Mini-Rant: Mandatory bike lights

[moxfyre]

Could we get a frickin' law requiring all adult-sized bikes to be sold with lights?? I know they have one in France... And how about cops start warning everyone who rides without them?

I've seen so many otherwise safe cyclists who ride with no lights at night. I did this in college because I was too cheap, then pissed off too many cars and had too many close calls and got yelled at by a cop, so I decided to get some. $30 for a good rechargeable headlight and 5-LED taillight from Performance.

It's incredibly dangerous to ride without them and it contributes to motorists' perception that bikes are dangerous and different and that they have to be alternately harassed and treated with kid gloves.

[Helmet Head]

Consider only a tiny percentage of cyclists ride in the dark, no.
We have too much that is mandatory already, thank you very much.

[skookum]

Maybe just enforce the existing laws against riding at night without a light.

[moxfyre]

Maybe just enforce the existing laws against riding at night without a light.
Ya, that'd be good. If it were done enough, it'd be enough.

[H23]

Enforcement often comes down to a matter of priorities. Some violations just aren't worth the effort when there are much much worse things going on. Here in Baltimore city, its not uncommon for a patrol car to be going from one 911 to another all night long.

Even so, I have heard of citations being handed out for riding w/o lights-- of course it is always in the context of a complaint: "don't the police have better things to do... etc". It seems they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

[moxfyre]

Enforcement often comes down to a matter of priorities. Some violations just aren't worth the effort when there are much much worse things going on. Here in Baltimore city, its not uncommon for a patrol car to be going from one 911 to another all night long.

Even so, I have heard of citations being handed out for riding w/o lights-- of course it is always in the context of a complaint: "don't the police have better things to do... etc". It seems they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Ya, I agree with you. My original post was obviously not well-reasoned (hence "rant"). I just wish society as a whole treated cycling on the road like driving a car.

[webist]

While you are passing yet more laws regarding cycling, why not go ahead and require lisence and registration, tags and insurance. Perhaps a gas tax equivalent as well.

I use a light when I ride at night and take it off when riding during the day. It's a light I chose, not one the government required.

I don't need a baby sitter. If I did, it wouldn't be the government.

[moxfyre]

While you are passing yet more laws regarding cycling, why not go ahead and require lisence and registration, tags and insurance. Perhaps a gas tax equivalent as well.

I use a light when I ride at night and take it off when riding during the day. It's a light I chose, not one the government required.

I don't need a baby sitter. If I did, it wouldn't be the government.
All right, basically my entire rant is stupid except for the part about using lights being a responsible and smart thing to do. I definitely don't want more government regulation, that's for sure.

[Da Tinker]

How about getting rid of the CPSC-mandated front reflector? There is serious debate as to if this is even their turf, plus so many unenlightened riders feel the white reflector is enough keep them safe at night, otherwise, why is it there?

[powers2b]

It's more important for the rider to be seen than the bike.
If I am wearing the lights and reflective tape then I can switch bikes without switching hardware.
I had a cop hassle me (in broad daylight) for not having a light on my bike.
I have a 3-LED head light and red blinkie on my helmet.
The cop said they had to be on the bike.

When cops follow the letter of the law there is never anyone around to check their spelling.

Enjoy

[moxfyre]

It's more important for the rider to be seen than the bike.
If I am wearing the lights and reflective tape then I can switch bikes without switching hardware.
Agreed! However is most convenient is fine, the important thing is to be seen. I like having a blinkie attached to each of my bikes, that way I'm sure not to forget it.

I had a cop hassle me (in brad daylight) for not having a light on my bike.
I have a 3-LED head light and red blinkie on my helmet.
The cop said they had to be on the bike.
That is definitely annoying. Fortunately, the cops I have interacted with seemed to use common sense when it comes to lights.

[jstream]

It could be worse... How about having to put a bell on the TT bike you only ride in races?

[Treespeed]

One thing not mentioned so far is that if lights were required the quality of lights might go down instead of up. I like that I get to choose the lighting system and not my bike manufacturer. There are enough variables in my opinion when choosing a bike without also having to consider if they put a decent lighting system on it.

