Please don't ride your bike on busy streets after dark

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reflective gear is super important, but it gets dark at 5 PM now and some of us actually use bikes for transportation. "Stop doing your daily commute/errands" is not a reasonable ask any more than telling you not to drive after dark if you don't feel confident that you can see cyclists. We should wear brighter gear and more lights, and you should drive carefully and expect to share the road.

You can blame other people all you want (and we know cyclists love to blame everyone else for everything). But you'll be the person who's dead if a driver doesn't see you.

This. If you plan to be on the road in traffic at night time, it is only logical to strive to be as visible as a car to reduce risk to yourself.

Yeah, I SAID use lots of reflective gear at night! Do you think it's reasonable to say cycling past 5 PM is out of bounds?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes bicyclists are moving so slowly it's easy to confuse a light on the front of their bike with something else because it doesn't appear to be moving.

This has happened to me when a cyclist is approaching me. It can look like the light on their bike is the left light of a car parked on the other side of the street.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes bicyclists are moving so slowly it's easy to confuse a light on the front of their bike with something else because it doesn't appear to be moving.

This has happened to me when a cyclist is approaching me. It can look like the light on their bike is the left light of a car parked on the other side of the street.

Ok but do you routinely hit that car that's parked on the other side of the street? Why would you hit the bike?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's really hard for drivers to see you, even if you have a headlight on your bike and a little reflector on your helmet. That just isn't enough. You need something much brighter like a reflective vest. I hate driving this time of year when the sun goes down so early because bicyclists just seem to pop out of nowhere. It is an accident waiting to happen.

Yes, cyclists should make themselves as visible as they can. But the onus is still on the driver to drive defensively and not hit people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes bicyclists are moving so slowly it's easy to confuse a light on the front of their bike with something else because it doesn't appear to be moving.

And you still have the responsibility to not hit them. They have the legal right to use the road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reflective gear is super important, but it gets dark at 5 PM now and some of us actually use bikes for transportation. "Stop doing your daily commute/errands" is not a reasonable ask any more than telling you not to drive after dark if you don't feel confident that you can see cyclists. We should wear brighter gear and more lights, and you should drive carefully and expect to share the road.

You can blame other people all you want (and we know cyclists love to blame everyone else for everything). But you'll be the person who's dead if a driver doesn't see you.

And you are the person with the $50 ticket and lifelong guilt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I suspect many bikers never drive, especially at night during rush hour, so they have no clue how hard it can be to see them.

I'd invite them though to try it themselves. Go rent a car and drive around at 6pm and see (or not see) for themselves.

And similarly, the drivers should try biking sometime, so they can see what the other a$$hole drivers are like on the road.

[Anonymous]

OP, put your phone out of hand's reach when driving, even when waiting at lights, don't idle/park in unprotected bike lanes, and don't oppose construction of new protected bike lanes.

Also, if you have sons, teach them not to rape, rather than posting a thread on DCUM about daughters dressing provocatively. Same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's really hard for drivers to see you, even if you have a headlight on your bike and a little reflector on your helmet. That just isn't enough. You need something much brighter like a reflective vest. I hate driving this time of year when the sun goes down so early because bicyclists just seem to pop out of nowhere. It is an accident waiting to happen.

Yes, cyclists should make themselves as visible as they can. But the onus is still on the driver to drive defensively and not hit people.

I think the point, which you're missing, is that the things cyclists typically do to make themselves visible at night at not nearly enough. That little light on your bike isn't very bright and those reflectors are next to useless.

[Anonymous]

State and federal standards address equipment on cars such as lights. There are DOT standards for minimum visibility for headlights, taillights, turn signals, etc.

The CPSC-required reflectors for bikes sold by retailers don’t provide enough safety for bikes at night. And many riders remove those reflectors anyway. And some riders don’t install lights at all, or use them in haphazard, non-standard ways.

There needs to be a rigid, vigorously enforced law for cyclists to have a minimum illumination, in a standard configuration, that can be recognizable from a safe distance and provide an immediate visual reference to the direction of travel of the bike - just like there is with cars.

Cyclists who don’t use lights should be warned/ticketed and then heavily fined for repeat offenses, just as the driver of a car would be for driving around in a car without working lights.

Bicycles should also be registered and tagged, with annual safety inspections for bicycles to make sure they have lights and are in working order, exactly how cars are administered now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:State and federal standards address equipment on cars such as lights. There are DOT standards for minimum visibility for headlights, taillights, turn signals, etc.

The CPSC-required reflectors for bikes sold by retailers don’t provide enough safety for bikes at night. And many riders remove those reflectors anyway. And some riders don’t install lights at all, or use them in haphazard, non-standard ways.

There needs to be a rigid, vigorously enforced law for cyclists to have a minimum illumination, in a standard configuration, that can be recognizable from a safe distance and provide an immediate visual reference to the direction of travel of the bike - just like there is with cars.

