|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"Be Bright - Wear White" vs' "Fight Back - Wear Black"
In a previous post (What does it all mean?), JLB wrote:
A couple of decades ago in Bristol (perhaps elsewhere also) cyclists were officially advised "Be Bright - Wear White". More than a few of us responded "Fight Back - Wear Black". This inoculated us against any dangerous delusion that we were visible and therefore somehow safe from motor vehicles. I am intrigued by this as I cycle a lot in the dark and despite being lit up "like the outside of a council house at christmas", I have a near-miss incident on practically every ride. Although I'm under no delusions that I'm safe from motor vehicles, do people believe that the number of near misses would reduce and my overall safety increase if I switch on the stealth instead of my lights? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rec.Bicycles Frequently Asked Questions Posting Part 1/5 | Mike Iglesias | General | 4 | October 29th 04 07:11 AM |
Trip Report - Philadelphia - Ste. Anne de Beaupre, QUE and back | Ron Wallenfang | Rides | 9 | June 27th 04 05:35 AM |
RoadBikeRider newsletter on tire wear | Matt O'Toole | Techniques | 2 | June 11th 04 12:08 AM |
ARBR has gone downhill | Al Kubeluis | Recumbent Biking | 143 | December 20th 03 11:29 PM |