Advocacy & Safety - Red Flashing Light Law - Louisiana

Representative Wayne Waddell from Shreveport has introduced House Bill 1121 that changes the existing Louisiana law requiring cyclists to use a rear, red reflector. The modified law will require cyclists to use a red-flashing tail light.

Personally, I think enacting a rear light requirement is a good move. However, I think specifying that the tail light be a red-flashing light goes too far. Individuals should be permitted to elect whether to use a flashing versus steady mode light.

My appreciation is that no concensus exists as to which mode of operation, steady versus flashing, is safer. I also have the impression that no other state has adopted a flashing tail light requirement and that the UK and Germany actually prohibit flashing head and tail lights.

Can anyone weigh-in on their experiences with similar legislation? Do you have any citiations to studies on the subject that I may make reference to in filing additional comments with my representative? Thank you very much for your attention to this development.

Not really what you're asking, but I run all of my lights as flashers ( except occasionally for the headlight, when it's dark and I need a better view of the road ) because it's so much more efficient. The battery life more or less doubles. Some of my lights use AA pairs, which I have a charger for, and others use proprietary ones that I have to go chase down somewhere. Of course the rear light has the harder-to-replace batteries...

The tail-light on one of my bikes does not offer a flashing mode - since it is made in Germany where flashing is verboten.

The light does nothing for the cyclist, it is an aide for motorists who may not be paying attention to where they are driving. I would prefer it if the law were written to read that a motorist must provide at least 3' of clearance to any cyclist who has a red flashing light.

Does this apply night and day?

-Kurt

I'm looking, I'm looking... I thought I once linked to a study or two that said that distance & speed recognition was more difficult when viewing flashing lights.

I can only say that I sometimes have a hell of a time if the only thing I can see of another cyclist is a light that blinks at a moderate tempo, especially if it's their only headlight. By the time I register where one blink happened, the light blinks off, the bike moves another few feet, then the next blink starts.

Maybe the law was simply written while being ignorant of the fact that bicycle taillights also have steady-on modes. Lawmakers don't know everything, ya know. ;)

I don't much care what the law says as long as they enforce it...

FWIW I have a red reflector, a solid red light and a red flasher on the rear of my bikes that get ridden at night. The rest typically have a rear red reflector that came with it.

Aaron :)

In the USA, flashing lights are typically illegal on everything except emergency vehicles, so this would be an interesting exception.

In Texas, at least, the law is funny because you can have a flashing light on your person, but not on your bike. My guess is that most cops here don't know about this picayune distinction.

I don't much care what the law says as long as they enforce it...

Like Portland?

http://bikeportland.org/2009/03/17/woman-sues-portland-police-officers-over-bike-light-arrest/

-Kurt

red reflector requirements are from the UVC, as almost universally adopted by all the states (white light red rear reflector); this is essentially an independent anti cyclist action on the part of the state of Louisiana, which was also the first state in the union to ban group rides.

It will simply be used by the police to harass cyclists. The only car coming from the rear that is a danger to a cyclist is the one directly behind the cyclist, and a good rear reflector is more than sufficient to warn that driver of your presence.

In the USA, flashing lights are typically illegal on everything except emergency vehicles, so this would be an interesting exception.


I have searched Illinois Vehicle Code and while most motor vehicles are prohibited from having flashing lights I see nothing prohibiting them on bicycles.

As a side note, even certain non emergency motor vehicles are allowed to run flashing lights.

I disagree. Lights are better than reflectors, always. Sheldon Brown has a good site about all the things that can go wrong with a reflector. Whether a flashing light is better is very much a question worth debating, however. Personally, I run a steady light, I think it gives more of a vehicle vibe, as well as making speed judgments easier.

Sure, its okay to require a light, but require it flash?

None of my dynamo lights flash and I wouldn't be up for adding a second light just to satisfy the law.

Joey?

Joey?

:roflmao:

-Kurt

I'd vote for non-flashing as well. Most EU bicycle light standards call for steady rear lights. But there could be better reflector standards as well, and I don't mean the current CSPC reflector standard.

In the USA, flashing lights are typically illegal on everything except emergency vehicles, so this would be an interesting exception.

In Texas, at least, the law is funny because you can have a flashing light on your person, but not on your bike. My guess is that most cops here don't know about this picayune distinction.Who knew, almost every motorist in the US has illegal equipment on their car with those emergency flashers that the government requires manufacturers to install on all new cars.

