View Poll Results: Should taillights be mandatory for night riding?
Voters: 80. You may not vote on this poll
Should taillights be mandatory?
#101
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
4 Posts
Rest assured if you don't have an "approved" reflector on your bike, it WILL be held against you if you're hit at night. Even if you're lit up like a Christmas tree.
#102
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,957
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,527 Times
in
1,040 Posts
I've heard that urban legend before, can you validate it by pointing to a single case where lack of a reflector "was held" against a well lit cyclist?
#103
Elitest Murray Owner
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,657
Bikes: 1972 Columbia Tourist Expert III, Columbia Roadster
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
If you're smart enough to have a tail light, then why would you care if there was a law requiring you to have one?
It's not like this is a slippery slope, and next thing you know bikes are going to have airbags and seat belts.
It's not like this is a slippery slope, and next thing you know bikes are going to have airbags and seat belts.
#104
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edgewater, CO
Posts: 3,213
Bikes: Tons
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Also, where do you draw the line? The argument is that lights make it easier for a car to see you. Sure, I'll give you that. So do reflective vests. So does reflective tape all around your bike. So does three taillights.
If all these make it easier for a car to see you, then why not have a law?
You're right though, requirements like those would be ludicrous, but if you ride with those, why wouldn't you care?
#105
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 4,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Then is the REAL ISSUE that there should be a mandatory requirement that cyclists must wear retro-reflective vests, reflective jerseys at night (light, bright colored clothing by day), and apply retro-reflective trimming and brightly painted surfaces to their bicycles as well as rear tail lights to maximize their visibility at "quite a distance"? Day and night? Couldn't hurt, eh? If not, why not?
#106
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,957
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,527 Times
in
1,040 Posts
Why not; as well as mandatory tire studs for slippery conditions. And mandatory "training" by "certified" trainers to ride a bicycle in the approved manner.
Goes without saying what the mandatory safety wear should be on cyclist heads at all times. Anyone who doesn't agree with additional mandatory safety requirements shouldn't be allowed to ride anyway,eh?
Goes without saying what the mandatory safety wear should be on cyclist heads at all times. Anyone who doesn't agree with additional mandatory safety requirements shouldn't be allowed to ride anyway,eh?
#108
Senior Member
Or ban it.
#109
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto (again) Ontario, Canada
Posts: 6,931
Bikes: Old Bike: 1975 Raleigh Delta, New Bike: 2004 Norco Bushpilot
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
Yesterday night I didn't see a ninja cyclist who was riding at the extreme right edge of the road until the last second. I believe said cyclist had the standard reflectors, and nothing else on a very busy 2 lane road (N Campbell Station for you locals).
So, should taillights be required safety equipment for night riding?
So, should taillights be required safety equipment for night riding?
#111
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Because its just one more law for our judicial system to handle and police to enforce.
Also, where do you draw the line? The argument is that lights make it easier for a car to see you. Sure, I'll give you that. So do reflective vests. So does reflective tape all around your bike. So does three taillights.
If all these make it easier for a car to see you, then why not have a law?
You're right though, requirements like those would be ludicrous, but if you ride with those, why wouldn't you care?
Also, where do you draw the line? The argument is that lights make it easier for a car to see you. Sure, I'll give you that. So do reflective vests. So does reflective tape all around your bike. So does three taillights.
If all these make it easier for a car to see you, then why not have a law?
You're right though, requirements like those would be ludicrous, but if you ride with those, why wouldn't you care?
That being said, IMHO the law should mandate a basic level of safety, and no more. You're correct in that safety vests, training, and such probably do make people safer, but they would go "beyond" the basic level IMO and would make cycling more expensive and less accessible, not to mention take away from people's sense of style. Consider the extreme in the other direction - no rules whatsoever. No brakes, no reflectors, nothing. Would such be a good idea?
#112
Banned
That's not going to happen, if it was possible, because it seems everybody's version of common sense tends to be a little different. I had a former employer who tried to tell me that working for him would be easy as long as one used their common sense. I tried like hell for several years to figure out what his version of common sense was, but only to end up resigning my employment with him in total frustration.
#113
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edgewater, CO
Posts: 3,213
Bikes: Tons
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Reason is that a reasonable level of safety benefits everyone. No one wants to wreck with anyone else, even if the other person were a ninja. Ninjas getting killed skew the statistics on cycling safety to be more dangerous than it really is or should be. The exact amount of skew is probably unknown at the present.
That being said, IMHO the law should mandate a basic level of safety, and no more. You're correct in that safety vests, training, and such probably do make people safer, but they would go "beyond" the basic level IMO and would make cycling more expensive and less accessible, not to mention take away from people's sense of style. Consider the extreme in the other direction - no rules whatsoever. No brakes, no reflectors, nothing. Would such be a good idea?
