Multiple blinkies? The Washington State Patrol replies to my question.
11-22-05, 09:08 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,956
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
Multiple blinkies? The Washington State Patrol replies to my question.
*
Just in case anyone finds this relevant or interesting... I live in the state of Washington in the United States, and I sent the Washington State Patrol this email to see what they'd say:
They sent me this reply:
(1) – Only one flashing lamp may be used in conjunction with a red reflector to the rear of the bicycle.
(2) – Flashing white lamps are only prohibited [I think they meant to say "permitted" instead of "prohibited"] for use on emergency vehicles; amber flashing lamps approved for use on construction/maintenance vehicles; pilot cars; public utility vehicle; tow trucks; animal control vehicles; hazardous materials response team vehicles; rural newspaper carrier vehicles; oversize units. Bicycle lighting may be similar to a motorcycles lighting – yes they have amber lamps in front, however they do not flash unless they activate the “hazard” lights.
(3) – There is not any rule (which I could find) saying you cannot attach flashers to your helmet, clothing, or backpack. You are cautioned to not use any neon lighting (prohibited for use while in motion on public roadways) or the color blue. The type of light may be similar or same as those used by runners to be seen.
In the event that someone hits me with their car, I don't want them to be let off on a technicality, so I guess I'll have to pick one blinkie to do my blinking and set the others steady. Or I can attach them to myself rather than to my bike, I guess.
Just in case anyone finds this relevant or interesting... I live in the state of Washington in the United States, and I sent the Washington State Patrol this email to see what they'd say:
Here are three questions:
(1) Is it OK to use more than one red LED flasher on the rear of my bicycle? RCW 46.61.780 says that a steady red taillight and a red light-emitting-diode flashing taillight are both permitted. RCW does not explicitly say whether it's OK to use more than one LED flasher at a time, however. I currently have three, and two of them are quite powerful, so I'm wondering if this is a no-no on the basis of it looking something like an emergency vehicle.
(2) How about front flashers on bicycles? In addition to a very good headlight, I have a small LED "blinkie" facing frontwards on my bike to improve front-&-side visibility. It has a clear lens and amber LED lights that blink. The RCW doesn't say anything in the bicycle-related section about front LED flashers (yet).
(3) In the event that either #1 or #2 are not technically permitted, then is it OK to work around the issue by attaching flashers to one's helmet, clothing or backpack rather than to the bicycle? RCW doesn't say anything one way or the other on this one, that I could see.
(1) Is it OK to use more than one red LED flasher on the rear of my bicycle? RCW 46.61.780 says that a steady red taillight and a red light-emitting-diode flashing taillight are both permitted. RCW does not explicitly say whether it's OK to use more than one LED flasher at a time, however. I currently have three, and two of them are quite powerful, so I'm wondering if this is a no-no on the basis of it looking something like an emergency vehicle.
(2) How about front flashers on bicycles? In addition to a very good headlight, I have a small LED "blinkie" facing frontwards on my bike to improve front-&-side visibility. It has a clear lens and amber LED lights that blink. The RCW doesn't say anything in the bicycle-related section about front LED flashers (yet).
(3) In the event that either #1 or #2 are not technically permitted, then is it OK to work around the issue by attaching flashers to one's helmet, clothing or backpack rather than to the bicycle? RCW doesn't say anything one way or the other on this one, that I could see.
(1) – Only one flashing lamp may be used in conjunction with a red reflector to the rear of the bicycle.
(2) – Flashing white lamps are only prohibited [I think they meant to say "permitted" instead of "prohibited"] for use on emergency vehicles; amber flashing lamps approved for use on construction/maintenance vehicles; pilot cars; public utility vehicle; tow trucks; animal control vehicles; hazardous materials response team vehicles; rural newspaper carrier vehicles; oversize units. Bicycle lighting may be similar to a motorcycles lighting – yes they have amber lamps in front, however they do not flash unless they activate the “hazard” lights.
(3) – There is not any rule (which I could find) saying you cannot attach flashers to your helmet, clothing, or backpack. You are cautioned to not use any neon lighting (prohibited for use while in motion on public roadways) or the color blue. The type of light may be similar or same as those used by runners to be seen.