In NY "light bars" are regulated. If you put a red or blue flashing light bar on top of your car you can get a ticket. OTOH, anyone can put a yellow flashing bar on top of their car ( around here they are called "Whoo hooo" bars and generally used for safety vehicles and volunteer firefighters ). Personally I'm with the above posters that they should either standardize with some other area or leave flashing/steady up to the user to decide. Either way it's useless to pass another law unless they actually intend to enforce it.

VA law as summarized on WABA's site:

Front white light and rear red reflector required when dark, may be attached to operator; rear red light required on roads 35 mph and up.

I think it's a very good idea to require at least one rear light at night. Whether the light ought to be steady or flashing is highly debatable; why not give the rider the choice?

As for the advantages of a light over a reflector, one big advantage is that the light gives drivers FAR earlier warning that a cyclist is ahead, so that the driver can plan accordingly. A reflector, even if it works as designed, doesn't register until the last few seconds, especially if the night is dark and/or the rider's wearing dark clothes.

^^^ That's assuming, of course, that the light is actually bright enough. I've seen some lights (well, "seen" isn't really the right word) that were as dim as the rider's clothing -- and their clothes didn't even have any reflective strips.

Lights are better than reflectors, always.


reflectors are ALWAYS much more effective than blinkies with dead batteries, malfunctioning switches or when not turned on.

reflectors should not be removed from required safety equipment lists. cyclists should legally able to supplement the reflector with a light.

Germany still has reflector requirements BTW as do all (most?) countries in europe.

WA state law requires rear reflector, front light visible to 500 feet, and allows red taillights as supplemental equipment, but does not require them.

Joey?

I run a red or amber blinkie after dark. I like the amber one best, so I am not so thrilled about the color choice in the law.

it needs to be brought to the attention of the louisiana legislature that going out of compliance with the UVC by requiring robust, non-powered safety equipment be replaced with fallible, sometimes ineffective safety equipment while providing a disincentive to active transportation AND a tool for discriminatory law enforcement is a pisspoor move for cyclist safety.

maybe the legislature could go about directing the state patrol to do focused advocacy where they hand out free lights to cyclists but do not require their use. it could save the state a lot of money while not providing a disincentive to active transportation in your state.

I disagree. Lights are better than reflectors, always. Sheldon Brown has a good site about all the things that can go wrong with a reflector. Whether a flashing light is better is very much a question worth debating, however. Personally, I run a steady light, I think it gives more of a vehicle vibe, as well as making speed judgments easier.

That is my reasoning for the steady on tail light. I run the flasher for increased visibility. I had my wife follow me one night and video tape my bike while I was riding a certain stretch of road. My tail light by itself blended into the background of other city lights. The PB Superflash was much more obvious. Also once the car was in head light range it picked up my reflectors as well as the safety vest I wear.

Aaron :)

In Illinois we are in the silly season in which legislators -- tired, bored, and desperate for attention -- introduce bills that have not a chance of making it all the way through the grinder to final approval. Is this also true in the great state of Louisiana?

Either way it's useless to pass another law unless they actually intend to enforce it.

No doubt it will be used for selective enforcement against 'undesirable colored people'

I think it's a very good idea to require at least one rear light at night. Whether the light ought to be steady or flashing is highly debatable; why not give the rider the choice?

As for the advantages of a light over a reflector, one big advantage is that the light gives drivers FAR earlier warning that a cyclist is ahead, so that the driver can plan accordingly. A reflector, even if it works as designed, doesn't register until the last few seconds, especially if the night is dark and/or the rider's wearing dark clothes.

Back in the day, a red rear light standard for cyclists was actively fought by cyclists in the UK on the premise that it is the motorist's obligation to look out for cyclists and pedestrians, and the harder a cyclist is to see, the more alert motorists will be to cyclists, with 'active' rather than passive watching required on the motorists part.

From an operational perspective, I think the government should encourage the combination of a bright rear reflector (bigger and brighter than those that come standard on new bikes today) and a red rear light. I believe that the government should allow either blinking or steady; the reflector will assist with tracking as the driver approaches closer to the vehicle in the case of the blinking light. At a distance, it's possible that the blinking light is more effective than the steady, but I'm not convinced enough to think blinking should be required or preferred. But any light is more effective at the long distances required for detection and response on modern high speed arterials.

