Cyclists without lights - something needs to be done

[anonymous-user]

Ares said:

cb1965 said:

Ares said:

Wasn't your whinge last autumn about cyclists lights being too bright?

No, it wasn’t! Have never ever said such thing, but of course you know that and you just stick it in a post so one of your other chums can pick up on it later and it becomes yet more ‘anti cyclist folklore’. If I’m so easy to put down why do you all seem to resort to lying.

So defensive! It must have been other members of your mob that ran a 10+ page thread on lights being too bright.

Ironic (groundless) accusation of lying too

Plus nice snipping of the rest of the post though, just to spark an argument. Again.

You are the one sparking the argument by deliberately posting baseless crap so try getting your facts right in future and then you won’t need an argument will you? FFS

[Ares]

cb1965 said:

Ares said:

cb1965 said:

Ares said:

Wasn't your whinge last autumn about cyclists lights being too bright?

No, it wasn’t! Have never ever said such thing, but of course you know that and you just stick it in a post so one of your other chums can pick up on it later and it becomes yet more ‘anti cyclist folklore’. If I’m so easy to put down why do you all seem to resort to lying.

So defensive! It must have been other members of your mob that ran a 10+ page thread on lights being too bright.

Ironic (groundless) accusation of lying too

Plus nice snipping of the rest of the post though, just to spark an argument. Again.

You are the one sparking the argument by deliberately posting baseless crap so try getting your facts right in future and then you won’t need an argument will you? FFS

I know that you appear to be unarmed in any intelligent discussion, but a sentence that starts with the word 'Wasn't' and ends with a question mark is a question.

I'm not the one posting baseless crap. Nor the one posting 'facts' that are clearly made up. "FFS".

[J4CKO]

colin79666 said:

Had a near miss with a cyclist on my commute home tonight. 50 mph unlight road with no cycle lane. Person on the bike had a feeble light on the front but no rear light, reflector or high viz. Fortunately for them I wasn’t speeding and was paying attention so was able to move over a bit in time. If their rear light had failed they should have got onto the verge and walked it at least until they reached a lit area.

Makes sense to have 2 or more rear lights as they arent the most reliable things and arent averse to conking out or even falling off.

Safest way is to be lit up like Close Encounters but ride like you havent got any lights fitted.

[Ares]

Mave said:

cb1965 said:

No, it wasn’t! Have never ever said such thing, but of course you know that and you just stick it in a post so one of your other chums can pick up on it later and it becomes yet more ‘anti cyclist folklore’. If I’m so easy to put down why do you all seem to resort to lying.

Pretty ironic that your first 2 posts in this thread start with you misrepresenting people's opinions and motivations.....

Hateful troll will troll Mave

[Ares]

J4CKO said:

colin79666 said:

Had a near miss with a cyclist on my commute home tonight. 50 mph unlight road with no cycle lane. Person on the bike had a feeble light on the front but no rear light, reflector or high viz. Fortunately for them I wasn’t speeding and was paying attention so was able to move over a bit in time. If their rear light had failed they should have got onto the verge and walked it at least until they reached a lit area.

Makes sense to have 2 or more rear lights as they arent the most reliable things and arent averse to conking out or even falling off.

Safest way is to be lit up like Close Encounters but ride like you havent got any lights fitted.

Don't forget that you can't tell if your rear light fails, or turns itself off. It's not like a car where you get a dashboard light warming you. If someone has a front but no rear, it's likely it has turned itself off, or failed. The polite thing to do is let them know....in the same way you would alert a driver that has forgotten to put their lights on and driving round on DRLs.

[WinstonWolf]

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

[DoubleD]

echazfraz said:

They are not cyclists - they're people who need to use a bike to get to work.

Is someone who needs to use a car to get to work a "driver"?

[Ares]

DoubleD said:

echazfraz said:

They are not cyclists - they're people who need to use a bike to get to work.

Is someone who needs to use a car to get to work a "driver"?

Its the same difference as comparing the person that only has a £500 MOT dodging car, and only uses it to drive to the station and back with the person that has a £80k focused sports car that they only use for doing sunny 'blats' across the best driving roads around, and track days.

Are they all the same driving standards & road awareness?

[mygoldfishbowl]

Ares said:

Don't forget that you can't tell if your rear light fails, or turns itself off. It's not like a car where you get a dashboard light warming you. If someone has a front but no rear, it's likely it has turned itself off, or failed. The polite thing to do is let them know....in the same way you would alert a driver that has forgotten to put their lights on and driving round on DRLs.

You make another very good point for cycle registrations. When the 186 quid light fails or turns itself off approaching motorists will still be able to see the registration number illumination light. Win-win situation.

[FakeConcern]

echazfraz said:

Their bikes are crap and squeaky. They're not wearing helmets or "cycling gear" They are not cyclists - they're people who need to use a bike to get to work.

You are not going to convince these people to use lights (in my opinion).

I have to agree with this as in the same way most people on PH are interested in their car and will make sure they don't only have the DRLs on at night or in fog and don't drive until the next MOT with only one head light a cyclist (as in an enthusiast) will keep the bike in tip top condition and if lights are needed they will be present.

[S100HP]

Nanook said:

Polite M135 driver said:

no, he asked 'what more can I do?' as an expression of exasperation with the poor skills of most drivers.