I also wonder if law enforcement views unlighted cyclist as darwin award competitors? I know this is a bit harsh, but maybe they figure an unlighted cyclist has to know the risk they are putting themselves into and if possible death isn't enough to dissuade them, then a ticket won't stop them either.

-Marcus.

[moxfyre]

One thing not mentioned so far is that if lights were required the quality of lights might go down instead of up. I like that I get to choose the lighting system and not my bike manufacturer. There are enough variables in my opinion when choosing a bike without also having to consider if they put a decent lighting system on it.
This is definitely true, a choice is good.

I also wonder if law enforcement views unlighted cyclist as darwin award competitors? I know this is a bit harsh, but maybe they figure an unlighted cyclist has to know the risk they are putting themselves into and if possible death isn't enough to dissuade them, then a ticket won't stop them either.
Ya, I think unlit cyclists contribute to the perceptions of cyclists as foolhardy and irresponsible. I do think however, that stricter enforcement would convince more college kids and folk cyclists and such to use lights.

[joeprim]

We don't need any more laws! We need to educate people not control them.

Joe

[alanbikehouston]

In the past year, I have had two or three close calls with guys (and it is ALWAYS a guy) racing around a corner late at night directly into my path. No lights, no reflectors, often in the center of the road, or on the wrong side of the road.

I wish the law said "Ride at night without effective lights? Forfeit your bike." These lightless idiots are killers in waiting.

[chicharron]

Could we get a frickin' law requiring all adult-sized bikes to be sold with lights?? I know they have one in France... And how about cops start warning everyone who rides without them?

I've seen so many otherwise safe cyclists who ride with no lights at night. I did this in college because I was too cheap, then pissed off too many cars and had too many close calls and got yelled at by a cop, so I decided to get some. $30 for a good rechargeable headlight and 5-LED taillight from Performance.

It's incredibly dangerous to ride without them and it contributes to motorists' perception that bikes are dangerous and different and that they have to be alternately harassed and treated with kid gloves.
I ride with lights at night, but if some one else decides to make that choice, and ride without a light, or a helmet, or engage in other kind of risky behavior, it is their decison. I wear eye protection when I mowthe lawn. Do you wear you? And if not, why? Should there be a law?

[bobfe]

It could be worse... How about having to put a bell on the TT bike you only ride in races?

I bet if LA tried it, bells would become pretty popular.

[moxfyre]

I ride with lights at night, but if some one else decides to make that choice, and ride without a light, or a helmet, or engage in other kind of risky behavior, it is their decison.
I would agree about helmets, because they only endanger themselves. As for lights, they put other road users at risk too, and so I would say using lights should not be optional.

[LV2TNDM]

This raises the age-old question: should we legislate personal responsibility and common sense? In some cases (probably many, sadly), yes; in others absolutely not.
This issue came before the cycling industry probably a decade ago when a Florida cyclist was either killed or paralyzed while riding his bicycle at night. I think it was Derby Cycle who was sued as the distributor/manufacturer of the bicycle. He was hit by a Jeep while cycling in the middle of nowhere where it was completely dark. Pretty stupid behavior on his part. Problem is, we all pay for it.
And although the end result was not mandatory lights, you will notice many bikes now have little (stupid) stickers that say something to the effect of "Do not operate this bicycle at night..."
Cyclists must accept the responsibility to properly outfit their bicycles for night riding. Plain and simple.

[atbman]

1. why do cyclists who ride at night without lights endanger themselves?

2. Because they can't be seen

3. How do you know cyclists ride at night without lights?

4. Because you see them doing it all the time

Yes, I do think they're idiots, but I've never yet missed seeing one when I've been driving (Murphy's Law - I will hit one the next time I'm out)

[moxfyre]

1. why do cyclists who ride at night without lights endanger themselves?

