View Single Post
  #202  
Old April 10th 21, 02:04 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Roger Merriman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 385
Default Safety inflation

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/8/2021 12:16 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, April 8, 2021 at 8:24:12 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/8/2021 10:21 AM, sms wrote:

Ohio is obviously a very different place than Oregon or California.

Out on the left coast no one is scared of riding a bicycle if they lack
a fluorescent jersey.
But I'm betting the "safety" people are telling them they should be
wearing fluorescent clothing. And if things progress as they did with
helmets, states will begin considering, then passing Mandatory
Fluorescent Laws. Please note, that happened in France. Cyclists are
legally required to wear safety vests on rural roads at least under
certain conditions.
As to DRLs, it is true that the vast majority of transportational
cyclists do have DRLs on their bicycles, by default. It's not because
some mystery group told them to go out and buy one, the DRL came with
whatever bicycle light that they bought, whether at a bicycle shop or
online.
AFAIK, most of that paragraph is still false. But we know one of your
objectives is to make it true. Because one can never be too safe, right?


Were you beaten by a school crossing guard or something? What is the
genesis of this recent anti-safety jihad?


The genesis of my complaints is rationality. As you've just
demonstrated, if someone questions the value of any purported "safety"
measure, they are likely to be taunted as "anti-safety."

I ride most every day, and nobody bugs me about not having a DRL or
wearing a fluorescent jersey or really anything. I haven't seen a
bicycle safety message in years, although I'm not looking and don't go
to shops. Who are these "safety" people? Is this about helmets? Did
somebody criticize you for not wearing a helmet?

When I go skiing, the liftys are neurotic about masks -- and I was mask
shamed while out on a walk early in the pandemic, but that's about it
for safety scolding. My neighbor panics and scolds me when I climb my
22' extension ladder because I'm an old dude and in the demographic for falls.


And your response? By arguing with me, you seem to be defending your
local nannies.

Ah, I have fallen prey to the walking safety thing, but not because of
warnings or messages from regulators. My wife and I got reflective
vests for walking at night because the Ninja walkers scare the snot out
of us when we're driving at night -- and we have a ton of walkers in our
neighborhood. Their are nights when it feels like a street fair with
everyone standing in the street yaking or walking their dogs. I really
like the lighted dog vests. I don't like the 30 foot reel

leashes. No French Nazi collaborators making us wear vests.

I'll submit that the proper response is for you to slow way, way down
when driving at night. There should be no expectation that pedestrians,
especially in a residential neighborhood, should kowtow to the
convenience of motorists. If pedestrians are likely to be around, cars
should be below 20 mph, and probably much below.

About DRLs, I'd say less than half the commuters pre-pandemic were using
DRLs in real daylight. There were lots of them in drear or dusk,
including me. I see club riders and even racers using them when I'm
weekend riding -- again, probably 50% or less. I'll try to keep an
accurate count next time. I don't think they're helpful in full
sunlight, although a rear flasher is helpful in dappled
sun-through-trees, at least according to the one panicked motorist who
said he couldn't see me under the trees on Larch Mountain. He was a
nice guy, and he was right because I was losing other cyclists in the hard shadows.


I'm convinced DRLs are a scam. As I've said before, there are a very few
times I've seen a bicyclist's DRL at a greater distance than I would
have seen the cyclist without the DRL. But there's _never_ been an
instance when that difference mattered. A cyclist riding properly on an
ordinary road is almost always visible enough, and the rare exception
(for example, the setting sun at equinox aligned with a west-facing
road) no DRL is bright enough to be effective.


I still don't take a flasher up there, however -- and one of the typical
dying Tinkerbell flashers wouldn't work in any event, and a lot of DRLs
do fall into that category. You ride up on someone and look down at the
fender or seat post and see this light once you get there. I do wonder
why people bother with those.

About your questions: First, nobody has yet bugged me in person about
not having a DRL, although both Scharf and Joerg have gone on about them
in this discussion group, portraying them as either absolutely necessary
or used by "all the riders with brains." But there have been ads pushing
DRLs for all riders, and I won't be surprised to see efforts to make
them mandatory, perhaps first on invitational rides. If those rules
catch on, there will be efforts to mandate them for other riding.


I’ve not seen any attempt bar some club ask that you have lights of some
degree.

Personally I like them i suspect that in terms of risk it’s within
statistical noise. In my case the front light is a fairly powerful light,
with a remote so I can toggle High/low. Which gets folks attention very
sharply! Though that maybe happens once a year or so, ie something so silly
that it’s worth high beaming them same as in the car, it’s rare that I’d
need to use the horn.

What it seems to do, is stop folks just pulling out/doing U turns as the
light at glance says motorbike than bike, i suspect. As folks can’t predict
speed or much generally, do I think it stops accidents? No.

Does it make my commute less tedious yes I think so, it’s also since I need
the light at all times of the year and running on low is a week or more
before it starts nagging for a charge in summer maybe 3/4 days in winter.

In short i will have the light with me so I turn it on.

Snips

Roger Merriman

Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home