Originally Posted by
GrouchoWretch
......Because motorists cannot be relied upon to meet their responsibility, a cyclist might choose to put lights on his bike, in order to make his presence more conspicuous to lazy, reckless, unvigilant motorists, so that they might avoid hitting him despite their negligence. It is not the cyclist's duty to do so, but if he thinks it might reduce the odds of getting smashed by a car, then the decision to put lights on his bike is a hurpadurp.
If a motorist hits him from behind, it is the motorist's fault, 100%, with or without bike lights and under all driving conditions. This is the diametric opposite of our lawyer friend's contention that if this occurs in the dark, and the cyclist has not assisted motorists in their duty by adding lights to his bike, it is 100% the cyclist's fault......
Your knowledge and understanding of both traffic laws and civil liability are a wonder to behold! I stand in awe of your expertise.
Originally Posted by
GrouchoWretch
.....
AFAIK, cyclists are everywhere expressly prohibited from operating on any road that we would call a freeway, and there are usually posted minimum speeds in the neighborhood of 45 mph.
At freeway speeds, no driver can steer or stop. He can only aim or slow down. There can't exist a duty to do the impossible. So bikes aren't allowed on the freeway.......
Wow, once again you show us how well versed you are in all nuances of both traffic laws and civil liability, and you share this expertise so freely, without even any regard to compensation. This is truely worth every cent that we have invested.
Psssst. Maybe you should actually pickup a drivers handbook and read it when you next visit a DMV, because your opinions are polar opposite of actual written law my friend.
Ride Safe!
... ...and do a bit of research....