All bikes should be fitted with lights!

[chap]

thomas on bicycle lights

Plenty of good reasons. First one is that it's a stupid idea which we don't need.

The last point isn't really relevant unless you believe cycling would be more popular here if bikes came with compulsory lights.

It still bears relevance as the main point raised was that it would hardly be a deterrent. Now compulsory bicycle helmets, there is another issue which the New Zealanders on site could tell you about.

Better to just exclude all bikes as our wonderful legal system does

Only because many of your posts have shown the same attitude.

The police ignore cyclists at the moment without lights, so why would they care if cyclists didn't have 'compulsory lights' on their bike.

A bit of a generalisation there. Perhaps the police have more immediately pressing issues where you are, although I have seen many people pulled aside by the police for this, and less.

I'm very much against a dynamo system, and I see no reason for me to spend more buying a new bike due to it having to come with lights, which I already own.

Once again, please read the OP, my last post, or many of the fine posts by other members.

As Cab has pointed out a number of times, there isn't really any benefit to this point. Much better to just enforce existing laws of having lights at night (if you're going to do something).

Thus, if you are going to enforce these laws, then wouldn't that make them mandatory in the first place?

To be honest, you may have a point, somewhere. There are exceptions to the rule. Why pay extra for a light if you will never use it during night (e.g. racing bike)? Why buy the lowest priced set when you already have a super-dazzling pair at home. These clearly are exceptions, which many of the posters have stated would have to exist. If every new bike is to come with lights, that implies that a focus shall be put on ensuring night riders use them. To ensure that there are no excuses, and that the people are not left out of hand, it would be best to have pedal-powered lights. This could be by dynamo but does not have to be so. Magnetically induced lighting is an affordable and effective technology, which will become cheaper if there is demand. This is not to say that battery-powered lighting should be banned. It is a perfectly feasible alternative - just not hassle free.

Where I may agree with you is on the outdated laws concerning certain forms of lighting. However, I will have to temporarily plead ignorance on that point, thus research it at my convenience.

Hope that cleared things up

 

[MadoneRider1991]

this thread is getting abit stupid now, some people think this is a good idea some think its isnt, there is NO way that the police would be able to enforce this or be able to fine cyclist for no having "always-on lights" on there bike

 

[redfalo]

Beeing a German who recently moved to London, I find this discussion quite interesting.
In general, I totally subscribe to the idea that all new bikes should be equipped with lights. (In Germany since recently the law even demands that the rear light of new bikes have standlight functions.) To be honest I am stunned how many badly lid bikers are around here. The most intersting difference is that in Germany almost nobody ever uses Hi-viz clothes while here they are ubiquitous. It´s vice versa with regard to dynamo lights.

With regard to road bikes it´t true that the German law requires the rider to carry battery lights when it´s not an offical race. But that´s pure theory. I have never heard that this part of the law has ever been enforced. Additionally nobody cares if you ride without a dynamo but have proper battery lights (it might mattern in case of an accident, however).

Somebody mentioned that mandatory lights would drive up the costs of bikes to much. I don´t think that´s really an issue. You can buy cheap bikes for 149 Euro in Germany which have a (rather rubbish) dynamo and front and rear lights. Aldi once even sold a cheap bike with a hub dynamo for somethink like 199 Euro. (When those bikes were tested one magazine wrote: It´s all rubbish - only the dynamo is fine!)

However, not everything is perfect in Germany. First of all, a lot of those dynamo lights are broken. You see plenty of bikers without lights in Germany as well. And the Police nowadays does not really care.

The biggest problem in Germany right now is that the Highway act is pretty much outdated with regard to bike lights. For example, it is not allowed to install a 12 Volt dynamo to your bike. This means it´s for example officially forbidden to have a hub dynamo with 2 front lights (which increases safety, doesn´t it?). The German equivalent to the CTC -the ADFC- really goes crazy about those laws. The discussion about a modernization of the law goes on for years and years and is leading nowhere.