Well, he actually asked "What else can I do" but it doesn't change the outcome. Get a brighter light, or continue to take your chances with the (mostly decent but occasional) muppets out there.

It was a rhetorical question. If you saw the light you'd appreciate how bright it was. I've been moaned at for it being too bright before. You can't win.

[DoubleD]

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

echazfraz said:

They are not cyclists - they're people who need to use a bike to get to work.

Is someone who needs to use a car to get to work a "driver"?

Its the same difference as comparing the person that only has a £500 MOT dodging car, and only uses it to drive to the station and back with the person that has a £80k focused sports car that they only use for doing sunny 'blats' across the best driving roads around, and track days.

Are they all the same driving standards & road awareness?

If you are riding a bicycle then you are a cyclist. A bit like if you drive a car then you are the driver.

Value of car has nothing to do with the drivers skill. But someone who is more interested in driving is more likely to be concentrating while driving.

[Ares]

mygoldfishbowl said:

Ares said:

Don't forget that you can't tell if your rear light fails, or turns itself off. It's not like a car where you get a dashboard light warming you. If someone has a front but no rear, it's likely it has turned itself off, or failed. The polite thing to do is let them know....in the same way you would alert a driver that has forgotten to put their lights on and driving round on DRLs.

You make another very good point for cycle registrations. When the 186 quid light fails or turns itself off approaching motorists will still be able to see the registration number illumination light. Win-win situation.

Surely the win win is that bigoted motorists can (in their own mind) justifiably run the cyclist off the road, without spilling their Venti, Giant, Extra Cream, Full Fat, Mocha Latte or having to let go of the phone in their hands?

Stupid response, yes?

[mygoldfishbowl]

FakeConcern said:

echazfraz said:

Their bikes are crap and squeaky. They're not wearing helmets or "cycling gear" They are not cyclists - they're people who need to use a bike to get to work.

You are not going to convince these people to use lights (in my opinion).

I have to agree with this as in the same way most people on PH are interested in their car and will make sure they don't only have the DRLs on at night or in fog and don't drive until the next MOT with only one head light a cyclist (as in an enthusiast) will keep the bike in tip top condition and if lights are needed they will be present.

Yeah, sometimes I walk to the shop but I'm not a pedestrian because I only use my legs to walk on.

[Ares]

DoubleD said:

If you are riding a bicycle then you are a cyclist. A bit like if you drive a car then you are the driver.

Value of car has nothing to do with the drivers skill. But someone who is more interested in driving is more likely to be concentrating while driving.

It's nothing to do with value. It's to do with action and attitude. Both (and all) modes of transport have huge variation.

Everyone on a bike is a cyclist, in the same way that the 80yr old lady that hasn't driven for 40yrs is as much of a driver as Lewis Hamilton when she gets behind the car that last moved or passed it's MOT in the late 1980s.

[Killboy]

So I just rode from Clarkenwell to Waterloo, part of the cycle super highway and not exactly peak time at 7pm,and I can confirm this situation is getting out of control. Something needs to be done about these stats!

1 person didn't have any lights or gear! 1 had a front light and no rear, and 1 had a rear light and no front. Insane!

Crisis!

[Ares]

Killboy said:

So I just rode from Clarkenwell to Waterloo, part of the cycle super highway and not exactly peak time at 7pm,and I can confirm this situation is getting out of control. Something needs to be done about these stats!

1 person didn't have any lights or gear! 1 had a front light and no rear, and 1 had a rear light and no front. Insane!

Crisis!

Are you OK? Do you need therapy? Or a cuddle?

Thoughts and prayers with you at this tough time.

[FakeConcern]

mygoldfishbowl said:

FakeConcern said:

echazfraz said:

Their bikes are crap and squeaky. They're not wearing helmets or "cycling gear" They are not cyclists - they're people who need to use a bike to get to work.

You are not going to convince these people to use lights (in my opinion).

I have to agree with this as in the same way most people on PH are interested in their car and will make sure they don't only have the DRLs on at night or in fog and don't drive until the next MOT with only one head light a cyclist (as in an enthusiast) will keep the bike in tip top condition and if lights are needed they will be present.

Yeah, sometimes I walk to the shop but I'm not a pedestrian because I only use my legs to walk on.

It's not about the terminology, it's about the attitude as I expect you are aware. There are not that many enthusiast pedestrians.

[mygoldfishbowl]

Ares said:

mygoldfishbowl said:

Ares said:

Don't forget that you can't tell if your rear light fails, or turns itself off. It's not like a car where you get a dashboard light warming you. If someone has a front but no rear, it's likely it has turned itself off, or failed. The polite thing to do is let them know....in the same way you would alert a driver that has forgotten to put their lights on and driving round on DRLs.

You make another very good point for cycle registrations. When the 186 quid light fails or turns itself off approaching motorists will still be able to see the registration number illumination light. Win-win situation.

Surely the win win is that bigoted motorists can (in their own mind) justifiably run the cyclist off the road, without spilling their Venti, Giant, Extra Cream, Full Fat, Mocha Latte or having to let go of the phone in their hands?

Stupid response, yes?

Yes very stupid, I should have said lights instead of light as I think two should be mandatory.

[FiF]

I just drove from Hartlebury to Worcester Uni campus and back, 26 mile round trip, I only saw two people on cycles the whole journey. Neither had any lights lit nor any reflective gear. Factually that is the absolute truth. Random anecdotes are so useless aren't they?