11-22-05, 09:13 PM
#2
Infamous Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Only one flashing lamp may be used in conjunction with a red reflector to the rear of the bicycle.
Wonder if one flashing and multiple solid lights are ok?
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
11-22-05, 09:42 PM
#3
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
Thanks for finding that out and sharing it, Mecbgon. I'm going to run one red solid and one red flashing in back on my most rural bicycle, and see if I get any flak. Hope not. Usually round town its just one flashing red in back for me, and a flashing whitish/greenish (kind of) light on front, that can be set to solid. maybe just pretend your blinkie was set to steady if you have to defend your riding lights in court?
And, if the state patrol decides to start citing all the bikers around the sound that use front cateye blinkies are hosed. 70% of us around Seattle would be guilty, seems like.
And, if the state patrol decides to start citing all the bikers around the sound that use front cateye blinkies are hosed. 70% of us around Seattle would be guilty, seems like.
Last edited by Bekologist; 11-22-05 at 09:48 PM.
11-22-05, 09:57 PM
#4
2-Cyl, 1/2 HP @ 90 RPM
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 15,762
Bikes: 04' Specialized Hardrock Sport, 03' Giant OCR2 (SOLD!), 04' Litespeed Firenze, 04' Giant OCR Touring, 07' Specialized Langster Comp
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
I think the real reason why you can't have multiple lights on blinking mode is to prevent people from seizing while they're behind you.
Other than that.. I've never seen a runner with blue lights before.
Other than that.. I've never seen a runner with blue lights before.
11-22-05, 10:44 PM
#6
You need a new bike
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 5,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Originally Posted by mechBgon
In the event that someone hits me with their car, I don't want them to be let off on a technicality...
11-22-05, 11:05 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,615
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Originally Posted by mechBgon
*
In the event that someone hits me with their car, I don't want them to be let off on a technicality, so I guess I'll have to pick one blinkie to do my blinking and set the others steady. Or I can attach them to myself rather than to my bike, I guess.
In the event that someone hits me with their car, I don't want them to be let off on a technicality, so I guess I'll have to pick one blinkie to do my blinking and set the others steady. Or I can attach them to myself rather than to my bike, I guess.
11-23-05, 01:27 AM
#8
Banned.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 616
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
A word of caution. I wouldn't trust the police here. Police will sometimes tell you something is illegal when they know it isn't. They think the law *should* be one way rather than another, for example. Or they are simply mistaken.
If WA's statute is like those in other states, it does not rule out more than blinkie. In that case, even if the police are telling you otherwise, they are mistaken.
Why don't you post the text of the law itself?
Before anyone starts saying that we shouldn't give "legal advice", bear in mind that the police will be the first to tell you that they do not give legal advice. The police's interpretation of the law has no official weight, as you would discover if you ever relied on an incorrect interpretation of some law offered by a police officer and faced charges anyway. (It's not going to happen in this case, but it has happened in other, more serious, matters, like gun possession crimes, or tax evasion, where the law can be quite obscure.)
No one here should offer you legal advice, that is, authoritative comments on how to conduct legal proceedings, but anyone can read for himself.
If WA's statute is like those in other states, it does not rule out more than blinkie. In that case, even if the police are telling you otherwise, they are mistaken.
Why don't you post the text of the law itself?
Before anyone starts saying that we shouldn't give "legal advice", bear in mind that the police will be the first to tell you that they do not give legal advice. The police's interpretation of the law has no official weight, as you would discover if you ever relied on an incorrect interpretation of some law offered by a police officer and faced charges anyway. (It's not going to happen in this case, but it has happened in other, more serious, matters, like gun possession crimes, or tax evasion, where the law can be quite obscure.)
No one here should offer you legal advice, that is, authoritative comments on how to conduct legal proceedings, but anyone can read for himself.
11-23-05, 01:49 AM
#9
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,956
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
Here's the actual text for analysis:
from the state website
I do think there's room for improvement in the wording and logic. For example, the optional "lamp emitting a red light." If it's optional equipment in the first place, then there's no point in them specifying 500 feet of visibility. Maybe I'll drop our state cycling advocacy group an email and see if they can simply get the law tweaked to explicitly allow for multiple LED flashers and front LED flashers. The mention of LEDs in this section of state law is not that old itself.