Personally, I think a hub dynamo with an LED light in the front and in the back is the best you can get (and a way to have always on light, BTW) This is why when I recently bought a Brompton I ordered it with a SON. The first thing I did after it was delivered was to replace the shabby halogen light with a 60 Lux Cyo by Busch & Mueller.

 

[thomas]

Thus, if you are going to enforce these laws, then wouldn't that make them mandatory in the first place?

Cars have to have lights don't they? Yet how often do I see people driving around at dusk or night without their lights on or with broken lights? Mandatory lighting at work.

A bit of a generalisation there. Perhaps the police have more immediately pressing issues where you are, although I have seen many people pulled aside by the police for this, and less.

Well done! You see my point. The police have better things to do, so aren't going to give a toot about mandatory lighting when riders ride with broken ones (which would become common).

I'm not against the police stopping people and giving them advice and a £30 FPN which doesn't need to be paid if you turn up with working bike lights. It seems a good idea.

To be honest, you may have a point, somewhere. There are exceptions to the rule. Why pay extra for a light if you will never use it during night (e.g. racing bike)? Why buy the lowest priced set when you already have a super-dazzling pair at home. These clearly are exceptions, which many of the posters have stated would have to exist.

Point here is, if you have all these exceptions it makes it a very difficult law to enforce. Allowing shops not to fit lights if customers have lights would become very difficult....and people would no doubt borrow a set of a mate to save a couple of quid. For people buying an ASDA bike a, what they cost? £50-100? Another fiver or tenner on lights does add up.

this thread is getting abit stupid now, some people think this is a good idea some think its isnt, there is NO way that the police would be able to enforce this or be able to fine cyclist for no having "always-on lights" on there bike

+1.

However, not everything is perfect in Germany. First of all, a lot of those dynamo lights are broken. You see plenty of bikers without lights in Germany as well. And the Police nowadays does not really care.

This is exactly what would happen here. The police wouldn't care, bikes would be fitted with broken lights and they'd be no major benefit.

Seriously, I would love that every cyclist who goes out during dusk, night, through bad weather and so on to use lights. It would be fantastic!

I've seen the aftermath of a cyclist, without lights being hit by a car (probably at around 60mph) and it is horrible. Body, lifeless in road....10 meters further up, a car, bicycle wedged in the grill.

As a country we already have existing laws on bike lights which are easily to enforce if there is a want or need.

I can see why you'd think that compulsory bike lighting would be good and I thought about it in the past, but believe it has too many flaws. Anyway, thankfully on this one our Government is too lazy to care so all you who want it, won't get it

 

[Cab]

In Britain you don't have to. In Germany you would. Theft would be unlikely once they were ubiquitous. Dynamo lights aren't removable and don't generally get nicked. Vandalised occasionally yes. As I said above your hire bikes just need the switches taken off.

And the bikes sold would quickly just have the dynamos disconnected in the same way that the hire bikes do. You know this is true.

The Germans are as usual way ahead of us. They take safety seriously where we don't, and therefore have good and sensible laws governing bike lighting.

It is proven that lack of bike lights does not constitute a major cause of cycling related deaths or injuries. It isn't that big a safety issue. Why do you persist with this line when you know this?

(cut)

You won't agree as you are quite happy to have bikes going round in the dark without lights.

Errm, no... Justify that claim.

That's the inevitable consequence of not having compulsory aways on lighting. You seem to think they're a good idea on your bike though.

The inevitable consequence of cycle lights not being that big a deal in improving safety is that many people won't use 'em. Its got nothing to do with a lack of compulsory dynamos.

You clearly know more about safety issues than any researchers, road safety professionals or the German government. Nonetheless I'd rather take notice of them.

2% of cycling casualties are caused by this. The vast bulk of adult cyclist deaths are caused by motorists. Are these professionals of which you speak arguing that this is not the case?

 

[chap]

Cars have to have lights don't they? Yet how often do I see people driving around at dusk or night without their lights on or with broken lights? Mandatory lighting at work.

Exactly, I think I covered that one earlier, perhaps they are preoccupied by other matters where you are. Over here, the police will pull you over for having dodgy lights. Then again, the standard is not ubiquitous.

