# Do you use your lights in the day light hours



## johnnyb47 (6 Feb 2017)

I was just wondering how many members here use the bike lights in the day light. I certainly do because it just makes you stand out that little better. After all motorcyclist,s do as many cars too. I have a set of Cob lights from Aldi and they are very bright and noticeable and day light. I use the flashing mode so the battery lasts a good while between recharges.


----------



## Mrs M (6 Feb 2017)

Yes, I often put on the lights in daytime.
Had them on today coming home at about 1.30pm.


----------



## Drago (6 Feb 2017)

Unless visibility is compromised due to poor weather, then no.

There's no evidence DRLs make cars any safer outside of a sub-Arctic climate, and some evidence that inappropriate headlamp use (as opposed to dim-dip or DRL) during the day may actually increase the chances of trouble. I also wouldn't jump off a cliff just because motorcyclists did it.


----------



## winjim (6 Feb 2017)

Nope, and I always drive with my sidelights on, to douse the DRLs. I don't see the need to stand out "better" than adequately and I find bright lights, especially flashing ones, very distracting.


----------



## BrynCP (6 Feb 2017)

No.


----------



## simon.r (6 Feb 2017)

johnnyb47 said:


> After all motorcyclist,s do as many cars too.



I suspect that in the vast majority of cases this is because the motorbike / car comes with DRL's that can't be turned off.


----------



## winjim (6 Feb 2017)

simon.r said:


> I suspect that in the vast majority of cases this is because the motorbike / car comes with DRL's that can't be turned off.


They can be if you have the will to do it.


----------



## HLaB (6 Feb 2017)

I have (used lights in the day time) but I tend not too unless its poor visibility or first thing in the morning or about to go dark in half an hour; I like to save my batteries for when I might need them.


----------



## Bollo (6 Feb 2017)

winjim said:


> They can be if you have the will to do it.


You can control lights with your mind?!


----------



## Drago (6 Feb 2017)

The Glasgow headlamp switch...


----------



## Bollo (6 Feb 2017)

Back OT, not a fan of DRLs - it just becomes an arms race. When on the bike, no to front lights unless it's dark or foggy, never flashing. I'm a little more relaxed about rear light use and might stick one on if the visibility's not clever.


----------



## winjim (6 Feb 2017)

Bollo said:


> You can control lights with your mind?!


I just close my eyes.


----------



## r04DiE (6 Feb 2017)

johnnyb47 said:


> Do you use your lights in the day light hours


Always.


----------



## ianrauk (6 Feb 2017)

Nope.


----------



## classic33 (6 Feb 2017)

Bollo said:


> You can control lights with your mind?!


You can  control your gears 

Rear light if visibility is reduced, but no front light.


----------



## Sharky (6 Feb 2017)

Yes. Ever since being airlifted to a hospital following an incident when a driver turned in front of me.


----------



## Drago (6 Feb 2017)

I've been T boned at night with my lights well and truly lit.

Perhaps a lucky rabbits foot?


----------



## Sharky (6 Feb 2017)

Drago said:


> I've been T boned at night with my lights well and truly lit.
> 
> Perhaps a lucky rabbits foot?


I sometimes carry a 4 leaf clover.


----------



## growingvegetables (6 Feb 2017)

Nope, except in poor visibility, or in the half-light period after sunrise/before sunset. And I resent the DLR "arms race".


----------



## summerdays (6 Feb 2017)

Sometimes but if my lights are on during the day it's because of poor weather conditions or light (for example in the city centre in winter when going in and out of deep shadows created by buildings).


----------



## mjr (6 Feb 2017)

Only if it's very foggy.

Otherwise if it works and makes you more attention-grabbing, you're basically playing beggar thy neighbour at the expense of other cyclists and people walking, but if it doesn't, you're an ugly nuisance giving motorists the opportunity to claim they were dazzled if they strike you or someone else.


----------



## classic33 (6 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> Only if it's very foggy.
> 
> Otherwise if it works and makes you more attention-grabbing, you're basically playing beggar thy neighbour at the expense of other cyclists and people walking, but if it doesn't, you're an ugly nuisance giving motorists the opportunity to claim they were dazzled if they strike you or someone else.


What do you do where it's mandatory to have lights on during the daytime then?


----------



## Drago (6 Feb 2017)

I find that cycling everywhere while wearing a sequined ball gown, or dressed as a jester, seems to get me noticed.