Unfortunately, I see few good products on the market now that provide both a bright reflector and a good light. The best reflectors are automotive reflectors, but these require some engineering effort to install on a bike. There are lots of good and affordable LED lights, but mounting them in combination with a large reflector can also be awkward, and the plastic seat post mounts that come with them often break or misalign. If the cyclist has a suspension seat post or rear bag/rack, a custom solution will often be required to mount the hardware.

I think it's unfortunate that there is no industry standard lamp mount for bicycles and rear racks. A little loop of fabric on which a blinky flops about on the back of a bag is no substitute for a solid support.

Amber pedal reflectors have excellent retroreflectivity and do an excellent job of identifying a cyclist by their movement, no batteries required.

Maybe if more people used high quality reflectors this legislation would never have been proposed.

Of course, pedal reflectors (and reflectors in general) are too 'Fred' for the racer boy wannabes, roadies and weight weenies.

:rolleyes:

Unfortunately, I see few good products on the market now that provide both a bright reflector and a good light.

These types of light are quite common in Europe.

Busch and Muller make several models available in the US, for both dynamo and battery:

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/images/products/Lights/B&M329Bfront.jpg

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/images/products/Lights/B&M325al.jpg

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/images/products/Lights/328alk.jpg

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/images/products/Lights/B&M323.jpg

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/b&m.asp
http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/taillights.asp

No doubt it will be used for selective enforcement against 'undesirable colored people'

The City of Miami passed a mandatory bike bell law in its code, specifically for clearing homeless people off of Calle Ocho.

-Kurt

These types of light are quite common in Europe.

Busch and Muller make several models available in the US, for both dynamo and battery:

Here's mine (Peter White doesn't sell it, though; got it at a German shop) -
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v201/BarracksSi/Bike/IMG_0610.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v201/BarracksSi/Bike/IMG_2138.jpg

I have one of these in a dynamo version: http://www.velo-orange.com/spvexbgta.html

Plenty bright, big reflector

Heck, Cateye has offered the TL-500, a CPSC rated reflector/LED light for well over a decade. they are NOT that hard to find. and of course, some of you will fondly remember the Vistalite?

I gave some feedback to some Cateye folks about pushing the light/reflector thing, who knows if they will listen to me, but they sure seemed intent when i was telling them about the near universal reflector requirement in the US.

how about the new RADBOTS from portland design works?

these flecco lights have never gone away. most of us long time avid commuter cyclists nursed our vistalites along for their very size, reflectivity and relatively bright LEDS for years - not many people still run the Vistalite anymore as they are no longer produced, and attrition has taken the usable ones out of circulation.

lousiana should not drop the reflector requirements nor require a red light. both safety moves in the wrong direction.

as far as I'm concerned, led taillights have gotten annoyingly bright and blinky lately, I hate following other cyclists with a 'superflash' (PBSF [TM]) on their bike, butt or bags, I think I might have a seizure...

:eek:

lousiana should not drop the reflector requirements nor require a red light. both safety moves in the wrong direction.

I totally agree w/ you on this!

:thumb:

Some of my thoughts on this: Standard rear reflectors on a bike stink as they are designed to defuse the light in multiple directions and is not as efficient reflecting light back to the driver as other types of reflectors. In my experience rear lights are extremely helpful in rural situations and less effective in urban areas (especially where street lights are present.) If a state has a significant at night rural bike crash I would support mandatory lights on bikes otherwise I would feel that the problem lies elsewhere (complete streets, driver training ...)

Some states now allow for the use of modulators on motorcycles that vary the intensity of the headlights when in day mode. It catches your attention. A good tail light , I don't care what brand, that is used in the daylight enhances your viability to the rear by motorists. In an urban environment they tend to get lost in the clutter of everything else, however they still IMHO give you some added visibility. I'm happy to see La. taking a fresh look into this. Good for them. Reflectors to me often are no more that a red "thing" that does little or nothing. Sometimes at night you may catch a glimpse of them. If you are prone to siezure activity maybe you shouldn't ride behind , but more up front. I do get a kick out of the conspiracy theories here though.

I disagree that lights are always more effective than reflectors. I personally wouldn't ride without both, but my reflective vest, in the vast majority of situations where I'm on a road with a car approaching me from the back, is many times more visible than the typical light.

Now, I happen to have a Dinotte taillight, so that pretty much negates my argument on this one, it is more visible if we're still talking about directly from the back. But for most bike taillights, a decent ($5 at Harbor Freight) reflective vest in a car's headlights is far more visible.