Well done! You see my point. The police have better things to do, so aren't going to give a toot about mandatory lighting when riders ride with broken ones (which would become common).

I'm not against the police stopping people and giving them advice and a £30 FPN which doesn't need to be paid if you turn up with working bike lights. It seems a good idea.



Point here is, if you have all these exceptions it makes it a very difficult law to enforce. Allowing shops not to fit lights if customers have lights would become very difficult....and people would no doubt borrow a set of a mate to save a couple of quid. For people buying an ASDA bike a, what they cost? £50-100? Another fiver or tenner on lights does add up.

Ah, is that common ground I sense, or shifting posts The racing exceptions would make sense, the bike light exceptions would be harder to enforce, it is that which would profit more from the law.

+1.

This is exactly what would happen here. The police wouldn't care, bikes would be fitted with broken lights and they'd be no major benefit.

Not necessarily, although as the kind poster mentioned it would matter in an accident.

Seriously, I would love that every cyclist who goes out during dusk, night, through bad weather and so on to use lights. It would be fantastic!

I've seen the aftermath of a cyclist, without lights being hit by a car (probably at around 60mph) and it is horrible. Body, lifeless in road....10 meters further up, a car, bicycle wedged in the grill.

As a country we already have existing laws on bike lights which are easily to enforce if there is a want or need.

I can see why you'd think that compulsory bike lighting would be good and I thought about it in the past, but believe it has too many flaws. Anyway, thankfully on this one our Government is too lazy to care so all you who want it, won't get it

Excellent a happy note, well if the government is too lazy then they would love to whack out an idea approximating our suggestions. The onus is on the cyclist, and the cycle-store. It's a potential money-making scheme too, for the sceptics amongst us

It's been an interesting debate Thomas, and I'm glad that we're more or less thinking somewhere along the same lines, if not just on the tabloid issue that something needs to be done. I guess, our sparring shall be taken further if somebody posts an e-petition or something , or maybe some ambitious politician might make an issue of it following the huge success that shall hopefully follow immediately after the launch of the London Cycle Scheme.

 

[thomas]

Exactly, I think I covered that one earlier, perhaps they are preoccupied by other matters where you are. Over here, the police will pull you over for having dodgy lights. Then again, the standard is not ubiquitous.

They do, I saw a police cop action type show and some guy had I think 1 working brake light (no rear side lights) and maybe half a front head light or something....it was seriously bad! Police pulled him over and just gave him advice to fix it. He could of been on his way, scot free. Yet, he starts arguing that he's too busy to fix his car. Quite surprisingly , this didn't go down well with the Police who pulled him over so they gave him 3 points and a £60 fine.....and he still had to get the car fixed

Though, back to the debate. There aren't really enough Police cars out on the road to stop all these cars with dodgy headlights and things...and part of the reason for it is that it can suggest the car is being used uninsured, by criminals, etc which is a bigger issue. Therefore I don't think the Police would be as interested in a cyclist with broken, mandatory lights.

Excellent a happy note, well if the government is too lazy then they would love to whack out an idea approximating our suggestions. The onus is on the cyclist, and the cycle-store. It's a potential money-making scheme too, for the sceptics amongst us

It's been an interesting debate Thomas, and I'm glad that we're more or less thinking somewhere along the same lines....

I don't really think it would make that much money. I think I could buy a set of battery lights for £3 at poundland. Possibly £2 if it is a set, half that being batteries. Now shops would be able to get a discount on that so it doesn't really make any money. The VAT on that would be peanuts...especially when most shops would just subsides it if they could get a good enough deal on the lights (get them to cost about the same as the compulsory bell).

I think ultimately we can agree that it'd be great to see more cyclists with lights. But you're wrong on the best way of doing that

 

[redfalo]

2% of cycling casualties are caused by this. The vast bulk of adult cyclist deaths are caused by motorists. Are these professionals of which you speak arguing that this is not the case?

