and instead contracts the L.A. Sheriff Department for its police work? Is there an equivalent of a city attorney there somewhere?

If so, I would suppose he or she is much higher in the hierarchy and perhaps not as accessible as a city attorney for such consultation.

-- Gary

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 6:43 AM, Jim Baross <jimb...@gmail.com> wrote:

When Pete Penseyres and I provided some training on *bicyclists' perspective  to Oceanside Police, their initial response was that a bicyclist "in the way" of motorists could be cited as in violation of 22400. We disagreed. They got an opinion/decision from their City Attorney; a response that agreed with us.

We were unable to get a copy of the opinion though ... .

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Serge Issakov]

Damn, I forgot how concise that argument was.  Good to reread it.  Bill Davidson, RIP.

Serge

--

[Jim Baross]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Jim Baross" <jimb...@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 7, 2017 6:43 AM
Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Impeding Traffic CVC 22400
To: "Gary Cziko" <gcz...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Cabo Forum" <cabo...@googlegroups.com>

When Pete Penseyres and I provided some training on *bicyclists' perspective  to Oceanside Police, their initial response was that a bicyclist "in the way" of motorists could be cited as in violation of 22400. We disagreed. They got an opinion/decision from their City Attorney; a response that agreed with us.

We were unable to get a copy of the opinion though ... .

[judyf...@att.net]

There was a case in Oceanside Harbor won by Richard Duquette.  They had video.  Maybe Pete Penseyres remembers and  knows more about it. 

I don't think he would have won just based on your argument but the video showed that the cop was not being impeded and could have passed, if I remember correctly.  

It.was about winning and not.so much the actual law as it applies to.cyclists.

Judy

Sent from my not so Smartphone.  Please excuse brief responses and typos.

------ Original message------

From: Gary Cziko

Date: Fri, Apr 7, 2017 6:51 AM

To: Jim Baross;

Cc: Cabo Forum;

Subject:Re: [CABOforum] Impeding Traffic CVC 22400

Jim,

Thanks for that.

The idea of consulting a city attorney for a city police department looks promising.

But how does that work for a city like Rancho Palos Verdes which has no police department and instead contracts the L.A. Sheriff Department for its police work? Is there an equivalent of a city attorney there somewhere?

If so, I would suppose he or she is much higher in the hierarchy and perhaps not as accessible as a city attorney for such consultation.

-- Gary

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 6:43 AM, Jim Baross <jimb...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Serge Issakov]

Yes, that's consistent with my memory.  The video showed the cyclist was keeping up with the RV in front of him.  The anti-cyclist bias was so blatant in that case.  Obviously going the same speed as the RV, but the cyclist is cited, and there no consideration to cite the RV going the same speed.

Serge

--

[Gary Cziko]

It's not being just slow that gets cyclists in trouble.

It's being slow AND narrow and not letting motor vehicles squeeze by. 

Gary

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[John Forester]

I was advising in that case. I remember the video well, and it reminds me of a rather similar case in which I was the defendant. I was riding on Middlefield Road in Palo Alto, which has a forty-foot roadway between curbs. At first, I was in a section that ran through a small shopping center, which was lined as four ten-foot lanes, two each north and south. I was riding in the #2 lane, when a there was some traffic noise behind me, maybe a short toot. I continued across an arterial intersection with traffic signals, where Middlefield changed to a two lane residential street with parking on both sides. There was a park on the right-hand side, but, this being a work-day morning, for that distance no motorists had chosen to park. So an LEO behind me blew her siren and stopped me for violating the vehicle code. I forget which section it was.

I had crossed the intersection on a new green, and the two lanes of motorists behind me singled up and were overtaking me in a steady stream. Here is the meaning of the LEO's testimony. She was driving in the #1 northbound lane of the four-lane section. A motorist immediately before her in the #2 lane moved suddenly into the #1 lane, almost causing a collision. The LEO saw that the motorist had made its dangerous lane change to overtake me. Then the traffic light ahead turned red and traffic stopped. When it returned to green and the motorists in both lanes singled up to suit the new road condition and moved on in single line, the LEO chose to move into the parking space behind me so she could charge me with blocking her movement. That was her testimony, yet I was convicted while the actual dangerous driver was not even stopped.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St, Lemon Grove, CA 91945
619-644-5481, fore...@johnforester.com

[Pete Penseyres]

The citation in Oceanside probably would not have been written if the cyclist had not baited the Harbor Police by yelling at them after they asked him to move over.  I watched the entire video (which the cyclist sent me later) which showed him arguing with the police for quite some time after they pulled him over.  So it seemed to me watching the argument that he put the police in a position where they had to admit they were wrong or write him up. So he essentially "asked" to be written up. The Harbor Police might have prevailed if they had used 21202, but they chose 22400, and the video clearly showed that no one was impeded, even the Harbor Police vehicle, which made a safe in lane pass. Another factor was the long time period between the citation and court date. Apparently the officer had difficulty explaining the details and some of the things he said were conflicting with the video evidence.