Lights are necessary too because there are many situations (curves, intersections, etc) where the car's headlights won't hit reflectors until too late, and also there are a great many cars on the road with broken or badly adjusted headlights, so the reflectors never get properly lit.

my reflective vest, in the vast majority of situations where I'm on a road with a car approaching me from the back, is many times more visible than the typical light.

No disagreement but a reflective vest is vastly superior to reflectors required by law, and this bugs me.

I have one of those double row blink, strobe, ON-LD 1000 ?? I think-that I have on my two nightime bikes. They seem pretty bright.However, I get off early enough that I rarely ride at night now.

I would guess that in metro NOLA maybe 1 bike in 20 has any rear facing light,and maybe the same for a headlight. A fair number-maybe the majority- have some sort of rear facing reflector.

NOLA isn't a bike safety conscious area. Helmets are worn by maybe 1 out of 20 riders.They just aren't cool looking, and they ruin the hair arrangement.

Now most folks have a bike lock-so we understand that aspect of "bike safety."

Charlie

The legislator in question has admitted to making a mistake in the writing of this bill. The intent was a blinkie after dark. Current law here is white light to the front and red light OR reflector to the rear.

The legislator in question has admitted to making a mistake in the writing of this bill. The intent was a blinkie after dark. Current law here is white light to the front and red light OR reflector to the rear.

Link?

-Kurt

reflectors are ALWAYS much more effective than blinkies with dead batteries, malfunctioning switches or when not turned on.



So to ensure you don't have an issue with those possibilities, the answer is redundancy.....redundancy.

Selective redundancy in this case. Just having extra batteries with you for ONE blinky is pointless if you can't see it dim or die. So the answer is to have more than one. Two is good, but I have four. The odds of several blinkies dying at once is slim to none. Another benefit is additional visibility.

No, this doesn't cover not turning them on.......so in that case a bike rider has to be responsible enough to remember to do that. One would think someone anal retentive enough to have several lights would also turn them on before riding. BUT, just in case.....then your point about keeping a reflector on your bike (or on you) is laudable. OR, you can also get blinkies with built-in reflectors.....one of my blinkies has a very effective one.

But the main reason for lighting....esp. flashing....is that it's dynamic and attention getting. It's not dependent on a remote light source for illumination.

Link?

-Kurt

Nothing yet. It was the result of bike advocates contacting the guy. I'm waiting to see the revised bill.

except emergency vehicles, so this would be an interesting In the USA, flashing lights are typically illegal on everything exception.

In Texas, at least, the law is funny because you can have a flashing light on your person, but not on your bike. My guess is that most cops here don't know about this picayune distinction.

My bicycle is equipped with two Beamer 5 white blinkies on the handlebars and 3 red Planet Bike Superflashes toward the back (two on the chainstays and one attached to the back of my helmet). Two are mounted on the chainstays and the third is attached to my helmet. Whenever I'm out on a ride, I have the safety lights set in flashing mode. With them set in this way, most people notice me and give me the space I need.

If it's illegal to ride with my safety lights set in flashing mode, the police have never stopped and/or ticketed me. Some policemen in different counties and states have appreciated my doing so.

I like the flashing front and rear lights. The first thing that you think of when seeing one..Bicycle. And the flash catches a persons attention..Just drive around town and look for yourself and notice the difference..Cheers :lol:

No disagreement but a reflective vest is vastly superior to reflectors required by law, and this bugs me.
Isn't the reflective vest superior simply because it is so much larger?

Question..Why would this bug you?

Yes, not only is it bigger but the movment of the vest also is involved. Also the reflective vest has not only vertical lines but horizontal lines. A reflector from a distance could be on a mailbox, a driveway reflector or just a sitting car reflector. It is the movment that catches a persons attention. A reflector on a bicycle stays at the same height and usually doesn't move back and forth, while the person wearing the vest moves. I wear a vest after dark but also have bands on my ankles and two blinking red lights on the rear of the bike besides on my bike helmet..I want to be seen..Cheers

It is the movment that catches a persons attention. A reflector on a bicycle stays at the same height and usually doesn't move back and forth, while the person wearing the vest moves.

This is why I always use pedal reflectors. They provide movement that unmistakably identifies a bicycle. Some bits of reflective tape on your pedals or crank arms will do the same thing.