Cyclists without lights....

[wafflycat]

Last night I took WMnr grocery shopping. On the way back from supermarket to his place, within a couple of hundred yards of each other, two ninja cyclists. One adult female, one adult male. Both wearing dark clothing, no reflectors on bike, no lights on either bike, front or rear. Morons. At least in the intermittent streetlighting they were visible, albeit poorly. A basic 'be seen by' LED light is as cheap as chips - under a fiver. There really is no excuse. When I'm cycling at night, I'm wearing acres of reflectives, have multitudinous lights front & rear... it's not difficult and it doesn't have to be expensive.

 

[PBancroft]

Wow, I'm amazed that people have taken my posts the wrong way.

No, I think we have probably taken them the right way. It's not just about you seeing other people, and other hazards, its partly about them seeing you.

Think about it another way. Think about cars driving at night without lights. Just like you, they can often see the road quite clearly up ahead, and spot other cars around them, especially on A roads.

Why do you think they use their lights?

 

[ufkacbln]

No, I think we have probably taken them the right way. It's not just about you seeing other people, and other hazards, its partly about them seeing you.

Think about it another way. Think about cars driving at night without lights. Just like you, they can often see the road quite clearly up ahead, and spot other cars around them, especially on A roads.

Why do you think they use their lights?

Of course it does raise the question as to how we can allow unlit dark cars to be parked unlit on the road.

 

[ufkacbln]

The "see or be seen" is an interesting point....

When the lighting law first came in there were objections by the CTC and other cycling groups as it was a significant change in responsibility.

The introduction of the law changed responsibility of the overtaking vehicle to ensure there was nothing ahead (to see) changed to the vehicle ahead being responsible for being seen.

This was a significant change in responsibility and a shift in legal status!

 

[ufkacbln]

No, I think we have probably taken them the right way. It's not just about you seeing other people, and other hazards, its partly about them seeing you.

Think about it another way. Think about cars driving at night without lights. Just like you, they can often see the road quite clearly up ahead, and spot other cars around them, especially on A roads.

Why do you think they use their lights?

Of course it does raise the question as to how we can allow unlit dark cars to be parked unlit on the road.

 

[PBancroft]

Of course it does raise the question as to how we can allow unlit dark cars to be parked unlit on the road.

This is actually a very good point. In my mind, the difference is movement. There are certain cues that people look out for when using the road - stationary hazards, such as parked cars, road junctions, or houses, and moving hazards. At night, the moving hazards are typified by moving light, because they give advanced warning that they are coming.

In Lee's example, he might be cycling along a road, and a car is waiting to the side, not indicating. There's no other traffic, and Lee might rightly think that its safe to pass.

The driver, on the other hand, might check to see if anyone else is coming. Seeing no other lights, he might not bother to indicate (we all know people do this) and pull out...

Stationary cars don't do that very often. Unless they've got a broken handbrake of course.

 

[PBancroft]

This was a significant change in responsibility and a shift in legal status!

My personal feeling (and it is not a legal standpoint) is that everyone using the road has a responsibility to make sure that it is used safely. Their safety and of those around them, no matter the mode of transport of choice be it foot, hoof, pedal or motor.

 

[hackbike 6]

I think that's a bit unfair. Motorists are human beings, and whilst they may end up winning a court case against any dangerous driving offence or similar, they would almost certainly be affected for having killed or seriously injured someone.

Ok fair enough.

 

[Flyingfox]

Gosh so many responses to my post, am glad the majority agree with my thoughts that to cycle without lights this time of year is crazy.

 

[cycling fisherman]

My personal feeling (and it is not a legal standpoint) is that everyone using the road has a responsibility to make sure that it is used safely. Their safety and of those around them, no matter the mode of transport of choice be it foot, hoof, pedal or motor.

+1 and well said...


lee, if you honestly ride without lights switched on at night i would prepare a will for yourself, its only £39...


http://www.wills.org.uk/Content/default.asp


While you're at it you might as well prepare your funeral...


http://www.axa-sunlife.co.uk/funera...28-046D&se=goog&kwd=funeral+preparation+Broad


You might think that you are safer and more alert without lights but, and now think about this don't just discount it please, what about the bloke who has just had 6 pints and his judgement and alertness is practically zero.

He will not see you, yet if you were riding with just one blinking red led rear light he probably will.

You have to raise your chances when riding at night and that is simple, hi visibility clothing and lighting.

Food for thought, I just don't want your family to be without a loved one this christmas.

 

[ufkacbln]

My personal feeling (and it is not a legal standpoint) is that everyone using the road has a responsibility to make sure that it is used safely. Their safety and of those around them, no matter the mode of transport of choice be it foot, hoof, pedal or motor.

No problem with that, however the shift in legal responsibility from the overtaking vehicle to the overtaken was a different issue.

Hence a campaign on Dartmoor and the New Forest for wild ponies to have reflectives or lights!

 

[PBancroft]

No problem with that, however the shift in legal responsibility from the overtaking vehicle to the overtaken was a different issue.

Hence a campaign on Dartmoor and the New Forest for wild ponies to have reflectives or lights!

That's a shift in legal status. Should it swing back the over way, I would still be saying the same thing as I have today.

A court case to be proved right or wrong is one thing, but dead is dead.

 

[ufkacbln]

The problem though as I have posted beforeis not always the lighting, butthe response. I am still fequently experience vehicles pulling out or overtaking dodgily, not because I am unlit, but because they simply do not react in an appropriate manner!

I have an EN 471 (Emergency Services Standard) reflecytive jacket or a Foska Bones depending on weather. I then have a 50 watt HID coupled with a USE Maxx Enduro at 60 watts and the RVLR compliant CAteye on the front and two Cateyes and a pair of Dinottes on the back.

Over 80 times the required lighting on thefornt and 40 times on the back and I still have problems with "being seen"!

 

[BentMikey]

LOL, this topic is hilarious! I can see Lee's credibility is on the rise.

 

[BentMikey]

You can change your refusal to be filmed anytime sunbeam, but it speaks words as to your quality of riding. Mind you, so does your regular RLJing admission and claim that you "ride like a messenger".