RCW 46.61.780
Lamps and other equipment on bicycles.
(1) Every bicycle when in use during the hours of darkness as defined in RCW 46.37.020 shall be equipped with a lamp on the front which shall emit a white light visible from a distance of at least five hundred feet to the front and with a red reflector on the rear of a type approved by the state patrol which shall be visible from all distances up to six hundred feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful lower beams of head lamps on a motor vehicle. A lamp emitting a red light visible from a distance of five hundred feet to the rear may be used in addition to the red reflector. A light-emitting diode flashing taillight visible from a distance of five hundred feet to the rear may also be used in addition to the red reflector.
Lamps and other equipment on bicycles.
(1) Every bicycle when in use during the hours of darkness as defined in RCW 46.37.020 shall be equipped with a lamp on the front which shall emit a white light visible from a distance of at least five hundred feet to the front and with a red reflector on the rear of a type approved by the state patrol which shall be visible from all distances up to six hundred feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful lower beams of head lamps on a motor vehicle. A lamp emitting a red light visible from a distance of five hundred feet to the rear may be used in addition to the red reflector. A light-emitting diode flashing taillight visible from a distance of five hundred feet to the rear may also be used in addition to the red reflector.
I do think there's room for improvement in the wording and logic. For example, the optional "lamp emitting a red light." If it's optional equipment in the first place, then there's no point in them specifying 500 feet of visibility. Maybe I'll drop our state cycling advocacy group an email and see if they can simply get the law tweaked to explicitly allow for multiple LED flashers and front LED flashers. The mention of LEDs in this section of state law is not that old itself.
11-23-05, 02:27 AM
#10
無くなった
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sci-Fi Wasabi
Posts: 5,072
Bikes: I built the Bianchi track bike back up today.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Honestly, I'd use as many LEDs as you have - I have 10 rear LEDs (all blinking) in two lights and up to 9 front ones if I wear my helmet light (6 blinking, 1-3 solid, 3 lights/) I get compliments on my visiblility from people all over - peds, other bikers, people in cars (yes, they've stopped and asked about the lights, or just slowed to tell me 'Thanks for being easy to see!')
It may be against the laws (though I really doubt it) but the thing is - you need to worry about the laws for something like lights after an accident. If the problem is that you were OVERlit, I have the feeling that a judge would overlook anything you were doing that's technically illegal.
Also, the actual wording of the law doesn't actually exclude more than one light. Actually, it sounds like you could have at least two lights - one 'in addition to' and one 'replacing.' But it doesn't say 'No more than two lamps can be used.'
Then again, I'm just drunk typing on bikeForums at 2:30am...
It may be against the laws (though I really doubt it) but the thing is - you need to worry about the laws for something like lights after an accident. If the problem is that you were OVERlit, I have the feeling that a judge would overlook anything you were doing that's technically illegal.
Also, the actual wording of the law doesn't actually exclude more than one light. Actually, it sounds like you could have at least two lights - one 'in addition to' and one 'replacing.' But it doesn't say 'No more than two lamps can be used.'
Then again, I'm just drunk typing on bikeForums at 2:30am...
11-23-05, 02:41 AM
#11
Banned.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 616
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Thanks for the post. You make a good point that the visibility requirements for the optional blinkers are strange. Strictly speaking, the state can claim that it is permitting only those taillights and blinkers with minimum visibility requirements. As you wonder, though, it's not clear why the state would do that given that a rider has the option of using only the reflector and no taillight or blinker.
Another item of note: as I read the statute, its wording allows for both a taillight *and* a blinker in addition to a reflector. After all, the last sentence says that you may "also" use a flashing taillight in addition to a reflector, instead of saying "alternatively" you may use a flashing taillight.
Finally, there is the fact that the statute does not forbid more than one taillight, or more than one blinker.
So, I think the police are just wrong about the law here. That, of course, is no guarantee of what would happen if you contested a ticket for too many taillights.
Another item of note: as I read the statute, its wording allows for both a taillight *and* a blinker in addition to a reflector. After all, the last sentence says that you may "also" use a flashing taillight in addition to a reflector, instead of saying "alternatively" you may use a flashing taillight.
