![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/09\/Screen-shot-2010-09-26-at-7.43.01-PM-150x150-1.png\" "\\"Screen")
<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Usually diamond-shaped and yellow, these \u201cwarning signs\u201d caution drivers that the road is slippery when wet; there is an intersection ahead, the lanes narrow, or there may be bicyclists, farm animals, or wildlife on or near the roadway. Somehow cyclists are supposed to be comforted by the notion that Big Brother is \u201cprotecting\u201d us by putting out a \u201cwarning\u201d that we are nearby \u2013 as though we are a hazard to motorists..<\/span>.<\/p>\n The whole point of the \u201cSHARED lane\u201d marking is to indicate to motorists that they ought to \u201cshare the lane\u201d with cyclists. This entire line of thought has always baffled me, frankly, because it implies that motorists OWN the lane and must be told, or just asked, to \u201cshare\u201d a bit of it with cyclists.<\/p>\n \u201cSharing\u201d is not a concept mandated by law, but a concept that relies upon the goodwill of the Share-or to give up a little bit of that which he owns to the Share-ee. No law says that the motorist owns the road and the cyclist may borrow it sometimes, IF the motorist feels like sharing.<\/p>\n Rather, the law is that a PERSON wishing to use the public roads has the right to CHOOSE the vehicle. A bicycle and a car are equally valid, legitimate and lawful choices as vehicles. A person who chooses to ride a bike on the roadway has exactly and precisely the same quantity or bundle of rights as one who chooses to operate a car.<\/p>\n The \u201cright to travel\u201d has been recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in U.S. vs. Guest which held citizens hold \u201c\u2026 the constitutional right to travel freely from State to State and to use highways and other instrumentalities for that purpose\u2026\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n In Packard v. Banton,<\/em> the Supreme Court said, \u201cThe streets belong to the public and are primarily for the use of the public in the ordinary way.\u201d<\/p>\n In Kent v. Dulles<\/em>, the Court said, \u201c\u2026<\/strong>The Right to travel is part of the Liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law ..<\/strong>.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n The Virginia court said, in Thompson v. Smith<\/em>: \u201cThe right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways \u2026. includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel\u2026<\/em><\/strong>.\u201d While \u201dordinary and usual conveyances of the day\u201d is certainly open for discussion bicycles, having been around longer than cars, certainly fit the bill!<\/p>\n With regard to the right to travel and move about the country, a Mississippi court held in Teche Lines Inc. v. Danforth<\/em>, held as follows:<\/p>\n \u201c\u2026The right of a citizen to travel on public highway is a common right which he has under his right to enjoy \u201clife, liberty, and pursuit of happiness,\u201d<\/em><\/strong> and the right to \u201ctravel,\u201d which means the right to go from one place to another, includes the right to start, to go forward on the way, and to stop when the traveler\u2019s destination has been reached, and also the right to stop on the way, temporarily, for a legitimate or necessary purpose when that purpose is an immediate incident to travel\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n So the PERSON, the \u201ccitizen,\u201d not the vehicle, possesses this \u201cright to travel\u201d about the country. But, once you\u2019ve walked into your garage, looked at your car, your truck, your motorcycle and your bike and you chosen to use the public way on ylur BIKE, what \u201crights\u201d do you have on your bicycle? Most states say you have the SAME bundle of rights as the operator of other vehicles, and the same responsibilities. You don\u2019t get bigger rights because you choose a bigger vehicle!<\/p>\n The person driving in the front of the pack of traffic typically has the \u201cright of way\u201d and the rights of the operator of the vehicle operated behind, or passing, are subservient to the one with the right of way. The \u201cright of way\u201d is a very powerful collection of rights. <\/span><\/p>\n In Ohio, for example, the \u201cright of way\u201d is defined in O.R.C. 4511.01:<\/span><\/p>\n UU) \u201cRight-of-way\u201d means * * * :<\/p>\n (1) The right of a vehicle, streetcar, trackless trolley, or pedestrian to proceed uninterruptedly in a lawful manner in the direction in which it or the individual is moving in preference to another vehicle, streetcar, trackless trolley, or pedestrian approaching from a different direction into its or the individual\u2019s path<\/strong>;<\/p>\n Note \u2013 the word \u201cshare\u201d is not in the law. There is no crying in baseball, and there is no \u201csharing\u201d in the right of way law. So, really, the concept of \u201csharing\u201d has absolutely no business being in the transportation lexicon. Advising a motorist who is coming up on a bicyclist from behind to \u201cShare The Road\u201d with the cyclist ahead is fundamentally and legally WRONG. <\/span><\/p>\n The cyclist owns the right of way and does not have to share\u2026 in fact the cyclist shouldn\u2019t \u201cshare.\u201d Once the cyclist gets into a \u201csharing\u201d mentality, the cyclist has lost the battle. You HAVE rights \u2013 the right of way. Maybe the motorist doesn\u2019t know this but you have to ASSERT that right. The fact that you have a right means nothing if you don\u2019t USE it.<\/span><\/p>\n Remember, the cyclist ahead of the motorist has the<\/span> right of way<\/span> \u2013 which is really a powerful collection of rights. The right to proceed ahead in an uninterrupted manner. The operator with the right of way has rights, as the preferred vehicle, that are GREATER than other vehicles. A \u201cShare The Road\u201d sign may give the motorist behind the cyclist the wrong message that the motorist can choose to share, or not, since the implication is that the bigger car has bigger rights that supercedes the right of the cyclist. <\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n The motorist is encouraged to view the cyclist as one who has actually SNATCHED HIS RIGHT TO DRIVE HIS CAR away, which ticks off the motorist, who may not WANT to \u201cshare\u201d his roadway\u2026<\/p>\n The Right of Way is valuable \u2013 it\u2019s important \u2013 and it\u2019s something cyclists should not SHARE.<\/p>\nRIGHT TO TRAVEL \u2013 RIGHT TO USE THE ROADS<\/span><\/h3>\n
Remember this \u2013> The rights belong to the person, not the vehicle. The RIGHT is the RIGHT TO TRAVEL. The Right is not bigger if you choose a bigger vehicle\u2026<\/h3>\n
RIGHT OF WAY LAW<\/span><\/h3>\n