3-foot laws are not enforced and may not be enforceable.  3-feet is not enough when a 55 mph tractor trailer  passes a 10 mph cyclist.  (See attached Rutgers 3-foot final report.)

Riding far to the right leads to

* Motorists passing bicyclists too closely;

* Motorists intruding into the adjacent lane when there is on-coming traffic;

* Right-turning vehicles crashing into cyclists at intersections and driveways;

* On-coming left-turning vehicles crashing into cyclists;

* Overtaking vehicles crashing into left-turning cyclists;

* Cyclists crashing because of objects, debris; pedestrians; animals and surface hazards that are more prevalent at the right edge of the roadway.   

(See attached talking point paper.)

Bicyclists that control the lane are almost always passed by the overtaking motorist making a full lane change, giving between 6 to 8 feet of passing clearance.  If you have ridden this way, you know it is true.  Why ask/plead/beg for 3 feet when predominant behavior secures more than twice that much passing margin and better passing behavior (lane changes instead of straddle and in-lane passes)?  

Three foot passing laws are a bad reaction to the consequences of riding too far right.  If you want passing space, solve the problem by eliminating the FTR law instead of applying a patch or "fix" such as a three foot passing law that doesn't address or solve the root cause of close passing.

We should also continue to pursue repeal of 17C-11-5 (c) which requires cyclists to use a side-path when available and not the roadway.