Bought all my lights for Day Safety.

They also work for night centuries.

+1 People are... who and what they are. Enjoy the diversity!

of course you can LINK to it

Lights are probably the second most controversial topic on bikeforums.net. As has been demonstrated many times, there is no reason to go off topic and argue about it all over again.

As far as saying something about it, there was an incident a couple of years ago when a cyclist spoke up to some ninjas, and got beaten for it. I am not sure I could find anything about it now, it was in Madison Wisconsin. The ninjas were riding expensive bicycles

Florida Law on Bicycles:

(7) Every bicycle in use between sunset and sunrise shall be equipped with a lamp on the front exhibiting a white light visible from a distance of at least 500 feet to the front and a lamp and reflector on the rear each exhibiting a red light visible from a distance of 600 feet to the rear. A bicycle or its rider may be equipped with lights or reflectors in addition to those required by this section. A law enforcement officer may issue a bicycle safety brochure and a verbal warning to a bicycle rider who violates this subsection or may issue a citation and assess a fine for a pedestrian violation as provided in s. 318.18. The court shall dismiss the charge against a bicycle rider for a first violation of this subsection upon proof of purchase and installation of the proper lighting equipment.

So, if you think it is really a problem, then notify you local police about the issue, and have them issues a warning/ticket. If you want to be nice, you could mention that they're breaking the law.

GH

+1. Even in the big city some people don't realize how hard they are to see. A few years ago I almost hit a pedestrian while driving. He was walking in the street parallel to a line of parked cars wearing a long, back trench coat and a dark hat. Backlighting from oncoming headlights can make it difficult to see a pedestrian or cyclist dressed in dark clothes and using no light.

Yeah! Excellent idea. Complain to the police about cyclists not obeying laws.

Thanks. I guess I meant I couldn't link to posts, namely mine.

IMO, I think there is pretty good agreement about lights in general, though a current thread raises the controversy of flashing vs steady lights (I took an alternative position). The main popcorn threads I follow are about wearing mirrors and listening to music.

unless we deleted your post, you can still click on the post number and get the link from there.

The arguments here are mostly about too bright lights. If you could sort by closed threads, that's way up on the list.

I wish I could get cyclists to do a better job at appearing to follow the law.

And your point is? Cyclists that don't obey the laws of the road reflect badly on those that do obey the laws. And by getting a ninja a ticket, you may be saving their life.

GH

The BEST way for the police to show you that they are doing their best to enforce traffic laws that apply to cyclists... is to watch you and ticket you.

Cyclist aren't exactly beloved on America streets and roads now. Cyclist are well know for zig-zagging thru traffic and not stopping for lights and stop signs. The police know that! More complaining [to the police] about cyclists is NOT going to reflect positively.

Maybe you're right. I wish I could be that optimistic.

This thread has hit on one of my pet peeves. Yes, I'm a light geek, I admit it.
That said, jon c. has said it best. Your advice would not be well received at all.
Best hope is that a LEO spots them. Enforcing the law is the police department's job.

Having said all that:

1. Why on earth would anyone ride without lights today, given how fantastic today's bike lights are?
There is simply no defense or excuse for this.

2. As someone mentioned, you can't fix stupid.

Ride your own ride. I can't tell you how sick I am of A-holes telling me I need a helmet..and then blowing the next stop sign.

I have yet to figure out the scoring system here, but I believe that is a +1000.

Account 11 years old. Checks out.

They're just smarter than we are. Two thirds of the applicants to the our prestigious local university are denied. Cyclists sans lights are very common, the vast majority obviously students bright enough for admission. Evidently they're so bright they regard lights unnecessary. BTW our local bike club offers free lights. My worst nightmare = taking out some dim bulb on a bike. I've had a few close shaves and the opportunity last spring to encourage the rider beside me at a traffic light to please get a bike light. He agreed to do so.

Those ninjas don't Really endanger anyone unless they are riding the wrong way or unless you are ninja-ing too.

