Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously? Don't bike after dark?

Drive more carefully.

I am mostly a biker and a walker, and as a result I am an extremely cautious driver.

It’s next to impossible to see a biker at night.

Don’t be an idiot.

A lot of people do it seeing normal lights/reflectors. If you have a hard time seeing lights and reflectors then please get your eyes checked to see if you have a condition. It's not normal.

I'm not taking about people who have no lights or reflectors.

WABA recommends using as much reflective material as possible when cycling at night in order to increase visibility beyond what is mandated by law, including reflective vests, wheel reflectors, tires with reflective strips, reflective ankle band, backpacks, stickers and decals. Not sure why you don’t want to take professional safety advice.

Do you need me to find you a link about driving after dark if you're visually impaired? I'm quite sure it's not recommended and may even be prohibited. Not sure why you don't want to take professional safety advice.

I am an optometrist. You need to stop. Most people with good vision cannot see a dark figure against a dark background at night, which is the scenario being described over and over again in this thread.

Then they shouldn't be driving after dark. Driving is inherently dangerous, if most people can't do it safely after dark then is it something that people should be doing after dark?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously? Don't bike after dark?

Drive more carefully.

We'll put that on your gravestone. That will show 'em.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously? Don't bike after dark?

Drive more carefully.

I am mostly a biker and a walker, and as a result I am an extremely cautious driver.

It’s next to impossible to see a biker at night.

Don’t be an idiot.

A lot of people do it seeing normal lights/reflectors. If you have a hard time seeing lights and reflectors then please get your eyes checked to see if you have a condition. It's not normal.

I'm not taking about people who have no lights or reflectors.

WABA recommends using as much reflective material as possible when cycling at night in order to increase visibility beyond what is mandated by law, including reflective vests, wheel reflectors, tires with reflective strips, reflective ankle band, backpacks, stickers and decals. Not sure why you don’t want to take professional safety advice.

Do you need me to find you a link about driving after dark if you're visually impaired? I'm quite sure it's not recommended and may even be prohibited. Not sure why you don't want to take professional safety advice.

I am an optometrist. You need to stop. Most people with good vision cannot see a dark figure against a dark background at night, which is the scenario being described over and over again in this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously? Don't bike after dark?

Drive more carefully.

I am mostly a biker and a walker, and as a result I am an extremely cautious driver.

It’s next to impossible to see a biker at night.

Don’t be an idiot.

A lot of people do it seeing normal lights/reflectors. If you have a hard time seeing lights and reflectors then please get your eyes checked to see if you have a condition. It's not normal.

I'm not taking about people who have no lights or reflectors.

WABA recommends using as much reflective material as possible when cycling at night in order to increase visibility beyond what is mandated by law, including reflective vests, wheel reflectors, tires with reflective strips, reflective ankle band, backpacks, stickers and decals. Not sure why you don’t want to take professional safety advice.

Do you need me to find you a link about driving after dark if you're visually impaired? I'm quite sure it's not recommended and may even be prohibited. Not sure why you don't want to take professional safety advice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously? Don't bike after dark?

Drive more carefully.

We'll put that on your gravestone. That will show 'em.

You missed the point here, obviously. Thousands of us drivers must alter our lives for the benefit of a few bikers.

Anonymous wrote: Thousands of us drivers must alter our lives for the benefit of a few bikers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously? Don't bike after dark?

Drive more carefully.

We'll put that on your gravestone. That will show 'em.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously? Don't bike after dark?

Drive more carefully.

The most careful driver in the world will hit an object in the road that is not visible. Reflective clothing was invented for a reason.

Bikers don't want to be required to do anything at all. They want to do something that is very dangerous but it's everyone else's job to make sure they don't get killed doing it.

As drivers, it is our job to make sure we don't kill anyone while we drive, no matter what they're doing. The reason bikes aren't required to be registered and checked for safety equipment, meanwhile, is the same as the reason that pedestrians aren't required to wear lights: because of bikes, cars, and people walking, only one weighs thousands of pounds.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out how to make yourself more visible in the dark. It might actually save your life (hoping you're not an organ donor).
Yeah, this makes zero sense. The reason bikes aren't regulated in any way whatsoever -- the reason why you're free to balance a two year old on your head while riding your bike sans helmet down the middle of Connecticut Avenue during rush hour in the dark -- is because there is no organized group pushing for cyclists to be regulated. It would make no sense to treat cyclists like pedestrians because, unlike cyclists, pedestrians are on the sidewalk.

