Cyclists without lights....

[tdr1nka]

Again we are missing the fact it was simple good advice given 'to get lights'. No one needed to feel they were 'told to', to react to this is more like a resentful and guilty admission of the truth than anything.

No harm in that.

If someone is 'untouchable' enough to ride without lights then so be it.
I see having full lights as part and parcel of defensive riding but if as a cyclist you expect people to drive and ride around respectfully then you have to be making your presence visible to some extent.

 

[PBancroft]

and 'it's not your business' - if you saw a little kid getting mugged, i guess you wouldnt help either, for the same reason?

+1

There is a point when you have to stand up and say "No."

Sometimes its difficult, sometimes its important, and sometimes it isn't. But sometimes it has to be said, and then it has to be backed up.

 

[BentMikey]

Thanks Hackers!

Lee, I think your riding is irresponsible going by your own words. RLJing and no lights at night? Riding like a 5 year old. No wonder you're so oversensitive on being "patronised".

 

[Andy 71]

If this was me, I would tell you to mind your own business. Calling me mate/friend eh? Mind you own.

Er Lee,

It is our business when our taxes are used to pay the Police to scrape your remains off of the road. It is our business when it comes to finding money to pay the hard-pressed ambulance service to transport what is left of you to the morgue. It is our business, when it comes to paying the Police to investigate the circumstances of your demise and the coroner to make a ruliing. Tot that up - how much do you think that comes to?

Frankly, I'd rather see public money used on more worthy causes, such as the disabled, sick, elderly or people who have enough nous to realise why it is simply idiotic to ride around after dark with no lights.

You complain about potentially being spoken to like a five-year-old. Tell me, what is 'mature' about persistently and deliberately putting the safety of yourself and others in jeopardy?

Do you think I have nothing better to do? I can assure you I do - It's just that the sight of a cyclist lying in a pool of his/her own blood does not turn me on in the least.

Tell me, if you saw someone preparing to jump off a high building, would you just walk on by? If not, why do you think my reaction to seeing people with no lights on busy streets would be any different? So was it a lecture? - well, call it what you want. But if that makes just one person re-think and take a basic, simple step to stay alive (like shelling out a fiver!), I can live with being called a sanctamonius twit. Sticks and stones won't save YOUR bones.

Do you want to know why people don't 'mind their own' sometimes? It's a reaction - being taken back, aghast at the sight of such stupidity and wondering what it is about you that doesn't understand or even care about what you are doing.

 

[BentMikey]

That's my response as well - it is my and everyone else's business when someone misbehaves on the public highway.

 

[Domestique]

Going slightly ot, is it only me that finds it strange that new bikes come with reflectors but not lights.

 

[wafflycat]

Not really. Don't forget many a new bike comes without pedals! There's such a vast choice of lights out there, that what you have is going to depend upon where you're going to be cycling.

Cycling along a well-lit urban street is an entirely different matter to cycling along an unlit country lane with nothing for ambient light other than perhaps the moon & stars. A basic front light is of little use when cycling an unlit country lane, but may be entirely adequate when cycling the urban road with excellent street-lighting.

 

[Bollo]

Cycling along a well-lit urban street is an entirely different matter to cycling along an unlit country lane with nothing for ambient light other than perhaps the moon & stars. A basic front light is of little use when cycling an unlit country lane, but may be entirely adequate when cycling the urban road with excellent street-lighting.

Beat be to it - there's lights to see and lights to be seen with. For most circumstances, the thankfully cheap as chips to-be-seen-with lights are enough.

Mr C's point has come up a few times with or without lights. There's a difference between seeing and cognition, but for sure you can't -cog- without the seeing bit first. And seeing is the only bit that a cyclist can objectively improve on. You can try to improve the chances of Joe Roaduser's brain bothering to process the images but that's more tricky, and too many lights may muddle the equation now and again. There's still also the chance that Joe Roaduser is a c0ck, and will pull out or buzz you anyway.
Finally Lee, if you end up trying to get some insurance money out of a driver that hits you at night, forget it. No matter how culpable and negligent the driver was, you've given them a gaping contributary negligence mine to dig. Why not just spend a fiver? D'ya want us to buy you one?

 

[Jaded]

Last time I checked it wasn't a legal requirement for a badger or a hedgehog to be wearing lights at night. It is a legal requirement for a cyclist. Lights cost hardly anything to buy - there is no excuse for not having 'be seen by' lights front & rear when cycling.

Is the big issue being legal or being seen.

?

 

[wafflycat]

Both.

 

[dondare]

Is the big issue being legal or being seen.

?

Both.

 

[dondare]

Both.

Jinx!

 

[Jaded]

So what's with dissing the badger post then?

 

[wafflycat]

So what's with dissing the badger post then?

Jaded, you never struck me as being stupid, indeed you used to come across as being quite sensible, but you do seem to be adopting an increasingly trolling attitude - quite different from another place. I wonder why?

 

[BentMikey]

Even I've noticed that, Jaded. I'm sad...