Finally, there is the fact that the statute does not forbid more than one taillight, or more than one blinker.
So, I think the police are just wrong about the law here. That, of course, is no guarantee of what would happen if you contested a ticket for too many taillights.
11-23-05, 06:38 AM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 518
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
That's why lawyers suck. They write laws with just enough incomprehensibility to make people have to discuss what they meant. I'll bet this is purposely done, so that two lawyers can spend thier client's money, jousting in court about the interpretation of that gibberish. Like, what consitutes a light; is it and/ or or instead of a blinker; are more lights than what it states in the law allowed; provide an expensive test to see if a light was really visible from x-number of feet, so on and so forth.
11-23-05, 07:18 AM
#13
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,964
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,529 Times
in
1,042 Posts
Originally Posted by Savas
That's why lawyers suck. They write laws with just enough incomprehensibility to make people have to discuss what they meant. I'll bet this is purposely done, so that two lawyers can spend thier client's money, jousting in court about the interpretation of that gibberish. Like, what consitutes a light; is it and/ or or instead of a blinker; are more lights than what it states in the law allowed; provide an expensive test to see if a light was really visible from x-number of feet, so on and so forth.
11-23-05, 07:30 AM
#14
Infamous Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
Actually the only people jousting over the multiple blinkie laws appear to be lawyer wanna-be's on the Bike Forum. I seriously doubt that "too many rear blinkies" has ever been a problem for a real life cyclist, or a real life law enforcement official on a real street.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
11-23-05, 07:44 AM
#15
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
I couldn't stop myself, I belted out "It's Beginning to Look a Lot..Like..Christmas.." To a rider last night that was wearing a blinking safety vest.
11-23-05, 07:59 AM
#16
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,964
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,529 Times
in
1,042 Posts
Originally Posted by chipcom
Yeah, but since we're all obviously fake cyclists, your point is not relevant. I wonder if slvoid or any of the other NYC cyclists would want to comment about the nitpicky things those real life law enforcment folks might do on a real street, unless of course they are all fakes too.
Could something happen? Yea, ANYTHING is possible to a cycling worry wort willing to fantasize hard enough.
11-23-05, 08:12 AM
#17
You need a new bike
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 5,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Assuming there is no case law to the contrary, an interpretation of this law, as written, to prohibit multiple blinking taillights would apply equally to prohibit multiple rear reflectors. The stated text refers to both reflectors and taillights in the singular form.
11-23-05, 08:20 AM
#18
Sumanitu taka owaci
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 8,945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Originally Posted by vrkelley
Dang...I've got large amber strobe on the front and one on the back...works great.
__________________
No worries
No worries
11-23-05, 08:40 AM
#19
Infamous Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
Anybody in NYC, or anywhere else, EVER get in trouble over multiple blinkies? No? I didn't think so.
Could something happen? Yea, ANYTHING is possible to a cycling worry wort willing to fantasize hard enough.
Could something happen? Yea, ANYTHING is possible to a cycling worry wort willing to fantasize hard enough.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
11-23-05, 10:37 AM
#20
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,956
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
The city police, county sherrifs and State Highway Patrol have never ticketed me. I'm guessing that if they stopped me, they'd let me off with a warning after I switched excess blinkies to steady mode.
The real concern, as I mentioned, would be what weaknesses a defense attorney could find in court if I were suing for damages after an obliviot managed to right-hook me and get me under the rear wheels of his SUV or something. If that makes me a worry wort [sic] then I guess that's what I am, but having been hit & injured by cars a couple times (and even a cyclist), I sort of prefer to be labelled a fatalist or something
The real concern, as I mentioned, would be what weaknesses a defense attorney could find in court if I were suing for damages after an obliviot managed to right-hook me and get me under the rear wheels of his SUV or something. If that makes me a worry wort [sic] then I guess that's what I am, but having been hit & injured by cars a couple times (and even a cyclist), I sort of prefer to be labelled a fatalist or something
11-23-05, 10:41 AM
#21
Enjoy
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Seattle metro
Posts: 6,165
Bikes: Trek 5200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by LittleBigMan
I'm not in Washington, but I use a powerful amber strobe. I pass through more police jurisdictions than I can count on one hand, but none of them ever bother me.