I am a firm believer in lights, having ridden in urban, suburban, and pitch-black rural roads, all of which can be ridden a lot more safely with proper lighting, in my experience. But sometimes, on very bright moonlit nights, I run without headlights just to enjoy the moonlight. Cars can see me as they approach, and I only ride when I know the road and can see well enough to pick out new obstacles (can never tell when a branch will blow into the road or some bit of debris will drop from a car) and other cyclists or pedestrians.

If someone were to pass me and yell "Lights!" I would ignore the person, same as I ignore the self-righteous dweebs who yell, "Where's your helmet?!" (By "ignore" I mean I won't yell "Inside your mom" or something ... any more.) So I usually don't tell others how to ride.

When I see someone approaching me on the wrong side of the road on a bike, I figure that is someone already finding life all too challenging, so I just move way out of the way.

There is a whole lot of stuff wrong in this world, but most of us never see any of it. We think "big issues'" are things like cyclists not wearing helmets or using lights. I try not to get too worked up about stuff, not to get others all worked up, unless it is something like torture, kidnapping, that kind of stuff. A cyclist with no lights, I can handle.

Ninjas endanger everyone in their proximity. Last moment recognition could result in an evasive maneuver by a walker/jogger/runner, bicycle rider or powered vehicle operator causing an accident and injuries.

Why do you think drivers can see you? Because they have headlights?

Let's say I'm driving a car, and I pull into the intersection. You are riding on the cross street. You crash into the side of my car, I never saw you. You were riding ninja, and I don't have headlights pointing sideways.

Let's say I'm driving a car, come to an intersection, and turn right. You are riding in the lane or bike lane behind me or beside me. You crash into the side of my turning car, or my car runs you down as I turn. I never saw you. You were riding ninja, and I don't have headlights pointing backwards.

I assume you mean on those moonlit rides?

I assume cars coming behind me can see me because I have a pair of tail lights flashing out of sequence with each other. I sometimes use a tiny white blinkie facing forward, sometimes not, but I am not too worried about approaching cars.

As for side streets most of the roads I ride that way have no side street which is why I am willing to risk it. However, there are driveways. I use my senses and common sense when riding lights or no lights. If I am approaching a side street with a car emerging, even if I am using my 500-lumen headlight, I assume I am invisible to the driver. if I were to be riding with no headlight and a car was going to pull out (it has Never happened but could) I would be forced to stop or at least slow and either let it go, or turn on my light.

Much as with riding without a helmet ... people think that anyone who rides without lights must be an idiot. Fact is, sometimes I am but Not while riding at night with or without lights. Idiot bike riders don't tend to last long. I got rid of my training wheels about fifty years ago. If I were just phenomenally lucky i would have hit the lottery by now ... so maybe I am not an idiot but think differently than you?

Whether you, in your car, have your lights on or not, I can use my ninja senses to detect .. A freaking Automobile! Think this through. What you suggest is that Because I Don't Have Lights, I Cannot See a Car??? Think it through?

Either you really think I am too stupid to ride a bike at all (in which case you would be pretty stupid to try to engage me in a logical discussion) or you really didn't think this one through.

As I said above, and I think as any cyclist who has ridden in traffic more than about five times and survived has learned, you never take it for granted that cars pulling onto the road notice you, even in broad daylight, even at night with a 500-lumen headlight plus an added blinkie ... and pretty much any cyclist who T-boned a car in that situation, dark or lights, day or night, would be deserving of a punch from The Fist of Darwin.

Your other scenario is the same. if a cyclist rams a car turning at an intersection, he deserves to be smacked down with Darwin's Hammer, for the good of the rest of the human race. In that case the issue wouldn't be that the driver could not see the bike, but that the rider was a moron.

Please, do yourself a favor and don't keep debating people you think are morons.