----------



## Hacienda71 (6 Feb 2017)

Rear light if foggy. Other than that no.


----------



## tyred (6 Feb 2017)

My winter fixed wheel bike and my hub geared mountain bike have hub dynamo and LED lights and I never bother to switch them off but I never bother with DRLs on any of my other bikes. I don't think it makes much difference.


----------



## classic33 (6 Feb 2017)

Drago said:


> I find that cycling everywhere while wearing a sequined ball gown, or dressed as a jester, seems to get me noticed.


Carrying a three foot No Entry sign didn't work for me. Nor a set of traffic lights.


----------



## classic33 (6 Feb 2017)

[QUOTE 4671139, member: 9609"]I will switch my rear flasher on if I have to venture onto a fast road, other than that no - i generally stop to let others pass.[/QUOTE]
What would you class as "a fast road". A what killed the cat question.


----------



## classic33 (7 Feb 2017)

Drago said:


> I've been T boned at night with my lights well and truly lit.
> 
> Perhaps a lucky rabbits foot?


Luckier than this?


----------



## Lonestar (7 Feb 2017)

Yes.If the cars and buses have.Also when it's raining.


----------



## growingvegetables (7 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> Only if it's very foggy.


Respect to you, and others, riding in fog. I'll ride in any weather .... EXCEPT fog; just don't have the bottle.


----------



## GGJ (7 Feb 2017)

Front light with flashing rear light in poor daylight and also in low winter sunlight. Whether drivers see or even pay attention I don't know but it gives me piece of mind


----------



## slowmotion (7 Feb 2017)

No.

I ride a bike, and I don't drive a Volvo.


----------



## Racing roadkill (7 Feb 2017)

I've got two sets of lights. One is fairly weedy and really wouldn't be much use in the dark, but does add to the visibility in daylight. The other ones are moth zappers, I wouldn't use them in daylight.


----------



## Shut Up Legs (7 Feb 2017)

Yes. In the event of a collision, it makes my legal position a bit better. Too many motorists will use any excuse to pretend they never saw me, so this makes their position weaker.


----------



## Banjo (7 Feb 2017)

Crazy to cycle in fog imho.Will use lights in mist or rain or on really dark cloudy winter days.

Cant see the point in good visibility.


----------



## RoubaixCube (7 Feb 2017)

Yes, if....

A. Foggy
B. Dull and overcast


----------



## ufkacbln (7 Feb 2017)

... ish 


I tend to look at the environment around me

if the headlights and shop lights are making significant difference to visibility then I will use lights, but as normal practice, I don't use them during the day


----------



## DaveReading (7 Feb 2017)

I don't ride in fog, but this time of year if my route is likely to involve cycling into a low sun, I'll put my rear flasher on.


----------



## mjr (7 Feb 2017)

classic33 said:


> What do you do where it's mandatory to have lights on during the daytime then?


Where's that?


----------



## mjr (7 Feb 2017)

growingvegetables said:


> Respect to you, and others, riding in fog. I'll ride in any weather .... EXCEPT fog; just don't have the bottle.


What do you and others do if the fog arrives while you're out, or if you still need to get somewhere? I'm rarely near the trains, buses won't take non folding bikes and walking in such conditions is often dicier.


----------



## Bollo (7 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> Where's that?


I think the original context was about cars, so Classic was probably referring to the Scandinavian countries. Sweden and Iceland for sure as I've driven in both and been bo****ed in both for forgetting to turn them on. 

No idea if there's anywhere that mandates daytime lights for cyclists.


----------



## Dogtrousers (7 Feb 2017)

If I start in the dark and expect to be home before dark I may not bother switching my back lights off. If I'm going to be returning in the dark, I'm more likely to switch them off to save the batteries.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (7 Feb 2017)

If were conditions were bad enough during daylight to need front lights I wouldn't be out. All of my bikes have at least 1 rear light fitted at all times, quite happily turn them on, on dull overcast days that are common in NI


----------



## winjim (7 Feb 2017)

Racing roadkill said:


> I've got two sets of lights. One is fairly weedy and really wouldn't be much use in the dark, but does add to the visibility in daylight. The other ones are moth zappers, I wouldn't use them in daylight.


Shouldn't that be the other way round? You need the bright one to stand out in the daylight but the dim one should be pretty visible in the dark. That's why DRLs are so stoopidly bright.

