Is Riding 2 Abreast Allowed If It's Not Your Fault ?

Is Riding 2 Abreast Allowed If It's Not Your Fault ?

	11/2/2004 3:24:13 PM
Most state laws say that it is not allowed to ride more than 2 abreast. But what if you are in the left lane to make a left turn and then 2 bicyclists come up to the intersection (going the same direction as you) in the right lane, already riding 2 abreast? Then there are 3 abreast. Is the left turner then in violation? Can you claim you were "acting under the will of another" because it was the other two riders who forced you into the illegal situation? Or does two abreast refer only to one lane of a multilane highway? Or are riders in such a situation simply not "abreast"? I am not a lawyer. I do not even see email sent to this address, due to past DOS attacks. If you wish to respond, do so through this newsgroup.



Joshua Putnam	11/2/2004 10:28:01 PM
In article <dGhpc2lzbWU=.492725ba83cca3441464896a81af286f@1099427053.nulluser.com>, thisisme@cotse.net says... Most state laws say that it is not allowed to ride more than 2 abreast. But what if you are in the left lane to make a left turn and then 2 bicyclists come up to the intersection (going the same direction as you) in the right lane, already riding 2 abreast? The laws generally say you have to ride to the right and no more than two abreast except for various situations such as left turns. So I think you'd be fine. But then, I'm not a lawyer. -- josh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam <http://www.phred.org/~josh/> Updated Bicycle Touring Books List: <http://www.phred.org/~josh/bike/tourbooks.html>



"Arthur L. Rubin"	11/3/2004 10:35:44 AM
thisisme@cotse.net wrote: Most state laws say that it is not allowed to ride more than 2 abreast. But what if you are in the left lane to make a left turn and then 2 bicyclists come up to the intersection (going the same direction as you) in the right lane, already riding 2 abreast? Then there are 3 abreast. Probably not. The law in most states define "abrest" for this purpose as meaning also in the same lane. Even if not, the lawbreakers would be the ones coming up beside you. You were there first.



	11/3/2004 3:08:16 PM
Arthur L. Rubin wrote: thisisme@cotse.net wrote: Probably not. The law in most states define "abrest" for this purpose as meaning also in the same lane. Even if not, the lawbreakers would be the ones coming up beside you. You were there first. "Abreast" isn't defined in Florida statutes. What state defines it? If there is a state that defines it, it wouldn't set a strict precedent, but the courts would "tend to look to it for guidance" () and that would make me feel alot better about relying on it. () You already know that, but just for the benefit of others who may be reading this. I am not a lawyer. I do not even see email sent to this address, due to past DOS attacks. If you wish to respond, do so through this newsgroup.



	11/3/2004 3:13:43 PM
Joshua Putnam wrote: In article <dGhpc2lzbWU=.492725ba83cca3441464896a81af286f@1099427053.nulluser.com>, thisisme@cotse.net says... The laws generally say you have to ride to the right and no more than two abreast except for various situations such as left turns. So I think you'd be fine. But then, I'm not a lawyer. reading very carefully, it seems that, in FLorida at least, the exception for a left turn applies to "must ride to the right" and not "no two abreast". But then again, these things can be tricky. That's why I post to usenet, for other interpretations. I also read it at least three times, and so on and so forth. Like the signature says. But even though I'm not a lawyer I am a sort of ped/bike rights person, so I think I have a right to know what the law says. -- josh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam <http://www.phred.org/~josh/> Updated Bicycle Touring Books List: <http://www.phred.org/~josh/bike/tourbooks.html> I am not a lawyer. I do not even see email sent to this address, due to past DOS attacks. If you wish to respond, do so through this newsgroup.

Report this post for offensive content