The other factor was Howard LaGrange, an LCI who teaches with me in Oceanside. There were 2 Traffic Commissioners at the time. One was notorious for finding cyclists guilty.  The other was far more reasonable... and a friend of Howard's.  The video, Howard's "expert witness" status and Richard Duquette's presence as pro bono defense attorney were all factors the favorable outcome.

[Gary Cziko]

People,

Thanks for the info on 22400 cases.

I'm also interested in 21565 citations for cyclists on two-lane roads.

21656.  

On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, any vehicle proceeding upon the highway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time, behind which five or more vehicles are formed in line, shall turn off the roadway at the nearest place designated as a turnout by signs erected by the authority having jurisdiction over the highway, or wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, in order to permit the vehicles following it to proceed.

If there is a shoulder, even a narrow one, that could well be considered a place were "a sufficient area for safe turnout exists," even if too small for a motor vehicle.

I suppose that the defense would then have to show that the shoulder was not safe for turnout. But that could be difficult to argue because even if much of the shoulder was hazardous for cycling (poor pavement, holes, rocks, other debris or hazards).

I also wonder if private driveways would be considered practicable turnout spaces for cyclists.

The fact that in California it is illegal to cross a solid yellow center line to pass cyclists even when safe to do (as allowed in several other states) could also justify a ticket for 21656.

Any relevant cases pertaining to 21656?

-- Gary

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St, Lemon Grove, CA 91945
619-644-5481, fore...@johnforester.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

[Serge Issakov]

I haven't heard of such a case and would be apt to back up the police if a cyclist with five or more behind was cited with a 21656 violation for failing to use a decent shoulder to release.  

BTW, 21656 compliance is on my (long) list of reasons for using a mirror:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/14WTMOX6R4tg2W10h5rPWTAOYGxeO2RjyHPIPZZ3b-Pg

Serge

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St, Lemon Grove, CA 91945
619-644-5481, fore...@johnforester.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

==================================================

Gary Cziko ("ZEE-ko"), PhD
Professor Emeritus, Educational Psychology
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

CyclingSavvy Instructor (CSI)

Board of Directors, American Bicycling Education Association (ABEA.bike)

Board of Directors, California Association of Bicycle Organizations (CABO)

Expert Witness for Cyclists' Rights

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

[judyf...@att.net]

Is he asking on single lane in each direction or 2 lanes in each direction.  I don't think you can be sited for.impeding if there is a passing lane and you are in the number 2 lane.   

[Gary Cziko]

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 21:28 judyf...@att.net <judyf...@att.net> wrote:

Is he asking on single lane in each direction or 2 lanes in each direction.  I don't think you can be sited for.impeding if there is a passing lane and you are in the number 2 lane. 

A two-lane road has a single lane in each direction. 

A multilane road has two or more lanes in each direction. 

21656 applies only to the former. 

Gary 

[Jim Baross]

I teach compliance with cvc 21656 by people - bicycling or motoring - when safe, but when doing so effectively precludes further travel - as when the stream of vehicles passing will have no reasonable breaks for re-entering the lane - I will hang on to lane control as long as possible; claiming the right to continue my travel.

On Apr 7, 2017 9:17 PM, "Serge Issakov" <serge....@gmail.com> wrote:

I haven't heard of such a case and would be apt to back up the police if a cyclist with five or more behind was cited with a 21656 violation for failing to use a decent shoulder to release.  

BTW, 21656 compliance is on my (long) list of reasons for using a mirror:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/14WTMOX6R4tg2W10h5rPWTAOYGxeO2RjyHPIPZZ3b-Pg

Serge

[Serge Issakov]

> when the stream of vehicles passing will have no reasonable breaks for re-entering the lane 

I'm always mystified by such answers and the caliber of traffic cyclist they often come from.  Et tu, Jim?

One of the first and main things I learned from reading Effective Cycling was how to create gaps practically at will in any kind of traffic.  I never worry about looking for gaps because I know I can just create them as needed.  