Not that I'm suggesting you do that of course, I'd prefer it if you ditched the bright ones altogether, particularly if you're riding in a built up area.


----------



## subaqua (7 Feb 2017)

Yes but only as it's a hub dynamo and I can't be bothered to have to remember to turn it off or back on .


----------



## fossyant (7 Feb 2017)

Commuting in dull light then yes. But don't expect them to help. My accident 14 months ago was in daylight, with 3 front lights ON !! Driver still didn't see me despite being right in his line of sight with the 'pulse' mode reflecting very nicely off the front of his car.


----------



## Will Spin (7 Feb 2017)

I always have a flashing back light on, I feel safer with this, I have no evidence to back this up but subjectively it seemed that cars were much more wary about overtaking once I started using it. All my rides in the daylight on country roads around East Hants and West Sussex and these can get quite dark even in summer as some parts are heavily wooded. I have a flashing front light that is on during the winter months, seems to have the effect of slowing oncoming cars down in narrow lanes.


----------



## snorri (7 Feb 2017)

No, because there are already more than enough distractions for other road users.


----------



## winjim (7 Feb 2017)

Will Spin said:


> I have a flashing front light that is on during the winter months, seems to have the effect of slowing oncoming cars down in narrow lanes.


I do tend to slow down when I'm being blinded. I had to properly throw out the anchors yesterday when I rounded a corner in the rain to be hit full in the face by a super bright flashing bike light. I couldn't focus on anything else and had no option but to slow to a dead crawl. Good job I was driving at a speed appropriate to the conditions and was able to safely slow down.


----------



## Crackle (7 Feb 2017)

Depends on the weather. Bright low sun ahead reflecting off wet tarmac is always the one that worries me. I might use a rear flasher then and keep my ears very much open and tuned in and Meerkat over my shoulder.


----------



## MichaelW2 (7 Feb 2017)

Another dynohub user who was forgotten that lights have an OFF switch.


----------



## chriscross1966 (7 Feb 2017)

My Busch und Muller dynamo lights have sensors and turn themselves on a dim setting in daytime (the rear will be on full, and has a brake light function)


----------



## growingvegetables (7 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> What do you and others do if the fog arrives while you're out, or if you still need to get somewhere? I'm rarely near the trains, buses won't take non folding bikes and walking in such conditions is often dicier.


I can only think of a couple of times that I've been caught out like that - outside town on country roads, miles from anywhere. Patches of pea-souper. No choice but to carry on. 

But it scared the bejasus out of me. It was terrifying the number of drivers who made no attempt whatsoever to slow down ....... even though they could not possibly see.

Fortunately most fog around me sets in early morning and hangs around until maybe 10 or 11 o'clock.


----------



## Old jon (7 Feb 2017)

Knee jerk, I turn the lights on.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (7 Feb 2017)

winjim said:


> Nope, and I always drive with my sidelights on, to douse the DRLs.



I thought I was alone in doing that.


----------



## winjim (7 Feb 2017)

glasgowcyclist said:


> I thought I was alone in doing that.


There might be loads of people doing it, we just can't see 'em.


----------



## Vantage (8 Feb 2017)

Yup. I run dynamo B&M's so battery use isn't an issue and therefor no reason not to run them.
No matter whether I'm the passenger in my fiancée's car, walking along or cycling along, when I see a cyclist with lights on during perfectly good daylight weather, that cyclist will stand out more than one without the lights. For that reason, I light 'em up.


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

Vantage said:


> Yup. I run dynamo B&M's so battery use isn't an issue and therefor no reason not to run them.
> No matter whether I'm the passenger in my fiancée's car, walking along or cycling along, when I see a cyclist with lights on during perfectly good daylight weather, that cyclist will stand out more than one without the lights. For that reason, I light 'em up.


So is it that you don't think distracting people from other perfectly legal unlit cyclists is rather anti-social and that encouraging light use in daytime is a waste of energy, or that you don't think they're valid reasons, or what?


----------



## Drago (8 Feb 2017)

I've yet to see any firm evidence that daytime lighting increases conspicuity, and that then translates into reduced collision rates. When I do, then I'll gladly begin doing so.

Until then, my lucky rabbits foot has as much proven ability to keep me safe.


----------



## classic33 (8 Feb 2017)

Drago said:


> I've yet to see any firm evidence that daytime lighting increases conspicuity, and that then translates into reduced collision rates. When I do, then I'll gladly begin doing so.
> *
> Until then, my lucky rabbits foot has as much proven ability to keep me safe*.