No offences but this figure looks incredibly low to me. Where does it come from? Additionally, If I´m not quite sure what it really says. Are fatalaties really the best "currency" to look at? When I hit another biker without lights neither of us hopefully dies - but it´s a nasty experience, anyway. Furthermore one has to take into account that the huge majority of bikers rides in the summertime and in the daytime, so it´s no real wonder the the relative proportion of deaths is rather low. In Germany, for example, a few years ago the statistics office attributed a decline in the deaths of cyclists to a particularily rainy summer where less people biked.

 

[Cab]

No offences but this figure looks incredibly low to me. Where does it come from?

TRL report for Deparment of Transport, which has been quoted and cited numerous times on this board. Same report that said that 60-75% of cyclist casualties are in accidents where blame can be entirely apportioned to motorists.

Its pretty solid.

 

[jonesy]

No offences but this figure looks incredibly low to me. Where does it come from? Additionally, If I´m not quite sure what it really says. Are fatalaties really the best "currency" to look at? When I hit another biker without lights neither of us hopefully dies - but it´s a nasty experience, anyway. Furthermore one has to take into account that the huge majority of bikers rides in the summertime and in the daytime, so it´s no real wonder the the relative proportion of deaths is rather low. In Germany, for example, a few years ago the statistics office attributed a decline in the deaths of cyclists to a particularily rainy summer where less people biked.

Er, you can't have it both ways!

 

[redfalo]

Er, you can't have it both ways!

Well, what I wanted to express is that I don´t think this statistics is really revealing much, even if it is quotes correctly. BTW just tonight I almost crashed into an unlighted biker.

 

[thomas]

Well, what I wanted to express is that I don´t think this statistics is really revealing much, even if it is quotes correctly. BTW just tonight I almost crashed into an unlighted biker.

Of course the statistics reveal something. More so than some antidote from your ride home.

 

[Ian H]

Much as I dislike cyclists who can't be bothered to fit lights, I do notice that under street lighting an unlit cyclist is pretty much as visible as a lit one. Quite as visible as, say, pedestrians on zebra crossings.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Much as I dislike cyclists who can't be bothered to fit lights, I do notice that under street lighting an unlit cyclist is pretty much as visible as a lit one. Quite as visible as, say, pedestrians on zebra crossings.

The problem with that point of view - which is true enough as far as it goes - is that drivers have other visual clues as to the possibility of a pedestrian at a zebra crossing: the black and white paint, the Belisha beacons, the zig zag road markings. None of these apply in the case of an unlit cyclist.

Now, I agree that an unlit cyclist may well be visible under streetlights, but only if the driver happens to be looking in that direction. Anyone who drives regularly will know that a driver is often looking in the mirrors, keeping an eye on that motorcyclist coming up to the junction 30 yards up the road on the left, watching that group of schoolchildren on the pavement to see if any of them are going to try and cross the road ... in the real world, an unlit cyclist stands little chance of being seen until the last minute. A cyclist with good lights will stand out and can be seen even in a driver's peripheral vision, which is as it should be.

In short, being passively visible is not really good enough, not when you're competing with the multitude of other things which clamour for a driver's attention in a busy city street. You need to shout to make yourself heard, if I may be allowed to mix my metaphors a bit.

 

[chap]

Rhythm Thief, you raise some good points. This would in fact show why blinking lights are in fact very useful to have from the perspective of being seen, since they demand ones attention.

To extend your first point about Zebra crossing, there is the fact that there are several cues to direct the drivers attention they will long see the flashing 'lollipop lights' before the crossing, or in some cases the actual pedestrians. Then there is the association with particular places, given the 'structured' layout where people get to know where to anticipate these walking 'obstacles'. With a bike, to the driver you are i their territory, and as such in many cases they will not expect to see you there. Alas, the critical mass has not been reached where steady concentrated flows of cyclists commute (unlike Copenhagen) so there are no associations with cyclists, other than the odd bike lane to park in - if you can't find a suitable spot with less broken glass.

Being well lit up would increase visibility, and if it is a common enough occurrence, may highlight to many road-users that the car is not the only way.