Accidents in which cyclists hit cars that pull out from side streets are not uncommon at all. The cyclist can't always stop or swerve in time. Accidents in which cyclists are cut off by turning cars are very common ("right hook"). These are the most common sort of bike/car collisions in my city, because we have a lot of curbside bike lanes.

Your statement seems to deny that any cyclists could be so stupid to get in such an accident and/or to say that cyclists involved in such accidents are all morons and deserve it.

I'm not sure if you are a moron, but you are certainly saying dumb things here.

Which is something (dumb statements) I see a lot, from people who are trying to justify not taking some safety measure (helmets, seatbelts, lights, etc).

Why not simply say "I know that doing XYZ (e.g. riding at night without lights) is more dangerous that the alternative, but I do it anyway for reasons sufficient to me".

The issue here isn't one of lightsm, it is one of sight and judgment. If I ma riding in a situation where I might get hammered fromt he side or a car might puill in fornt of me, slow down.

Same principle when driving a car, by the way. You proceed at the speed which is safe given the current conditions. Fifteen years of commuting in the most dangerous city in the nation at the time, I learned that my eyes and my brain were all that would keep me off the bumpers or the pavement.

Again, very much a matter of awareness and judgment. if you cannot stop in time you were going too fast. if yuo did not anticipate that a car might make a turn at an intersection, you were not using sufficient foresight. I expect that cars won't signal, will switch lanes, will suddenly realize they are passing their turns while texting, lighting a cigarette, changing the music, yelling at kids--all at the same time---and I adjust accordingly. Thus, I am still riding.
i think you mean, my statement seems to imply ... and yes, if I hit a car, I am at fault in most cases, and really, who cares who is at fault? I don't ride to show that I know thew rules of the road, i ride so that I can survive and ride more tomorrow. if a car misjudges my speed or doesn't see me and pulls out in front of me ... how fast must I be going not to be able to slow, stop,, or turn inside the car? Maybe I should have bene watching that car from several hundred yards back, and been ready for the kind of bonehead moves which drivers often make?

Shoot, i do that in my car, where I am surrounded by steel. Why wouldn't i do that on my bike?

In my experience, often cyclists get into accidents because they got a bit complacent or decided to push the limit a bit. If a rider is steaming down the side of the road or in a bike lane and decides to assume a car won't cut across or pull out ... well, in your own observation that would be a tremendously unwise choice.

Tell me ... how often has it happened to you? Or maybe things you simply cannot or choose not to understand. Either way, if you think i am so dumb, why respond? Oh, I see ... you are caling me dumb as a rhetorical tactic. well, thanks very much.

You choose to ride a bike in this incredibly dangerous traffic you were describing in your post, where so many riders get hit ... seems to me you are making the riskiest choice and trying to justify it. You see a lot of those riders who get hi wearing helmets? Yet ... they still got hit. Hmmm ... yeah, it is always a good idea to call everyone who disagrees with you "dumb" even if they aren't the ones getting hit.

I might be doing it all wrong and those other folks doing it your way may be doing it perfectly correctly, but They are the ones picking gravel out of their wounds.

You: "Stealth mode!"
Ninja: "What?"
You: "Good morning, you snuck up on me again."
Ninja: "Whateverdude"
You: "Ride on"

Saying "Ninja" might have variable reactions depending upon the other person, "stealth mode" might not.

Some riders ride dark on purpose for various reasons, so speak or don't speak for your own peace of mind, then pedal on.

I have Avoided intersection and driveway crossing , crashes by having lights.

If cars were not required to have lights, the only folks to have them would be a few people on car forums.

I often encounter dark clothed dark bicycles bicyclists who have neither lights nor even reflectors. As I pass them I'll call out to them, "You may not reralize it but you're virtually invisible to everyone behind you!" I figure that at least then they know.

I'm amazed at how many bicyclists don't want to spend even a few dollars on lights.

I like this time of the year when the temperatures are low because it keeps a lot of those "Stealth Bicyclists" indoors.

The problem with the no lights bicyclists is the attitude that nothing bad will ever happen to them.

Cheers