Lane splitting is here — will it make motorcycling safer?
On July 1, Minnesota became the sixth state to allow motorcyclists to “lane split,” a practice that allows motorcyclists to split two lanes of traffic to pass slow or stopped vehicles.
According to the Minnesota Office of Traffic Safety, the best mindset we all should adopt is to “lane share,” as that accurately describes how, in certain circumstances, motorcycles may now maneuver.
The new law seems rather incongruous with traffic safety, and it seems inevitable that lane splitting will result in avoidable increases in motorcycle crashes, injuries, and property damage.
Advocates say lane splitting is safer as it reduces rear end collisions of motorcycles, aids against heatstroke, and reduces the seriousness of motorcycle collision injuries.
Opponents believe the law will be abused, that speed limits will be ignored, and that avoidable crashes, injuries, and property damage will increase where lane splitting is practiced.
The law, and the Office of Traffic Safety’s guidance on lane splitting
The new law was rather quietly advanced in conference committee during the 2024 legislative session and was signed into law by Governor Walz, effective July 1, 2025.
It amended Minnesota Statute 169.974 to say:
“(g) A person may operate a motorcycle and overtake and pass another vehicle in the same direction of travel and within the same traffic lane if the motorcycle is operated:
(1) at not more than 25 miles per hour; and
(2) no more than 15 miles per hour over the speed of traffic in the relevant traffic lanes.”
The law goes on to say:
(h) For the purposes of paragraph (g), traffic lane does not include:
(1) the approach, drive-through, or exit of a roundabout;
(2) a school zone established under section 169.14, subdivision 5a;
(3) a work zone where only a single travel lane is available for use; or
(4) an on-ramp to a freeway or expressway with or without an active control device where moving or stationary vehicles are queued in one or more traffic lanes.
The Office of Traffic Safety’s Motorcycle Safety Center has put out the following guidance on the law, stating:
Lane splitting is allowed when two or more lanes of traffic are traveling in the same direction and traffic is moving. It allows a motorcycle to pass another vehicle in the same direction of travel and in the same traffic lane only under these conditions:
- At no more than 25 miles per hour.
- No more than 15 miles per hour over the speed of traffic in the relevant traffic lanes.
The law and the guidance seem to differ on whether lane splitting requires two lanes in the same direction. The law is really the only thing that counts. These differences only add to the confusion that exists around lane splitting and they reduce confidence that average motorists and motorcyclists will have a solid understanding of what is allowed and what isn’t. Given that adherence to the law is going to be paramount to the success of this effort, this isn’t a good start. (Note: I reached out to the Office of Traffic Safety on this discrepancy but did not receive a response prior to posting this article).
The legislature appropriated $200,000 in 2025 to make sure we are aware. I’ll let everyone be their own judge on whether they feel they have been properly informed about lane splitting. I know I wasn’t aware of the particulars until I proactively investigated. Conventional wisdom would suggest the public is not properly prepared.
The debate
I went back and watched the testimony of the bill in the Senate Transportation Committee. I was struck by how little this issue was debated.
Testimony included reference to a 2015 study by the California Highway Patrol and suggested the study had concluded that lane splitting improved safety for motorcyclists. That conclusion seems charitable upon review.
The study cited the American Motorcyclist Association’s (AMA) “cautiously worded endorsement of lane-splitting.”
The study characterized the AMA’s position as follows:
“Their position is that lane-splitting is a safe and beneficial strategy for motorcyclists if done in a reasonable manner, and that the success of legalized lane-splitting in any US state will be dependent upon high levels of knowledge among non-motorcycling road users.” (Underline added for emphasis).
The problem with lane splitting, as the AMA’s position makes clear, is that in order to be successful it requires motorcyclists to conduct the lane splitting in a “reasonable manner” and requires the non-motorcycling road users to have a “high level of knowledge” of the practice. Neither are likely. As such, lane splitting is likely to create more problems than advocates purport it will solve.
The California study looked at 5,969 motorcycle collisions. It noted that 997 of them involved lane-splitting — a full 1/6th of all collisions. While it noted that many of the injuries associated with lane splitting collisions were less severe than non-lane splitting collisions, that entire argument is misleading. These were obviously slower-speed collisions that would logically lead to less severe injuries. However, they represented 1/6th of the state’s total motorcycle collisions and they were entirely avoidable.
Furthermore, the study noted that motorcyclists were “very infrequently” rear-ended by other motorists — just 254 of the 5,914. This is important because rear-ending is a major argument that lane splitting advocates cite. The data shows that while lane-splitting motorcyclists were rear-ended less frequently than non-lane-splitting motorcyclists, they were twice as likely to rear-end another vehicle than non-lane-splitting motorcyclists. This is not a glowing endorsement for lane splitting.
Three motorcyclists testified in the Minnesota Senate hearing in support of the bill.