Cyclists who don’t use lights should be warned/ticketed and then heavily fined for repeat offenses, just as the driver of a car would be for driving around in a car without working lights.

Bicycles should also be registered and tagged, with annual safety inspections for bicycles to make sure they have lights and are in working order, exactly how cars are administered now.

As if any cars owners are tickets for not having working lights.

And you are going to have a 5 year old get their bike registered?

Come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:State and federal standards address equipment on cars such as lights. There are DOT standards for minimum visibility for headlights, taillights, turn signals, etc.

The CPSC-required reflectors for bikes sold by retailers don’t provide enough safety for bikes at night. And many riders remove those reflectors anyway. And some riders don’t install lights at all, or use them in haphazard, non-standard ways.

There needs to be a rigid, vigorously enforced law for cyclists to have a minimum illumination, in a standard configuration, that can be recognizable from a safe distance and provide an immediate visual reference to the direction of travel of the bike - just like there is with cars.

Cyclists who don’t use lights should be warned/ticketed and then heavily fined for repeat offenses, just as the driver of a car would be for driving around in a car without working lights.

Bicycles should also be registered and tagged, with annual safety inspections for bicycles to make sure they have lights and are in working order, exactly how cars are administered now.

Yeah, let's have our police issue tickets for this kind of bs.

I'd rather have them go after the motorcyles who speed and the cars that have no mufflers/that backfire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:State and federal standards address equipment on cars such as lights. There are DOT standards for minimum visibility for headlights, taillights, turn signals, etc.

The CPSC-required reflectors for bikes sold by retailers don’t provide enough safety for bikes at night. And many riders remove those reflectors anyway. And some riders don’t install lights at all, or use them in haphazard, non-standard ways.

There needs to be a rigid, vigorously enforced law for cyclists to have a minimum illumination, in a standard configuration, that can be recognizable from a safe distance and provide an immediate visual reference to the direction of travel of the bike - just like there is with cars.

Cyclists who don’t use lights should be warned/ticketed and then heavily fined for repeat offenses, just as the driver of a car would be for driving around in a car without working lights.

Bicycles should also be registered and tagged, with annual safety inspections for bicycles to make sure they have lights and are in working order, exactly how cars are administered now.

I get what you're saying, but the reason for the heavy fines and illegality of driving without tons of headlights on is because the car is this giant powerful machine that can kill people if it's not as visible as possible. The laws aren't to protect the car and driver, they are to protect the rest of the people on the road. There isn't really the same risk with a bicycle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:State and federal standards address equipment on cars such as lights. There are DOT standards for minimum visibility for headlights, taillights, turn signals, etc.

The CPSC-required reflectors for bikes sold by retailers don’t provide enough safety for bikes at night. And many riders remove those reflectors anyway. And some riders don’t install lights at all, or use them in haphazard, non-standard ways.

There needs to be a rigid, vigorously enforced law for cyclists to have a minimum illumination, in a standard configuration, that can be recognizable from a safe distance and provide an immediate visual reference to the direction of travel of the bike - just like there is with cars.

Cyclists who don’t use lights should be warned/ticketed and then heavily fined for repeat offenses, just as the driver of a car would be for driving around in a car without working lights.

Bicycles should also be registered and tagged, with annual safety inspections for bicycles to make sure they have lights and are in working order, exactly how cars are administered now.

You'd think this would already be the law. There are basically no rules in D.C. on bicyclists though. They don't even have to wear helmets, which seems pretty incredible. Cyclists fight any sort of government regulations. They'd rather just blame drivers for everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:State and federal standards address equipment on cars such as lights. There are DOT standards for minimum visibility for headlights, taillights, turn signals, etc.

The CPSC-required reflectors for bikes sold by retailers don’t provide enough safety for bikes at night. And many riders remove those reflectors anyway. And some riders don’t install lights at all, or use them in haphazard, non-standard ways.

There needs to be a rigid, vigorously enforced law for cyclists to have a minimum illumination, in a standard configuration, that can be recognizable from a safe distance and provide an immediate visual reference to the direction of travel of the bike - just like there is with cars.

Cyclists who don’t use lights should be warned/ticketed and then heavily fined for repeat offenses, just as the driver of a car would be for driving around in a car without working lights.

Bicycles should also be registered and tagged, with annual safety inspections for bicycles to make sure they have lights and are in working order, exactly how cars are administered now.

I get what you're saying, but the reason for the heavy fines and illegality of driving without tons of headlights on is because the car is this giant powerful machine that can kill people if it's not as visible as possible. The laws aren't to protect the car and driver, they are to protect the rest of the people on the road. There isn't really the same risk with a bicycle.

If it saves the life of even one cyclist, it’s worth it.