Not so lucky for the rabbit though!


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

classic33 said:


> Not so lucky for the rabbit though!


The foot might still be attached to the rabbit!





(source)


----------



## Vantage (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> So is it that you don't think distracting people from other perfectly legal unlit cyclists is rather anti-social and that encouraging light use in daytime is a waste of energy, or that you don't think they're valid reasons, or what?



I'm a bit slow today. What are you asking?


----------



## Drago (8 Feb 2017)

I think he's asking you on a date.


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

Vantage said:


> I'm a bit slow today. What are you asking?


You wrote that there was no reason not to light up in daytime... so I'm asking if you disagree with the suggested reasons or what?


----------



## nickyboy (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> So is it that you don't think distracting people from other perfectly legal unlit cyclists is rather anti-social and that encouraging light use in daytime is a waste of energy, or that you don't think they're valid reasons, or what?



I saw that you used this argument upthread ie. by using day time lights this potentially puts those not using day time lights at greater harm. I didn't bother replying at the time but as you mention it again I think I might.

My personal safety is exactly that, personal. I will take whatever actions I deem necessary to make myself safe on my bike. That may or may not include day time lights. If another cyclist chooses not to use lights or whatever then that's up to them. But please don't suggest that I shouldn't take an action that I consider will make me safer, just to help some other cyclist who chooses not to do so


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

nickyboy said:


> My personal safety is exactly that, personal. I will take whatever actions I deem necessary to make myself safe on my bike. That may or may not include day time lights. If another cyclist chooses not to use lights or whatever then that's up to them. But please don't suggest that I shouldn't take an action that I consider will make me safer, just to help some other cyclist who chooses not to do so


How far do you take that beggar-thy-neighbour attitude? Would you consider it acceptable to push another cyclist into traffic if it might help you avoid a collision?

Sharing the roads seems inherently a social task. Lighting up motivated by attracting more attention than you should get (rather than lighting up to help oneself see or to comply with the law) seems anti-social whether it works or not.


----------



## Vantage (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> You wrote that there was no reason not to light up in daytime... so I'm asking if you disagree with the suggested reasons or what?



I wrote that there was no reason for me not to light up. As it costs nothing to power dynamo lights, I might as well run them all the time.
I do wonder why you might think that my decision to use daytime lights is in anyway antisocial towards riders who choose not to use day lights though. If they believe that their lack of lights puts them at no more risk than I with my lights, where is the problem?


----------



## Vantage (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> How far do you take that beggar-thy-neighbour attitude? Would you consider it acceptable to push another cyclist into traffic if it might help you avoid a collision?
> 
> Sharing the roads seems inherently a social task. Lighting up motivated by attracting more attention than you should get (rather than lighting up to help oneself see or to comply with the law) seems anti-social whether it works or not.



People have the right to take whatever safety measures to protect themselves as they deem fit as long as it doesn't cause harm to others.
There are fixie riders who choose not to fit brakes to their bikes. Do you suggest we all remove our brakes so we're all equally at risk?


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

Vantage said:


> People have the right to take whatever safety measures to protect themselves as they deem fit as long as it doesn't cause harm to others.
> There are fixie riders who choose not to fit brakes to their bikes. Do you suggest we all remove our brakes so we're all equally at risk?


I don't see why that would be comparable?

One cyclist lighting up to grab attention does cause harm to others: if it works, by taking attention away from others; and even if it does nothing, by encouraging a public expectation that cyclists should be needlessly lit at all times which may have consequences in motorist behaviour and court rulings and so on.


----------



## fossyant (8 Feb 2017)

Shut Up Legs said:


> Yes. In the event of a collision, it makes my legal position a bit better. Too many motorists will use any excuse to pretend they never saw me, so this makes their position weaker.



They still use the same excuse. That's the excuse the driver used in my case.


----------



## fossyant (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> I don't see why that would be comparable?
> 
> One cyclist lighting up to grab attention does cause harm to others: if it works, by taking attention away from others; and even if it does nothing, by encouraging a public expectation that cyclists should be needlessly lit at all times which may have consequences in motorist behaviour and court rulings and so on.



I work on the assumption of covering my own backside. So if conditions are questionable or say I'd set out in low light I would leave my lights on rather than stop.
The driver's insurance will try everything argue contibutory negligence in an event of an accident. 

