5 ms·

It is not their responsibility to ensure you drive at a pace such that you can stop before striking an obstacle that was hard to see. Should we require pedestri

It is not their responsibility to ensure you drive at a pace such that you can stop before striking an obstacle that was hard to see. Should we require pedestrians using the road (like the one without shoulders) to dress in bright colors as well?

falcolas 7y ago
Frankly, yes. To paraphrase from a meme - the biker in black has to be lucky every time. A car only has to be unlucky once. In a vehicle-bicycle/pedestrian incident at the posted speed limit, no matter who is at fault, it's the bicyclist/pedestrian who will be dead. If someone wants to be alive, as well as correct, they'd do well to make themselves as visible as possible. But that's too practical a view to hold here on HN, I realize that. EDIT - I just realized this is likely in response to 'their fault' in my original message. I stand by it though. Riding a bike at night on an unlit 50mph rural road with no reflectors while wearing black is, as the GP said, suicide by car.
- SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
  You didn't mention night in your first message. You'd still be criminally at fault, and if you can't stop in time for a cyclist you're over-driving your headlights, but the cyclists would be well served by buying a back light for visibility. Keep in mind that wild animals can't, and they'll have roughly the same visibility as the cyclist.
  - falcolas 7y ago
    Yup, and there are thousands of animal strikes every year in my state alone. Every three days or so there's fresh roadkill on the side of the road when I drive into work. Night, day, twilight - a bicyclist can only increase their likelyhood of surviving their trip by adding reflectors and wearing bright clothing.
  - lostapathy 7y ago
    In a lot of states, a cyclist riding at night without a rear light is also breaking the law and at fault.
    - jschwartzi 7y ago
      Yep, and I've still managed to avoid hitting all of those I've encountered by driving slower at night in places where I can't see as far ahead of my vehicle.
      - falcolas 7y ago
        So far. Just hope that you're never distracted at just the wrong time. It only takes a couple of seconds to overrun your headlights, even at lower speeds. A car with high beams cresting a hill behind you. A car with high beams cresting the hill in front of you. An animal. A drink. A radio station change. A text message.
        SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
        But a light or bright clothes won't change that situation - if you're distracted or are coming up to the top of a hill reflection won't save the biker.
        falcolas 7y ago
        It’s the difference between having 4 seconds to avoid a collision, and having 30 or more (I’ve seen a few well outfitted bikers over a mile away before). Reflectors make that big of a difference; they don’t look or move naturally, and thus play well to our night vision strengths, even to a distracted driver.
        jschwartzi 7y ago
        I agree that bicyclists should outfit their bikes to be visible in the conditions they will encounter. But it it's also our responsibility as drivers to maintain a sense of the unseen hazards of our environment so as to avoid killing people who aren't as savvy as us. I wouldn't personally cycle without lights or reflectors but the fact that tons of people do means that if I'm not sure then I must assume there's someone out there.
- CalRobert 7y ago
  It's practical in the same way that a bulletproof backpack is practical for school. The person introducing the element of danger bears the responsibility for handling that danger responsibly.
kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
Reflectors are required in all 50 states. Active lighting is generally required after dusk. If you don't have these then it's hard to blame "reckless cagers" for not being able to see you.

falcolas 7y ago

Frankly, yes. To paraphrase from a meme - the biker in black has to be lucky every time. A car only has to be unlucky once. In a vehicle-bicycle/pedestrian incident at the posted speed limit, no matter who is at fault, it's the bicyclist/pedestrian who will be dead. If someone wants to be alive, as well as correct, they'd do well to make themselves as visible as possible. But that's too practical a view to hold here on HN, I realize that. EDIT - I just realized this is likely in response to 'their fault' in my original message. I stand by it though. Riding a bike at night on an unlit 50mph rural road with no reflectors while wearing black is, as the GP said, suicide by car.

SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
You didn't mention night in your first message. You'd still be criminally at fault, and if you can't stop in time for a cyclist you're over-driving your headlights, but the cyclists would be well served by buying a back light for visibility. Keep in mind that wild animals can't, and they'll have roughly the same visibility as the cyclist.
- falcolas 7y ago
  Yup, and there are thousands of animal strikes every year in my state alone. Every three days or so there's fresh roadkill on the side of the road when I drive into work. Night, day, twilight - a bicyclist can only increase their likelyhood of surviving their trip by adding reflectors and wearing bright clothing.
- lostapathy 7y ago
  In a lot of states, a cyclist riding at night without a rear light is also breaking the law and at fault.
  - jschwartzi 7y ago
    Yep, and I've still managed to avoid hitting all of those I've encountered by driving slower at night in places where I can't see as far ahead of my vehicle.
    - falcolas 7y ago
      So far. Just hope that you're never distracted at just the wrong time. It only takes a couple of seconds to overrun your headlights, even at lower speeds. A car with high beams cresting a hill behind you. A car with high beams cresting the hill in front of you. An animal. A drink. A radio station change. A text message.
      - SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
        But a light or bright clothes won't change that situation - if you're distracted or are coming up to the top of a hill reflection won't save the biker.
        falcolas 7y ago
        It’s the difference between having 4 seconds to avoid a collision, and having 30 or more (I’ve seen a few well outfitted bikers over a mile away before). Reflectors make that big of a difference; they don’t look or move naturally, and thus play well to our night vision strengths, even to a distracted driver.
        jschwartzi 7y ago
        I agree that bicyclists should outfit their bikes to be visible in the conditions they will encounter. But it it's also our responsibility as drivers to maintain a sense of the unseen hazards of our environment so as to avoid killing people who aren't as savvy as us. I wouldn't personally cycle without lights or reflectors but the fact that tons of people do means that if I'm not sure then I must assume there's someone out there.
CalRobert 7y ago
It's practical in the same way that a bulletproof backpack is practical for school. The person introducing the element of danger bears the responsibility for handling that danger responsibly.

kevin_thibedeau 7y ago

Reflectors are required in all 50 states. Active lighting is generally required after dusk. If you don't have these then it's hard to blame "reckless cagers" for not being able to see you.