And it’s time for that organized group to lobby for the creation and enforcement of bicycle safety equipment to appear. If cyclists won’t act in their own interest of safety, then AAA or another group representing drivers needs to start pushing on their behalf.

If bike registration/tags and annual safety inspections save the life of even ONE cyclist, it’s worth all the hassle and associated costs to them.

Wow, cool idea! Even more, we can lobby for speed governors on cars. I know it's not fun, but if it saves the life of even ONE driver it will be worth it. Once we do that, if we want to save even more lives we can lobby to ban personal cars altogether. You're a genius!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey bike haters, get your story straight. The lycra-clad cyclists are well lit and reflective via pricey cycling gear that has it integrated into their clothes, shoes, helmet, etc.

The people completely unlit are poor and biking because that's how they can afford to get around. How about we use our copious taxes to fund a handful of people out this time of year giving out free lights and reflective stuff...

A rechargeable bike light costs like what, $8 from Amazon? Same for a reflective vest.

The people riding around without safety equipment are doing so by choice, not because they’re poor. Your patronizing low income people to excuse cyclists is elitist and gross.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously? Don't bike after dark?

Drive more carefully.

The most careful driver in the world will hit an object in the road that is not visible. Reflective clothing was invented for a reason.

Bikers don't want to be required to do anything at all. They want to do something that is very dangerous but it's everyone else's job to make sure they don't get killed doing it.

As drivers, it is our job to make sure we don't kill anyone while we drive, no matter what they're doing. The reason bikes aren't required to be registered and checked for safety equipment, meanwhile, is the same as the reason that pedestrians aren't required to wear lights: because of bikes, cars, and people walking, only one weighs thousands of pounds.

Yeah, this makes zero sense. The reason bikes aren't regulated in any way whatsoever -- the reason why you're free to balance a two year old on your head while riding your bike sans helmet down the middle of Connecticut Avenue during rush hour in the dark -- is because there is no organized group pushing for cyclists to be regulated. It would make no sense to treat cyclists like pedestrians because, unlike cyclists, pedestrians are on the sidewalk.

And it’s time for that organized group to lobby for the creation and enforcement of bicycle safety equipment to appear. If cyclists won’t act in their own interest of safety, then AAA or another group representing drivers needs to start pushing on their behalf.

If bike registration/tags and annual safety inspections save the life of even ONE cyclist, it’s worth all the hassle and associated costs to them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously? Don't bike after dark?

Drive more carefully.

The most careful driver in the world will hit an object in the road that is not visible. Reflective clothing was invented for a reason.

Bikers don't want to be required to do anything at all. They want to do something that is very dangerous but it's everyone else's job to make sure they don't get killed doing it.

As drivers, it is our job to make sure we don't kill anyone while we drive, no matter what they're doing. The reason bikes aren't required to be registered and checked for safety equipment, meanwhile, is the same as the reason that pedestrians aren't required to wear lights: because of bikes, cars, and people walking, only one weighs thousands of pounds.

Yeah, this makes zero sense. The reason bikes aren't regulated in any way whatsoever -- the reason why you're free to balance a two year old on your head while riding your bike sans helmet down the middle of Connecticut Avenue during rush hour in the dark -- is because there is no organized group pushing for cyclists to be regulated. It would make no sense to treat cyclists like pedestrians because, unlike cyclists, pedestrians are on the sidewalk.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously? Don't bike after dark?

Drive more carefully.

The most careful driver in the world will hit an object in the road that is not visible. Reflective clothing was invented for a reason.

Bikers don't want to be required to do anything at all. They want to do something that is very dangerous but it's everyone else's job to make sure they don't get killed doing it.

Exactly. They want license to behave totally recklessly with the onus of their safety on everyone else. That mentality is what gives us things like the ridiculous Idaho stop law.

Actually, the Idaho stop law says that bikes can proceed through stop signs if, but only if, there are no other vehicles at the intersection. I don't see how that's particularly unsafe.

Anonymous wrote:Hey bike haters, get your story straight. The lycra-clad cyclists are well lit and reflective via pricey cycling gear that has it integrated into their clothes, shoes, helmet, etc.

The people completely unlit are poor and biking because that's how they can afford to get around. How about we use our copious taxes to fund a handful of people out this time of year giving out free lights and reflective stuff...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should let the police know that the individual circumstances in any given accident don't matter because it's always the driver's fault so there's no need for them to investigate what happened.

The driver is legally responsible for the safe operation of his or her car. Just because police don't enforce it doesn't mean it's any less true.