I've been there. The third partys insurer have said they will try for that in my case. Exactly what they will argue is beyond me as they have admitted primary liability. If it saves them money they will. I had lights on and bright clothing.

The more you do to cover your own backside the better in an accident. These insurance companies are sneaky swines.


----------



## Vantage (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> I don't see why that would be comparable?
> 
> One cyclist lighting up to grab attention does cause harm to others: if it works, by taking attention away from others; and even if it does nothing, by encouraging a public expectation that cyclists should be needlessly lit at all times which may have consequences in motorist behaviour and court rulings and so on.



Do you use lights at night? If so, why?


----------



## fossyant (8 Feb 2017)

DRL's are a big problem now for cyclists. They obliterate many cycle lights even if used. They also make it harder to see cyclists.


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

Vantage said:


> Do you use lights at night? If so, why?


To see and to reduce the risk of police attention. Would you answer my earlier questions, please?


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

fossyant said:


> The more you do to cover your own backside the better in an accident. These insurance companies are sneaky swines.


Indeed, many seem to be, but trying to second guess their fraudulent attempts to impose pointless practices isn't covering one's own backside: it's bending over and greasing up, plus helping them to get their next victim!

I wish there was an insurer who promised to point out when there's no evidence supporting the other insurer's suggested anti-cycling measure and they'd have to prove otherwise in court to reduce their liability.


----------



## nickyboy (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> How far do you take that beggar-thy-neighbour attitude? Would you consider it acceptable to push another cyclist into traffic if it might help you avoid a collision?
> 
> Sharing the roads seems inherently a social task. Lighting up motivated by attracting more attention than you should get (rather than lighting up to help oneself see or to comply with the law) seems anti-social whether it works or not.



Is that a serious question? Of course I wouldn't push another cyclist to avoid a collision. That is completely different from me choosing to use lights in the day time. The law sets the minimum standard acceptable on the road. If I want to exceed that standard then that's up to me. If others don't want to then that's up to them.

FWIW I believe that day time lights make me more visible and thus less susceptible to a collision with another road user. It would be no comfort to me if I was involved in a collision whilst unlit but "at least I didn't attract more attention than I should get"


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

I suspect there's a better example of a legal-but-selfish action that's frowned upon but I can't think of it right now.

How much comfort will your lights be if you see a cyclist alongside you get hit because a motorist was distracted by your lights?


----------



## fossyant (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> Indeed, many seem to be, but trying to second guess their fraudulent attempts to impose pointless practices isn't covering one's own backside: it's bending over and greasing up, plus helping them to get their next victim!
> 
> I wish there was an insurer who promised to point out when there's no evidence supporting the other insurer's suggested anti-cycling measure and they'd have to prove otherwise in court to reduce their liability.



Insurers will try anything. In my case I have additional GPS data that shows speed etc.

The guy turned right across my path. Unless you have been in this situation you won't know. No matter how right you were they will try and wiggle out of paying some fees. The more evidence you have the better.

Believe you me.


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

fossyant said:


> Insurers will try anything. In my case I have additional GPS data that shows speed etc.
> 
> The guy turned right across my path. Unless you have been in this situation you won't know. No matter how right you were they will try and wiggle out of paying some fees. The more evidence you have the better.
> 
> Believe you me.


I believe you on that aspect, but I also believe that they'll try anything, so if a cyclist has lights, they'll simply claim that the driver they insured was dazzled instead. We cannot pre-empt all these fraud attempts because some are mutually exclusive, so shouldn't we probably do what's best for society instead of what we think insurers will claim?


----------



## Drago (8 Feb 2017)

Nevertheless, if someone T bones you in broad daylight, and the best they can trot out is "I didn't see them", then they've done nothing to divert blame to the innocent cyclist.

Suzuki did a lot of research into daytime lighting in the Eighties. They discovered running headlights - as opposed to specialist dim/dip lighting - on a motorbike corresponded with an increased likelihood of collision. The concluded that the light breaks up the outline of rider and machine, thus depriving the brain of an observer of the datum required to effectively calculate speed as the brain was unable to register the rate at which the shape grew against it's background. I can't see typical legal cycle lights bringing about this phenomenon, but some of the badly aimed stupid bright lights some cyclists use might be powerful enough to do just that.


----------



## Vantage (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> To see and to reduce the risk of police attention. Would you answer my earlier questions, please?