That being said, IMHO the law should mandate a basic level of safety, and no more. You're correct in that safety vests, training, and such probably do make people safer, but they would go "beyond" the basic level IMO and would make cycling more expensive and less accessible, not to mention take away from people's sense of style. Consider the extreme in the other direction - no rules whatsoever. No brakes, no reflectors, nothing. Would such be a good idea?
Some states require both a front light and rear light. Other states only require a front light and rear reflector. Is there a large gap in the number of traffic collisions between these states to justify a requirement of a rear light? These things all have to be considered.
If "ninjas" with only rear reflectors are so much of a threat to public safety, then why haven't more municipalities mandated rear lights?
#114
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edgewater, CO
Posts: 3,213
Bikes: Tons
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
That's not going to happen, if it was possible, because it seems everybody's version of common sense tends to be a little different. I had a former employer who tried to tell me that working for him would be easy as long as one used their common sense. I tried like hell for several years to figure out what his version of common sense was, but only to end up resigning my employment with him in total frustration.
#115
Membership Not Required
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: On the road-USA
Posts: 16,855
Bikes: Giant Excursion, Raleigh Sports, Raleigh R.S.W. Compact, Motobecane? and about 20 more! OMG
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 15 Times
in
14 Posts
The standard reflectors are fine, if the motor vehicle is at the correct angle from the bicycle, like some of the older LCD monitors, it's directly behind or within a few degrees. Given this, tail lights should be required, but there should also be a federal standard for bicycle tail lights, like there is for automotive tail lights, effectively the tail light would act like a reflector when not lit.
Aaron
__________________
Webshots is bailing out, if you find any of my posts with corrupt picture files and want to see them corrected please let me know. :(
ISO: A late 1980's Giant Iguana MTB frameset (or complete bike) 23" Red with yellow graphics.
"Cycling should be a way of life, not a hobby.
RIDE, YOU FOOL, RIDE!"_Nicodemus
"Steel: nearly a thousand years of metallurgical development
Aluminum: barely a hundred
Which one would you rather have under your butt at 30mph?"_krazygluon
Webshots is bailing out, if you find any of my posts with corrupt picture files and want to see them corrected please let me know. :(
ISO: A late 1980's Giant Iguana MTB frameset (or complete bike) 23" Red with yellow graphics.
"Cycling should be a way of life, not a hobby.
RIDE, YOU FOOL, RIDE!"_Nicodemus
"Steel: nearly a thousand years of metallurgical development
Aluminum: barely a hundred
Which one would you rather have under your butt at 30mph?"_krazygluon
#116
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
FWIW the Cateye TL-LD500 also is a combined taillight/reflector. I am of the opinion that it's far more important that one has a taillight that works, than to worry about which light to get although some taillights are undoubtedly superior to others.
#117
Membership Not Required
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: On the road-USA
Posts: 16,855
Bikes: Giant Excursion, Raleigh Sports, Raleigh R.S.W. Compact, Motobecane? and about 20 more! OMG
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 15 Times
in
14 Posts
Aaron
__________________
Webshots is bailing out, if you find any of my posts with corrupt picture files and want to see them corrected please let me know. :(
ISO: A late 1980's Giant Iguana MTB frameset (or complete bike) 23" Red with yellow graphics.
"Cycling should be a way of life, not a hobby.
RIDE, YOU FOOL, RIDE!"_Nicodemus
"Steel: nearly a thousand years of metallurgical development
Aluminum: barely a hundred
Which one would you rather have under your butt at 30mph?"_krazygluon
Webshots is bailing out, if you find any of my posts with corrupt picture files and want to see them corrected please let me know. :(
ISO: A late 1980's Giant Iguana MTB frameset (or complete bike) 23" Red with yellow graphics.
"Cycling should be a way of life, not a hobby.
RIDE, YOU FOOL, RIDE!"_Nicodemus
"Steel: nearly a thousand years of metallurgical development
Aluminum: barely a hundred
Which one would you rather have under your butt at 30mph?"_krazygluon
#119
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto (again) Ontario, Canada
Posts: 6,931
Bikes: Old Bike: 1975 Raleigh Delta, New Bike: 2004 Norco Bushpilot
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
The reason for a certification, is to make it easier to buy a decent tail light, and easier for states/provinces to word laws requiring them. For example a state requirement for a tail light that meets federal certification, is easier then expecting one to know whether a specific unit is visible a certain distance back. It also makes buying one easier, in that you just look for models that meet that same certification.
#120
Membership Not Required
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: On the road-USA
Posts: 16,855
Bikes: Giant Excursion, Raleigh Sports, Raleigh R.S.W. Compact, Motobecane? and about 20 more! OMG
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 15 Times
in
14 Posts
The reason for a certification, is to make it easier to buy a decent tail light, and easier for states/provinces to word laws requiring them. For example a state requirement for a tail light that meets federal certification, is easier then expecting one to know whether a specific unit is visible a certain distance back. It also makes buying one easier, in that you just look for models that meet that same certification.