2. Because they can't be seen

3. How do you know cyclists ride at night without lights?

4. Because you see them doing it all the time

Yes, I do think they're idiots, but I've never yet missed seeing one when I've been driving (Murphy's Law - I will hit one the next time I'm out)
I've had a couple near misses while driving, these were wrong-way dressed in black night time cyclists. I think I'm a pretty alert driver and have never been in an accident of any kind. Clearly, you see most of them in time, and that's why MOST of them are still alive :)

[Roody]

I ride with lights at night, but if some one else decides to make that choice, and ride without a light, or a helmet, or engage in other kind of risky behavior, it is their decison. I wear eye protection when I mowthe lawn. Do you wear you? And if not, why? Should there be a law?This is a faulty analogy. Ride without a helmet and you only endanger yourself. Ride without lights and you endanger other road users. (I don't agree with mandatory lights either, but this is not a good argument.)

[Roody]

1. why do cyclists who ride at night without lights endanger themselves?

2. Because they can't be seen

3. How do you know cyclists ride at night without lights?

4. Because you see them doing it all the time

Yes, I do think they're idiots, but I've never yet missed seeing one when I've been driving (Murphy's Law - I will hit one the next time I'm out)
Another faulty argument. You cannot know that you see all riders without lights--only that you see some riders without lights.

[randya]

Consider only a tiny percentage of cyclists ride in the dark, no.
We have too much that is mandatory already, thank you very much.
Frankly, I am surprised that this is your position on this issue. Requiring all bikes sold to be equipped with appropriate lighting for night use would go a long way towards legitimizing bikes as true vehicles and not toys. As a vehicular cyclist, I would think you'd be all for that. I assume you do know the history of the CSPC decision on bike lighting, and how inappropriate that decision really was?

[John E]

My Bianchi is strictly a fair-weather, broad-daylight toy, and my Capo has become the same after its makeover at CyclArt. Lights, reflectors, etc. are out of place and superfluous on these two machines. The Schwinn mountain bike and the two Peugeots are my daily drivers, with racks, rear blinkies, and handlebar clips for front lights. I don't have pedal reflectors, which interfere with proper and safe operation of toeclips, and I don't have spoke-mounted side reflectors, which I view as silly and unnecessary. However, I always wear white at night, and I make sure I am very visible, so I certainly comply extremely well with the spirit, although not the letter, of the law. As others have mentioned in this thread, I really don't want to live in a nanny state, but somewhere the government gives me enough credit to think for myself.

[randya]

How would y'all feel if cars were sold without lighting equipment and you had to go out and buy aftermarket lights in order to drive at night? I'm sure there's a certain percentage of people who don't drive at night and feel that lights are superfluous on cars and trucks, too. :rolleyes:

[Roody]

randya--Now that's a good analogy! You mentioned the CPSC's development of the reflector requirements. What is the story there? I have read only Forrester's account and take that with a grain of salt.

[Treespeed]

How would y'all feel if cars were sold without lighting equipment and you had to go out and buy aftermarket lights in order to drive at night? I'm sure there's a certain percentage of people who don't drive at night and feel that lights are superfluous on cars and trucks, too. :rolleyes:

I personally think it would be great, because if we are comparing bikes to cars that would mean that all car bits would be interchangeable. (remember this is just for example this is no place to be debating specific cars) But for example, I could take the reliability of a Camry engine, drop it into a sturdy Volvo chassis, with an all-wheel drive Audi drivetrain, and a leather mercedes interior; and do it all with my Park allen wrench set.

That is the great thing about bikes the way they are now, infinitely customizable without having to be an engineer or a full-blow mechanic. I know I wouldn't trust myself to just go bolting stuff on to my car, but it's all pretty straight forward on a bike. It's a shame that people ride without lights and put themselves and others at risk. But from my anecdotal experience of night driving and cycling just because a vehicle is equipped with lights doesn't mean people will use them.

[randya]

randya--Now that's a good analogy! You mentioned the CPSC's development of the reflector requirements. What is the story there? I have read only Forrester's account and take that with a grain of salt.
I think Forrester's account is probably correct, even if you subtract some embellishment. The Bike Mfgs. Assn. opposed lighting requirements and lobbied for the reflector standard instead, even though all state statutes require lights. Lower cost, less liability if they could claim their product wasn't intended for night use.

