Celebrating the 3-foot law to protect cyclists

Cyclists are celebrating Gov. Brown signing the 3-foot buffer law, meaning motorists should pass cyclists by at least three feet, but some motorists are not. 
As soon as the story hit the press, the comments online started:

"Cyclists are already in my way, some of them are not even close to the curb. Now I have to pass them with 3 feet to spare?"

Well yes. Truth is, whether it is a bicycle, horse and buggy, or another car, you have to pass safely, and that was true way before this law. The change is only in specifying that 3 feet is safe.

"I'd rather cite cyclists who are not riding as close to the curb as possible, as the law states."

Uh, no. The law says cyclists should ride as close to the side of the road (not the curb, not the sidewalk, not on the shoulder of the road), as practicable, which means safe. If it is not safe to ride close to the right side of the road, the cyclist can take the lane. Motorists must slow down (a difficult concept to sell in Temecula) and pass safely.

So now California joins twenty two  other states and the District of Columbia who have similar 3-foot buffer laws. (I was in Phoenix last weekend and the city boasts clearly marked bike lanes, and postings that cyclists are protected by the 3-foot law there. Hope to see those signs soon in Temecula.)

Our Gov. Brown actually rejected similar laws twice. The previous versions said motorists could cross a double yellow line to pass cyclists, but the state was worried it would be liable if that caused an accident. So, this one passed by saying you are just going to have to slow down and pass safely (again, motorists in Temecula are not good at the slowing down part).

Final comment heard on KNX1070 this morning, this from a otherwise intelligent sounding news anchor. "So (snort, snort), are the cops going to carry yardsticks?"

Not likely. How about looking at it this way. All of us have had motorists pass us with an inch to spare, or some have actually brushed us off the road. They like to startle us, I guess. One motorist is about to go to trial for making contact with a cyclists who happens to be a law enforcement officer. He now has his own surprise waiting for him from the judge.

Some motorists actually enjoy "putting a little scare" into cyclists by seeing how close they can get. So for these two groups of motorists, hitting and brushing are bad, add about three feet, good. Pretty simple. 

If not, you get fined. $35 the first time, more on subsequent convictions. (Yes, the same people do this over and over). If you hit a cyclist, the fine is $220.

Not much for a collision that can cost the cyclist his or her life. The fine is probably greater for littering. But cyclists take heart. That fine rises for subsequent collisions in violation of the law.  And there is always that pesky "assault with a deadly weapon charge."

I know this is a serious subject for cyclists and motorists, and trying to approach it with a little humor is my best way to deal with the danger. A lot of cyclists kid about how many times they have been bumped. 

I am out on the roads every day on my bicycle, I have been passed so close that I can "feel" the car going by, brushed off the road and into curbs, dirt and bushes, and struck so violently that my bike flipped and landed on top of me, which is really embarassing.

Not a single motorist that caused me to crash stopped to see if I was alive or dead. So yes, I understand this is serious. I have also been passed by motorists who have given me lots of room (in England and France, they follow slowly for as long as they need to so that they may pass safely, and not startle).

We share the road. This new law just adds some more specific information to that relationship.