So the notion that I shouldn't yield space in my lane because I might  not be able to easily regain it never occurs to me - it's that trivial and reliable to do.  I stick out my arm and look back.  They let me in, instantly.  Every time. Without exception. John calls it negotiation.  I call playing Moses. 

To be fair even John suggests  negotiation is limited to traffic at certain speeds (35 mph if I recall correctly).  But I've never had an issue playing Moses with 45, 55 or even 65 mph traffic (Kearney Villa Rd). 

For me, learning to do this was perhaps the single most important technique for achieving safety and comfort in any kind of traffic. And really, like most of traffic cycling (and life for that matter) it's more about belief and attitude than skill. 

Serge

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St, Lemon Grove, CA 91945
619-644-5481, fore...@johnforester.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

==================================================

Gary Cziko ("ZEE-ko"), PhD
Professor Emeritus, Educational Psychology
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

CyclingSavvy Instructor (CSI)

Board of Directors, American Bicycling Education Association (ABEA.bike)

Board of Directors, California Association of Bicycle Organizations (CABO)

Expert Witness for Cyclists' Rights

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.

[judyf...@att.net]

Yeah right. You find a thrn out and create a gap to  only to immediately have 5 following cars?  So.then again jave to turn out. Of course you'd wait as long as possible.

[Serge Issakov]

If the shoulder of decent width for releasing is of limited length I would use it to release as many cars as I could and then I would signal to get back in.   

I do something similar on Genesee east of I-5.  Before my left onto Campus Point Drive I use the bike lane to release traffic.  In that case I need to stop releasing for a different reason - to get to the left turn lane rather than because the release area ends - but the dynamic is the same.   I use the natural gap when possible.  At other times I have to negotiate, often with 50 mph traffic in all three lanes. 

Serge

[Gary Cziko]

Serge,

This would make a great video. 

Cyclist with rear-facing camera in front of you best, but even rear view from your bike would be good

Gary

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 06:59 Serge Issakov <serge....@gmail.com> wrote:

If the shoulder of decent width for releasing is of limited length I would use it to release as many cars as I could and then I would signal to get back in.   

I do something similar on Genesee east of I-5.  Before my left onto Campus Point Drive I use the bike lane to release traffic.  In that case I need to stop releasing for a different reason - to get to the left turn lane rather than because the release area ends - but the dynamic is the same.   I use the natural gap when possible.  At other times I have to negotiate, often with 50 mph traffic in all three lanes. 

Serge

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 1:47 AM judyf...@att.net <judyf...@att.net> wrote:

Yeah right. You find a thrn out and create a gap to  only to immediately have 5 following cars?  So.then again jave to turn out. Of course you'd wait as long as possible.

Sent from my not so Smartphone.  Please excuse brief responses and typos.

q

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[judyf...@att.net]

Has nothing to do with impeding and releasing where there is no shoulder or bike lane and you are talking about a multlane road where impeding does not exist

Sent from my not so Smartphone.  Please excuse brief responses and typos.

------ Original message------

From: Serge Issakov

Date: Sat, Apr 8, 2017 6:59 AM

To: Cabo Forum;jimb...@cox.net;judyf...@att.net;

Cc:

Subject:Re: [CABOforum] Impeding Traffic CVC 22400

If the shoulder of decent width for releasing is of limited length I would use it to release as many cars as I could and then I would signal to get back in.   

I do something similar on Genesee east of I-5.  Before my left onto Campus Point Drive I use the bike lane to release traffic.  In that case I need to stop releasing for a different reason - to get to the left turn lane rather than because the release area ends - but the dynamic is the same.   I use the natural gap when possible.  At other times I have to negotiate, often with 50 mph traffic in all three lanes. 

Serge

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 1:47 AM judyf...@att.net <judyf...@att.net> wrote:

Yeah right. You find a thrn out and create a gap to  only to immediately have 5 following cars?  So.then again jave to turn out. Of course you'd wait as long as possible.

Sent from my not so Smartphone.  Please excuse brief responses and typos.

[Serge Issakov]

Like I said, the dynamic is the same. I experience no difference when negotiating a gap in an adjacent continuous stream of fast motor traffic whether it's two lane or multilane, or whether I'm starting in a bike lane or shoulder. My signaling is the same.  Motorist response is the same. 

On a multilane it's sometimes possible for them to change lanes but not always; often they just slow down in their lane to let me in, just like in the two lane case. And even if one car changes lanes often the next one can't so it slows to let me in. Only in light traffic can everyone get by without slowing down. 