I have those same strobes and pass cops also. Things only get sticky when the cop has to assign fault at the time of the accident. If the cop can get you on a technicality, they will. Like if your bike has Christmas lights, but back no reflector, you'll be "considered partially at fault".
11-23-05, 11:31 AM
#22
52-week commuter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,929
Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Well, here's what 46.37.215 says:
Certainly multiple blinkies fit into the spirit of this law, if not the letter due to the visibility requirements. Although again it's curious to have requirements for optional equipment.
Keep in mind that this is Internet legal advice, worth exactly what you paid for it.
Any vehicle may be equipped with lamps for the purpose of warning other operators of other vehicles of the presence of a vehicular traffic hazard requiring the exercise of unusual care in approaching, overtaking, or passing.
Vehicular hazard warning signal lamps used to display such warning to the front shall be mounted at the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable, and shall display simultaneously flashing amber light: PROVIDED, That on any vehicle manufactured prior to January 1, 1969, the lamps showing to the front may display simultaneously flashing white or amber lights, or any shade of color between white and amber. The lamps used to display such warning to the rear shall be mounted at the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable, and shall show simultaneously flashing amber or red lights, or any shade of color between amber and red. These warning lights shall be visible from a distance of not less than five hundred feet in normal sunlight.
Vehicular hazard warning signal lamps used to display such warning to the front shall be mounted at the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable, and shall display simultaneously flashing amber light: PROVIDED, That on any vehicle manufactured prior to January 1, 1969, the lamps showing to the front may display simultaneously flashing white or amber lights, or any shade of color between white and amber. The lamps used to display such warning to the rear shall be mounted at the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable, and shall show simultaneously flashing amber or red lights, or any shade of color between amber and red. These warning lights shall be visible from a distance of not less than five hundred feet in normal sunlight.
Keep in mind that this is Internet legal advice, worth exactly what you paid for it.
11-23-05, 11:37 AM
#23
Electrical Hazard
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Manhattan / Vancouver
Posts: 974
Bikes: a bunch.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I run Cat eye LD170 LED strobes on my bike front and rear.
However, I've replaced the Amber LEDs in my front one, with 430nm UV blue LEDs.
I've never had a problem with Johnny Law, even though I'm flashing red and blue.
However, I've replaced the Amber LEDs in my front one, with 430nm UV blue LEDs.
I've never had a problem with Johnny Law, even though I'm flashing red and blue.
11-23-05, 12:23 PM
#24
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,964
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,529 Times
in
1,042 Posts
Originally Posted by vrkelley
P,
I have those same strobes and pass cops also. Things only get sticky when the cop has to assign fault at the time of the accident. If the cop can get you on a technicality, they will. Like if your bike has Christmas lights, but back no reflector, you'll be "considered partially at fault".
I have those same strobes and pass cops also. Things only get sticky when the cop has to assign fault at the time of the accident. If the cop can get you on a technicality, they will. Like if your bike has Christmas lights, but back no reflector, you'll be "considered partially at fault".
11-23-05, 01:01 PM
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 18,138
Bikes: 2 many
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1266 Post(s)
Liked 323 Times
in
169 Posts
I have had COMPLIMENTS for having to much lighting on my bike. I accidentally shined my 16 watt HID light into an officers eyes at a crosswalk once.
I apologized to him, his response was "It's OK, don't worry about it It's safer to have good lights."
After thinking about his response I realized that he has very similar visibility problems when he is standing in the road directing traffic. He may have had problems with not being seem as well. My guess is that any officer who has experience standing in the road directing traffic, would be sympathetic to a cyclists need to be seen.
Wouldn't that be be practically all policemen?
I apologized to him, his response was "It's OK, don't worry about it It's safer to have good lights."
After thinking about his response I realized that he has very similar visibility problems when he is standing in the road directing traffic. He may have had problems with not being seem as well. My guess is that any officer who has experience standing in the road directing traffic, would be sympathetic to a cyclists need to be seen.
Wouldn't that be be practically all policemen?