IMO, it would be better if inexpensive but effective lights came with all bikes and you could 'opt out' instead of 'opting in'. The cost to mfgs. would be really low, prob. less than $20 per bike.

Who gives a hoot if you take the lights off? The cops have no business questioning you for not having lights in daylight hours, that's just BS harassment...

But with an 'opt out' system, more cyclists would have the proper equipment to be safe, without having to go to the extra effort and expense. :)

[skanking biker]

But where does this stop

Do we pass a law equipping bikes with air bags so they are "safe" in a crash? How about mandatory elbow and kneww pads to prevent broken bones? How about mandating the types of tires you can use or the types of brakes? Maybee we should ban fixed gear bikes because they are "unsafe" Where does it end?

I believe in punishing people under the law when they harm someone-I do nto believe in passing all kinds of laws to a priori control people's behavior.

Let people be free and then punish them if they abuse that freedom in a way that causes physical harm to others

[moxfyre]

But where does this stop

Do we pass a law equipping bikes with air bags so they are "safe" in a crash? How about mandatory elbow and kneww pads to prevent broken bones? How about mandating the types of tires you can use or the types of brakes? Maybee we should ban fixed gear bikes because they are "unsafe" Where does it end?

I believe in punishing people under the law when they harm someone-I do nto believe in passing all kinds of laws to a priori control people's behavior.

Let people be free and then punish them if they abuse that freedom in a way that causes physical harm to others
I don't believe in regulating things that only protect the rider themself (such as airbags or knee pads or helmets). But I think lights are a different issue because they also affect the safety of OTHER PEOPLE around the cyclist. I think it's proper that there's a law requiring them, and I wish more cyclists followed it.

[skanking biker]

there is a big difference between requiring someone to PURCHASE and USE a light when they ride at nights and requiring MANUFACTURERS to produce all of their bikes with lights.

[moxfyre]

there is a big difference between requiring someone to PURCHASE and USE a light when they ride at nights and requiring MANUFACTURERS to produce all of their bikes with lights.
Agreed... but I think a lot of people buy bikes without lights because they think they'll never ride at night. Then they do and don't bother to buy lights.

[Roody]

But where does this stop

Do we pass a law equipping bikes with air bags so they are "safe" in a crash? How about mandatory elbow and kneww pads to prevent broken bones? How about mandating the types of tires you can use or the types of brakes? Maybee we should ban fixed gear bikes because they are "unsafe" Where does it end?

I believe in punishing people under the law when they harm someone-I do nto believe in passing all kinds of laws to a priori control people's behavior.

Let people be free and then punish them if they abuse that freedom in a way that causes physical harm to othersSo, it's better that an innocent person be harmed, then punish the offender, so two people suffer? Doesn't it make much more sense to PREVENT the harm, even if that means you don't get to punish anyone? By your argument, cops should not ticket motorists who run red lights, unless they slam into a school bus and wipe out a few kids. I mean, think aobut it!

[webist]

How would y'all feel if cars were sold without lighting equipment and you had to go out and buy aftermarket lights in order to drive at night? I'm sure there's a certain percentage of people who don't drive at night and feel that lights are superfluous on cars and trucks, too. :rolleyes:

In that case I'd recommend that vehicles be limited to 30 lbs in weight and 30 MPH for speed. I wouldn't mandate lights. :)

[DonD]

You cannot know that you see all riders without lights--only that you see some riders without lights.

Really, isn't it just that you see them from a much closer distance (too close) than you would have otherwise. thus impairing your ability to maneuver your vehicle in a way that is safe for both you and them.

- Don

[240GL]

The situation in my neck of the woods, if anyone's interested:
Come every autumn and darker mornings, police will establish check points near schools and around the city center, looking out for school kids and commuters without proper lights on their bikes. The fine is currently 500 NOK, or about 80 USD. "Proper lights" also means that the rear light has to be non-blinking.
Erling.

