Originally Posted by
AmsterDan
Obviously a flashing light is more 'noticeable'. That's why I said a steady light would be more than sufficient. (Not saying a steady light is more visible than blinking).
I also didn't say blinded by the tail light, I said the impressions of getting blinded. So, get your passive thinking but further than your nose is long and think ... for passing cars, I rather have them being able to focus better on the road, making it safer for you and a driver. Even then when the car hits you, SSP, you had your steady light on and you owe them in court anyhow.
Don't take this offensive guys.
I am a very experienced cyclist from the Netherlands and know what I am talking about ... this is what I've seen, it's something I want to show you as a driver as well. I am hoping for a more informative response other than 'I own them in court' this and that.
Which means you're experienced with riding around Dutch drivers. Negotiating cars while on a bike is entirely different and, from what I'm told, much more challenging in North America. We need absolutely every tool available to not get hit.
Also, I'm not sure what 'the impressions of getting blinded' means. Can you see? Can you pilot your car in a straight line? Good. Then don't hit the blinking thing.
Again, the number of cyclists that have gotten the "but I didn't see you!" response from cars that almost hit them, despite using steady lights, implies that blinkies are of benefit.
Don't confuse people disagreeing with you for not getting 'a more informative response.' We hear you. I think most people disagree.