Well you only really asked one question and it was if a lack of brakes was comparable to a lack of lights. The answer being yes as both are proven safety devices.
Someone else's failure to take adequate safety precautions is their own fault, not mine, unless it's my duty to ensure they take those precautions such as my kids.

You say you use lights at night to reduce the chances of being caught by the police. What about those cyclists who don't use lights at night? Don't you feel guilty that your actions are making them look bad?


----------



## fossyant (8 Feb 2017)

Lights shouldn't be dazzling during the night never mind day. If they are during the day then there is something wrong.

Drivers often use SMIDSY as an excuse. Their insurer will try and pull your case to bits.

As for doing things for society as general, that's not going to save your bacon on the road. Drivers don't give a hoot about any road users

I don't ride on the road now. I did everything to avoid a collision but, despite that if someone doesn't look properly it's game over.


----------



## nickyboy (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> I suspect there's a better example of a legal-but-selfish action that's frowned upon but I can't think of it right now.
> 
> How much comfort will your lights be if you see a cyclist alongside you get hit because a motorist was distracted by your lights?



What? Can you give one single example of that ever happening anywhere in the world? I'm happy to discuss the social morality or otherwise of using lights in the daytime but please provide real-life possible scenarios. Until then, I will happily use my day lights based on my belief that they render me more visible to other road users and thus I am less likely to be involved in a collision


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

Vantage said:


> Well you only really asked one question and it was if a lack of brakes was comparable to a lack of lights. The answer being yes as both are proven safety devices.


Thanks for finally getting there - but they're still not comparable because it probably doesn't harm you whether Fred on the other side of the road has brakes or not, does it? That's probably a key difference with DRLs.

I did also ask:


mjr said:


> You wrote that there was no reason not to light up in daytime... so I'm asking if you disagree with the suggested reasons or what?


and I feel you replied but did not answer.



Vantage said:


> Someone else's failure to take adequate safety precautions is their own fault, not mine, unless it's my duty to ensure they take those precautions such as my kids.


DRLs are a necessary safety precaution? So you do think you're grabbing attention at the expense of other road users... Sorry but I think that's selfish.



Vantage said:


> You say you use lights at night to reduce the chances of being caught by the police. What about those cyclists who don't use lights at night? Don't you feel guilty that your actions are making them look bad?


I also said I use them to see. I don't feel particularly guilty. I feel it's up to them. I think the CTC was right to oppose mandatory bike lights way back when.



fossyant said:


> Lights shouldn't be dazzling during the night never mind day. If they are during the day then there is something wrong.


Like your lights being misaligned or flopping around... which could easily be the case once the bike is bent in a collision.



fossyant said:


> Drivers often use SMIDSY as an excuse. Their insurer will try and pull your case to bits.


Sure and they can still try SMIDSY and try and pull your case to bits.



fossyant said:


> I don't ride on the road now. I did everything to avoid a collision but, despite that if someone doesn't look properly it's game over.


How often motorists seem to leave the roads now, it's surprising they don't kill more people off-road


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

nickyboy said:


> What? Can you give one single example of that ever happening anywhere in the world?


Sadly not - very few collision cases end up on record in sufficient detail to attribute blame in that way.



nickyboy said:


> Until then, I will happily use my day lights based on my belief that they render me more visible to other road users and thus I am less likely to be involved in a collision


That seems like an irrational belief similar to what people place on hi-vis. Even at night, unlit cyclists are involved in about 2% of collisions and it certainly seems like much more than 2% of people are riding unlit!


----------



## fossyant (8 Feb 2017)

Vantage said:


> Do you use lights at night? If so, why?



He doesn't want to attract the bizzies on his drugs runs.


----------



## fossyant (8 Feb 2017)

There is nothing wrong with using lights during the day if someone wants to. It creates no further hazards to any other road users.

Saying it may affect other cyclists is just your opinion. In my opinion someone using lights in daylight hasn't ever affected me not using any. 

We are starting to go round in circles. If someone feels safer using them then that's upto them. Same can be said about ... helmets... ssshhhhh


----------



## nickyboy (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> Sadly not - very few collision cases end up on record in sufficient detail to attribute blame in that way.
> 
> 
> That seems like an irrational belief similar to what people place on hi-vis. Even at night, unlit cyclists are involved in about 2% of collisions and it certainly seems like much more than 2% of people are riding unlit!