[RubenZ]

The less stuff on my bike from the factory the better :)

[skanking biker]

So, it's better that an innocent person be harmed, then punish the offender, so two people suffer? Doesn't it make much more sense to PREVENT the harm, even if that means you don't get to punish anyone? By your argument, cops should not ticket motorists who run red lights, unless they slam into a school bus and wipe out a few kids. I mean, think aobut it!


the logical extension of yoru argument results in a totalitarian state. If we remove free will and control everyone's behavior, then we can make everyoen "safe." Insecurity and the risk of being harmed by idiots is the price of freedom and i price i am more than willing to pay.

[Roody]

the logical extension of yoru argument results in a totalitarian state. If we remove free will and control everyone's behavior, then we can make everyoen "safe." Insecurity and the risk of being harmed by idiots is the price of freedom and i price i am more than willing to pay.You equate headlights, traffic signs, seat belts, airbags, etc. with a "totalitarian state"? How interesting. Are there any prior constraints on human behavior that you approve of?

[catatonic]

my opinion is YES: there should be mandatory lights...BUT much like reflectors, there should be a way to remove them easily if you don't want them.

Nothing special, just make the rear reflector function as a light as well, and a simple LED light up front for visibility...if tehy want to see the road, they can buy an upgrade model.

It should add all of maybe $15-20 to the price of the bike.


oh, and anyone who screams totalitarian about it, needs to rehtink their logic...cars require lights, scooters require lights, etc...a bike is considered a vehicle, like all of the previously mentioned, therefore lights are something that should be added to place these objects on equal pedestals.

[lamajo25]

Wow, I'm not sure what to say. I built my bike light when I was still dispatching so I could ride to and from work at night. It works great. I don't know why you wouldn't want one especially if you live in out lying areas. It's too dark to ride without one.

It is a safety issue for everyone. Pedestrians, cyclists, motorists, emergency vehicles. Everyone. Arizona requires only a headlight while operating at night and a rear reflector. A headlight at Wal-Mart (which meets the requirements as it's a light) costs $5-$10. The ticket for riding without a headlight is more than likely 2-5 times that ammount. I don't know exactly because I haven't written one yet. I've warned two or three people but not written. So in all reality let's make a guestimation. Let's say $50.00 for the ticket, $10.00 for the light. $50.00 for the ticket, $10.00 for the light. Pretty much a no brainer.

[PaulH]

As far as I can tell, France has no law requiring all bicycles to have lights. Both Germany and France do have laws requiring all bikes ridden at night to have lights -- which seems reasonable and worth emulating. Germany has much more stringent driver's licensing also. I'd have to say that both countries have a better approach to both driving and cycling than the US has.

Paul

Paul

[moxfyre]

Wow, I'm not sure what to say. I built my bike light when I was still dispatching so I could ride to and from work at night. It works great. I don't know why you wouldn't want one especially if you live in out lying areas. It's too dark to ride without one.

It is a safety issue for everyone. Pedestrians, cyclists, motorists, emergency vehicles. Everyone. Arizona requires only a headlight while operating at night and a rear reflector. A headlight at Wal-Mart (which meets the requirements as it's a light) costs $5-$10. The ticket for riding without a headlight is more than likely 2-5 times that ammount. I don't know exactly because I haven't written one yet. I've warned two or three people but not written. So in all reality let's make a guestimation. Let's say $50.00 for the ticket, $10.00 for the light. $50.00 for the ticket, $10.00 for the light. Pretty much a no brainer.
That's the way I feel about it. I think a lot of people are just clueless about the risk of riding without lights. I am glad to hear there are cops like you who take an interest in making sure cyclists are well lit!

[AndrewP]

When I was a child in England over 50 yrs ago, all the bikes I saw came with a bracket for mounting a headlight, either in front of the stem or on the side of the forks. I cant remember what provision was made for tail lights, but they were equivalent to a glowing cigarette butt. In about 1960 they changed the rear light requirement to be something like 1.5" min diameter.