Daytime running lights

[mjr]

That's like saying I'm selfish for using studded tyres and disc brakes on an icy road because the cyclist behind is using slicks and rod brakes.

Please explain how those could lead to another cyclist being injured through no fault of their own.

 

[Vantage]

If I out brake someone and they crash into me?

 

[hatler]

Posts 13, 15 and my first in relation to that point, 23. Numerous times. You're welcome.

Post 13 does nothing of the sort.

Twice ≠ 'numerous times'.

I'd far rather discuss the core issue, not the meta-issue.

 

[classic33]

Yes, if they work, they're selfish because you are distracting people from other perfectly legal cyclists. If they don't work, they're selfish because you are creating a false perception that unlit cyclists are behaving negligently, which will eventually enable a new type of SMIDSYBYHNLO (...because you have no lights on).

As someone said

I think the "drivers shouldn't be expected to see ordinary people" idea implied by all the lights and unproven clothes suggestions is far more unhelpful - and it seems not true because unlit ninja cyclists always seem to get seen enough to generate comments on social media!

 

[DaveReading]

Fitted but so far you can switch most of them off.

Though not, it would seem, on my Toyota.

 

[swansonj]

There are a number of issues in society where the optimum course for any one individual is counter to the best interests of society as a whole. Taking antibiotics is one; having your children vaccinated is another; and what we are discussing here, the arms race in lighting on roads, is another. If you view it purely from the perspective of your own best interest (we could say "selfishly", but that could be considered emotive), you'll do one thing - take antibiotics at the drop of a hat, not let your children be vaccinated, and buy, and use more often, bigger and better lights. If you view it from the perspective of society as whole, you'll think twice.

Ever since Thatcher and Reagan, we've been taught to behave selfishly, and asked to believe that this will automatically benefit society as well - but it ain't true.

 

[Vantage]

Hmm, OK.
No lights = drivers hits me because s/he failed to notice me.
Crash means police and ambulance crew to start with.
Ambulance to hospital where the A&E staff need to assess me. Then a bed needs to be found. Nursing staff to look after me. Cooking staff to feed me. Doctors to treat me. Physiotherapist to get me moving again and other healthcare workers to ensure I recover properly.
Police officers start a case against the driver. Prosecution service needs to make a case. Drivers solicitor needs to defend him/her. Court makes a ruling. Driver gets a fine and/or public service/prison time. Drivers family pays a price also.

I use lights = driver sees me and avoids causing a crash and none of the above takes place. Society as a whole gets saved a truckload of work, time and money.

I'll keep my lights on thanks.

 

[swansonj]

Hmm, OK.
No lights = drivers hits me because s/he failed to notice me.
Crash means police and ambulance crew to start with.
Ambulance to hospital where the A&E staff need to assess me. Then a bed needs to be found. Nursing staff to look after me. Cooking staff to feed me. Doctors to treat me. Physiotherapist to get me moving again and other healthcare workers to ensure I recover properly.
Police officers start a case against the driver. Prosecution service needs to make a case. Drivers solicitor needs to defend him/her. Court makes a ruling. Driver gets a fine and/or public service/prison time. Drivers family pays a price also.

I use lights = driver sees me and avoids causing a crash and none of the above takes place. Society as a whole gets saved a truckload of work, time and money.

I'll keep my lights on thanks.

Your analysis is largely right at a functional level and on the timescale you are analysing, that is, one specific RTI occurring here and now, given the current context, attitudes, and norms. What some of us seek is to move beyond just considering individual RTIs, and start considering how we change those cultures, attitudes, and norms.

And, as I said, your choice to keep your lights on in daytime is perfectly justifiable as a choice for you as an individual.

 

[DCBassman]

I use lights at all times. I largely don't ride on roads at all. But I often go through tunnels, and other tunnel users, on foot and two wheels, mainly do not, which is there prerogative, but stupid all the same.
My lights are not at all blinding, but are on flash mode always. I tend to use a separate, higher power front in the tunnels to actually give ME a clue where I am, but otherwise that is off.
DRLs on motor vehicles are far too bright, and dazzle me even in daylight. HIDs and LED headlights are also part of a brightness arms race that was out of control even before LED headlights were a thing. DRLs should be half the power they are, and I agree with a comment above that they often mask indicators.

 

[newfhouse]

I use lights = driver sees me

If only life was this simple...

 

[Drago]

If its day time and visibility is good or better - do not use them. There is some evidence that inappropriate use of lighting during the day can actually make you more prone to being had off. I shan't go into the mechanisms behind this as I've done so many times before.

If its day time and visibility is murky (ie, not merely a dull day) , or even night time, then do indeed light up.

It ain't difficult, I don't understand why people insist on making it so.

Unless I'm mistaken, new cars are required by law to have DRL's fitted.

Yes, this is so, despite there being no evidence whatsoever that they contribute to lower collision rates anywhere other than a sub-actic climate of the type found in the very furthest reaches of northern europe. Just because something is the law it doesn't automatically follow there is any observable benefit to it.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Mod Note:
@Thegreatthor (OP) did you mean bike lights or car lights?
I think the advocacy board is fine for both discussions, but if the OP wants I can move this thread to motoring.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I remain unconvinced that it's a big deal either way. I will continue to leave my rear lights on for my all day rides through the gloomy sunken lanes of Kent. Not because I think it's going to save my life or anything dramatic like that but because at this time of year the days are so short it's two extra faffing stops I can avoid.

I've seen the "selfishness" argument before and it doesn't convince me.

 

[mjr]

If I out brake someone and they crash into me?

Then it would be their fault for not leaving enough stopping distance, wouldn't it?

 

[mjr]

[...] but because at this time of year the days are so short it's two extra faffing stops I can avoid.

No light switch on the handlebars? Stopping to put lights on and off is so 1970s.

I've seen the "selfishness" argument before and it doesn't convince me.

Which step do you disagree with?