Originally Posted by
CaptCarrot
And reading that story, you jump to the conclusion that because lights are not mentioned, he did not have or was not using them just because he was not wearing a helmet. This is probably true, but from the information in that story, is unverifiable.
You are correct, I did come to that conclusion. Being hit from behind, usually comes from not seeing what is in front, not paying attention (whereas, IMO, blinking lights would have drawn attention). So, there is at a least a 50% chance the car driver didn't see. Most of the times that is the case, and that is what I based my assumption. Or if they saw, didn't pay it much mind. That is just as worse..
You say it is unverifiable, I beg to differ. He did get hit a 3pm in the afternoon on the bicycle, that is verifiable and a fact. Why did he get hit?? Can't be but a couple answers to that, and not being seen is one of the biggies. I am a newbie at this bicycle thing, but I think I am learning fast. From what I have learned in the last couple months, I have outfitted ALL my bikes with lights, and in the process of adapting all my helmets to have a front and rear blinking lights.
I for one, do not one to leave this wonderful world or get badly injured on a humble!!

A humble is a simple word, meaning "something that happened but didn't need to happen"...