Serge

[judyf...@att.net]

We all know how to merge.  The point was piulling out when merging back only leaves you in a position to have to find another safe pullout where there ia no shoulder or bike lane because of a constant stream where 5 cars are behind.  Totally different thing.  

You would wait as long as possible or you'd keep having to stop.

Not on city streets.  Out here there are roads like that. Not too often in the city.

[Al Williams]

In your list you should include that a mirror helps you determine which side to go around an obstruction directly in your path, and allows you to know if you are in a gap of motor traffic, where you may need to be more vigilant because other traffic may try to cross your path from the left or right.  

                                 

***************************************************

* Al Williams          AlWill...@gmail.com     *

* San Jose CA                                     *

***************************************************

[Serge Issakov]

Judy,

I'm talking about only one issue; the statement Jim made which I quoted.

> when the stream of vehicles passing will have no reasonable breaks for re-entering the lane 

That's not a concern for me in any context (because I know how to create my own break), and I'm genuinely surprised it is for Jim or anyone else of his caliber.

Whether I got out of the stream to avoid impeding on a two-lane road, or was never in the stream, doesn't matter.  I'm talking about the difficulty (or lack thereof, rather) of getting into the stream.

Serge

[bruce dughi]

Serge,

Not everybody has your amazing skill at "parting the traffic". I find plenty of difficulty in making my own gaps and I have angered drivers in the process such that they pass dangerously close, yelling and cursing along the way. I have experienced and documented many hostile drivers in the bay area. I think most people have difficulty regaining lane position once it is lost and Jim's argument about maintaining position makes sense. I also disagree that we should have to pull over every time 5 cars collect because I would never get anywhere otherwise. 

My father rode his bicycle for transportation and recreation until he was 90 yrs old. I do not think it is realistic for him to weave in and out of traffic, especially fast moving traffic. The same holds for children or somebody's slow moving middle aged Mom. Although I can ride fast, I dont always feel like it. Sometimes I am tired. This idea of pulling over every time 5 cars stack up make cycling impractical for most people. 

I am having a debate with the Castro Valley CHP presently about lane usage and he thinks he can use CVC 22400 (Impeding Traffic) to get me off the road. I love Bill Davidson's argument and I plan on using it. I hope it works but has anyone heard of any court precedent on this one? I think we need good interpretations of the law otherwise police keep making things up to suite their own tastes. Cheers.

Bruce

Castro Valley, CA

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cabo...@ googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St, Lemon Grove, CA 91945
619-644-5481, fore...@johnforester.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

==================================================

Gary Cziko ("ZEE-ko"), PhD
Professor Emeritus, Educational Psychology
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

CyclingSavvy Instructor (CSI)

Board of Directors, American Bicycling Education Association (ABEA.bike)

Board of Directors, California Association of Bicycle Organizations (CABO)

Expert Witness for Cyclists' Rights

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.

[Serge Issakov]

Hi Bruce,

How is it that you’re replying to a three year old post?

Anyway, if a motorist gets angry at a cyclist for moving into their path then the cyclist is  probably not waiting for them to yield before moving over. 

Waiting for them to slow and yield is a key step in negotiating for right of way. I say this because I see cyclists all the time who seem to think they have the right to move over - without regard to how others are affected - as long as they signal first. In fact, many seem to think they have the right to move over even without signaling, or even without looking back first, if their way is blocked by a parked car, a slower cyclist, road narrowing, etc. Then they’re miffed when others get angry with them. 

I learned to negotiate by necessity - when I had to move left across three 45+ mph lanes daily in commute traffic. But the skills are really simple, it’s just not intuitive to be assertive to anyone who feels inferior to motor traffic: clearly/assertively signal, look back, wait for someone to yield, move into that lane, repeat one lane at a time as necessary. Just remember to start early enough. 

Regarding 21656 (pullover for five or more behind on two lane roads), that’s the law, whether you like it or not.  But it’s rarely an issue for cyclists because releasing at the edge (without slowing, when safe) is almost always an effective option for cyclists. 

I’m almost certain there is no precedent set in California with respect to 22400 (impeding) applicability to cyclists.  But Bill Davidson (RIP) did have a good argument. The main point comes from the Ohio state appeals court decision in Trotwood v Selz, which might have persuasive appeal In a California court (that Ohio court itself followed precedent set in a Georgia case involving a corn combine). 

Serge

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/5e710f31-5eec-447d-b5d9-a3e468566c34%40googlegroups.com.