Well given that there is little statistical evidence to support whether daytime lights make you more or less likely to be involved in a collision we are left with everyone's "irrational belief". Actually, it's not irrational, it's unsubstantiated. So you can have your unsubstantiated belief and I can have mine. That's how it works. I'm not telling you to use lights so please don't tell me not to use them


----------



## gavroche (8 Feb 2017)

never


----------



## mjr (8 Feb 2017)

fossyant said:


> We are starting to go round in circles. If someone feels safer using them then that's upto them. Same can be said about ... helmets... ssshhhhh


Well, yes, DRLs are quite similar to H&H in that there's little evidence it helps, yet some advocates keep on claiming it works because common sense and it's not hurting anyone else, while others give scary stories that insurers try to reduce payouts for non-conformists which certainly seems like hurting someone else... this contradiction combines with what seems like determination to avoid simple questions to send it round in circles. I give up!


----------



## fossyant (8 Feb 2017)

That's your opinion of people using lights on a bike in the day. Other people's opinions are different but you keep arguing ifs and buts about an issue that doesn't exist. The OPs question was who uses them or not.

You alone think that using bike lights during the day may affect the safety of others. I pointed out that in the event of an accident the insurance weasels will try anything to get out of a full payout.


----------



## GuyBoden (8 Feb 2017)




----------



## subaqua (8 Feb 2017)

Drago said:


> I've been T boned at night with my lights well and truly lit.
> 
> Perhaps a lucky rabbits foot?


Maybe it wasn't accidental ?


----------



## Vantage (8 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> this contradiction combines with what seems like determination to avoid simple questions to send it round in circles. I give up!



Been busy. I'm a single dad. Far more important things to attend to than argue over silly things. 
Besides, fossyant said what I was thinking better than I.


----------



## fossyant (8 Feb 2017)

subaqua said:


> Maybe it wasn't accidental ?



Don't - given my history. I'm worth a fortune dead..... hmmmmmmmmmm


----------



## classic33 (9 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> Indeed, many seem to be, but trying to second guess their fraudulent attempts to impose pointless practices isn't covering one's own backside: it's bending over and greasing up, plus helping them to get their next victim!
> 
> I wish there was an insurer who promised to point out when there's no evidence supporting the other insurer's suggested anti-cycling measure and they'd have to prove otherwise in court to reduce their liability.


Why the use of the word "fraudulent"? I don't think there was anything fraudulent about his stay in hospital over Christmas, after being hit, nor the damage done to him.

Me, I was hit by a car, drunk driver(over the limit), in a car that had no MOT, VED or insurance. The driver had no licence or insurance. Oh and it wasn't his car either, he'd borrowed/been loaned it to get home by the female owner.

Your view changes after you've been involved in any RTC. To call it fraudulent is insulting. One reason why I ended up losing a job, despite my best efforts to keep it.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (9 Feb 2017)

Only if the weather is dull/stormy, certainly not on a bright sunny day.


----------



## mjr (9 Feb 2017)

classic33 said:


> Why the use of the word "fraudulent"? I don't think there was anything fraudulent about his stay in hospital over Christmas, after being hit, nor the damage done to him.


Nor do I and I don't see how what I wrote can be misunderstood that way. I used the word to suggest it's fraudulent when the insurer tries to blame a cyclist for using / not using daytime running lights (delete as applicable).


----------



## classic33 (9 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> Nor do I and I don't see how what I wrote can be misunderstood that way. I used the word to suggest it's fraudulent when the insurer tries to blame him for using / not using daytime running lights (delete as applicable).


It's not. Re-read your own post again.

I just hope you never find out the hard way.


----------



## mjr (9 Feb 2017)

classic33 said:


> It's not. Re-read your own post again.


I've had another go at making the most recent clarification even clearer. Any better? I still don't quite see how you're making a massively mistaken leap to seem like you think fraudulent applied to fossy.



classic33 said:


> I just hope you never find out the hard way.


 That's the second time you've written shoot like that. Is it meant to be some sort of threat?

I've already had practical experience of how some insurers wriggle TYVM


----------



## Vantage (9 Feb 2017)

mjr said:


> That's the second time you've written shoot like that. Is it meant to be some sort of threat?


----------



## Drago (9 Feb 2017)

One should be cautious when using lights inappropriately.

I awoke this morning to find a Jumbo Jet parked outside my bedroom door. Turned out i'd left the landing light on.

I'll get my coat...


----------