One seemed to suggest the value of the bill was to reduce rear end collisions of motorcyclists while in congested traffic, and to accomplish that it was important for motorcyclists to be able to occupy the split lane. I can understand the desire to avoid being rear ended, and support allowing motorcyclists to occupy the split lane for this purpose, but I see no logic in allowing that same motorcyclist to then use that split lane position to drive up to 25 mph through slow moving traffic. This is just asking for trouble, and confusion on the part of everyone else on the road. Look no further than the data from the California study above — rear-ending isn’t the issue some believe it is, and lane splitting doubles the likelihood that motorcyclists will rear-end another car.
Another testifier focused on the heat motorcyclists must endure in stop and go traffic. This person advocated that there was a need to allow motorcyclists to safely get to the next exit to get relief from the heat. Okay — again, I can support that need in that circumstance, but it shouldn’t be parlayed to allow open-ended lane splitting. Rather, it should be considered an option for extreme heat situations.
The final testifier suggested that lane splitting should be allowed because, as a woman who rides an older motorcycle, she had a hard time operating her clutch lever repetitively in stop and go traffic. This is simply no reason to authorize lane splitting for all — period.
These advocates were followed by the Acting Chief of the Minnesota State Patrol (MSP), Lt. Col. Bogojevic. She testified that although the MSP was officially neutral on the bill, she was concerned that lane splitting would increase motorcycle collisions because car drivers are not used to it, and because inattentive driving will only become more of an issue with motorcycles trying to share lanes with cars.
Minnesota Department of Public Safety Crash Reports:
The Minnesota Department of Public Safety issues annual crash reports with data on vehicle crashes, including motorcycles. The most recent report available is the 2022 report found here.
Upon review, I found data that is important to this debate. The data undermines many of the arguments made on behalf of lane splitting.
In 2022 there were 1,035 motorcycle crashes in Minnesota. 883 resulted in injuries and 80 were fatal.
In the preceding 10 years, the number of licensed motorcycle operators in Minnesota dropped by 32%, but the number of motorcycle registrations increased by 17%. This suggests fewer motorcyclists are taking the time to get properly trained or to obtain legal endorsement. This is borne out in the data on fatal crashes — whereby 49.1% of motorcyclists who died in crashes either had no motorcycle license or their license had been canceled, suspended, or revoked. Again, when the success of lane splitting is dependent upon motorcyclists operating legally and reasonably, this is not supportive data.
According to state guidance, lane splitting is only allowed on highways and freeways where there are two or more lanes moving in the same direction. However, data shows that the overwhelming majority of motorcycle crashes happen on roadways that don’t meet these criteria. The purported benefits of lane splitting are negated when the majority of crashes occur on roadways where lane splitting isn’t allowed.
Of the 80 fatal motorcycle crashes in 2022, just 26% of those killed were wearing a helmet. Of the 883 motorcyclists injured, just 44% were wearing a helmet. If safety is the goal, the data shows mandating helmets would be a more logical move than introducing lane splitting.
Finally, reviewing data around the contributing factors in motorcycle crashes should be persuasive to those willing to acknowledge the problems with lane splitting. Focusing on contributing factors attributed to other drivers, the single biggest factor — five times higher than the next biggest factor — was “failure to yield right of way” to the motorcyclist by another driver. This single biggest factor in motorcycle crashes will only be amplified as lane splitting is introduced into the mix.
The takeaway
Lane splitting will unnecessarily introduce more opportunities for motorcycle-related collisions.
The law, as written, doesn’t seem to match the guidance from the Office of Traffic Safety on when and how motorcyclists can lane split. These differences only create more confusion over the practice of lane splitting, and confusion is the last thing anyone needs with this issue. The law or the guidance will need to be addressed in the near future.
If improving motorcycle safety is the goal, there are far more certain ways to accomplish that goal than introducing lane splitting into the mix — mandating helmets, addressing the non-endorsement rate to name just two.
As a motorcyclist myself, my priority when riding is to avoid a collision. The surest way to avoid a collision is to avoid areas of heavy vehicular traffic. Many motorcyclists will bristle at this point, but motorcycling isn’t safe, and if safety is your goal, driving a motorcycle on roads or at times when traffic is likely to be heavy just doesn’t make sense. Neither does introducing lane splitting.
But the state did introduce lane splitting, so it’s our collective responsibility to adjust to it. I advocate that motorcyclists avoid the need, and/or the practice when at all possible. We all must familiarize ourselves with the law and the guidance (as convoluted as it is) and adopt the mindset of “lane sharing.” Doing so will help limit the number of motorcycle collisions that seem to inevitably be about to increase in our state.
It’s said that what is predictable is preventable. Motorcycle collisions and the injuries and loss associated with lane splitting are certainly predictable and more importantly, they are entirely preventable.