Aaron
__________________
Webshots is bailing out, if you find any of my posts with corrupt picture files and want to see them corrected please let me know. :(
ISO: A late 1980's Giant Iguana MTB frameset (or complete bike) 23" Red with yellow graphics.
"Cycling should be a way of life, not a hobby.
RIDE, YOU FOOL, RIDE!"_Nicodemus
"Steel: nearly a thousand years of metallurgical development
Aluminum: barely a hundred
Which one would you rather have under your butt at 30mph?"_krazygluon
Webshots is bailing out, if you find any of my posts with corrupt picture files and want to see them corrected please let me know. :(
ISO: A late 1980's Giant Iguana MTB frameset (or complete bike) 23" Red with yellow graphics.
"Cycling should be a way of life, not a hobby.
RIDE, YOU FOOL, RIDE!"_Nicodemus
"Steel: nearly a thousand years of metallurgical development
Aluminum: barely a hundred
Which one would you rather have under your butt at 30mph?"_krazygluon
#121
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352
Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
The standard reflectors are fine, if the motor vehicle is at the correct angle from the bicycle, like some of the older LCD monitors, it's directly behind or within a few degrees. Given this, taillights should be required, but there should also be a federal standard for bicycle taillights, like there is for automotive taillights, effectively the taillight would act like a reflector when not lit.
#122
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ogopogo's shoreline
Posts: 4,082
Bikes: LHT, Kona Smoke
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
I'm torn.
Being in Canada, and carfree, I'm inevitably riding in the dark for half of the year.
And I wouldn't be caught dead (or rather I'm afraid I would) without my headlight, blinkies and ANSI vest.
But do I want to legislate that? I dunno... maybe I do.
I certainly have come upon some wrongway ninja idjits that I've had to quickly navigate around.
And if we're TRULY traffic (which I adamantly believe), don't we have some responsibilities?
Being in Canada, and carfree, I'm inevitably riding in the dark for half of the year.
And I wouldn't be caught dead (or rather I'm afraid I would) without my headlight, blinkies and ANSI vest.
But do I want to legislate that? I dunno... maybe I do.
I certainly have come upon some wrongway ninja idjits that I've had to quickly navigate around.
And if we're TRULY traffic (which I adamantly believe), don't we have some responsibilities?
#123
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ogopogo's shoreline
Posts: 4,082
Bikes: LHT, Kona Smoke
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Something about being unprepared on the road and putting others (and yourself) at risk.
Can you believe it? Silly Canadians.
/snark
#124
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto (again) Ontario, Canada
Posts: 6,931
Bikes: Old Bike: 1975 Raleigh Delta, New Bike: 2004 Norco Bushpilot
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
I agree, but rather than trying to come up with a completely new set of regulations (I know the government needs to justify it's existence) they could just adopt the standards from a country that has them already worked out. Like Germany... Unfortunately the only current standard in the US for rear reflectors for bicycles is the CSPC standards and they leave a lot to be desired. We need to go global with ISO standards. I have long used DOT reflective tape as an adjunct to the stock CSPC reflectors, there are several states that the law states that the if the bike is ridden at night it must have the reflectors required by federal law (ie;CSPC standards), if you replace them with something better you are in violation of their laws. In the US many laws are left up to the individual states, this is a case where a universal federal standard "might" be a better idea. All of my bikes exceed the minimum standards for any state I have ridden in. At minimum I run a front generator light with stand light, a rear light with stand light and a Planet Bike Super Flash. I also have reflective components on my clothing and gear. Unfortunately the minimum requirements are not enforced for all bike riders, it is also unfortunate because the rider is the one that is most likely to come out on the losing end when they are involved in an accident.
Aaron
Aaron
#125
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,040
Bikes: Bacchetta Giro, Strada
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
https://www.atxbs.com/?q=node/1095
Basically, the cop ran into Adam and messed up his rear wheel. Totally their fault (and stupid, because it was fairly well lit and he was only one of like 200 cyclists), and they admitted it. However, the city attorney decided that they would not be paying for the damages because while Adam had both headlight and taillight on his person, the law says the bike must be so equipped, and he was violating the (letter of the) law, and therefore they would not pay.
Ultimately, Adam appealed this ruling and won -- they paid for his damages. But my point is, they will attempt to use ANY little violation of the law, even if you're doing way better than what the law requires, to avoid paying a claim or taking responsibility. Texas law requires a rear flasher OR a reflector, and so he was good with a flasher, but rest assured, had the law required a reflector, they'd have used that as yet another reason to deny his claim.