8 ms·

> Low beams are dangerous? Not really the focus of the article but that's a baffling statement to me. Like, sure, of course more light is better but unless your

> Low beams are dangerous? Not really the focus of the article but that's a baffling statement to me. Like, sure, of course more light is better but unless your lights aren't adjusted correctly, they're good? Great, even? I don't feel the need to blast my high beams into people's windows when driving down a lit residential street. That's weird and rude. They're definitely dangerous when you're on an unlit county road with deer-inhabited woods on either side.

stonogo 3y ago
No they're not. Driving faster than your light coverage is what's dangerous. You can drive on low beams all your life if you slow down.
- stubish 3y ago
  Not quite. Since we are talking about wildlife, you have to remember that the kangaroo does not respect your speed limit and may be approaching at 50km/h. You can avoid the mobs if you can spot them at a distance.
- Auracle 3y ago
  I’ve been hit by deer twice (and the same happened to my mom in my car). I’ve never hit a deer. Also, driving slower than other people is even more dangerous. Why would I slow down so I can use my low beams when I can just use my high beams to go the speed limit?
whateveracct 3y ago
And on the flipside, low beams (and incandescents) are way safer than high beams (and modern LEDs) on the expressway, where the purpose of lights is to be seen as much or moreso than to see.
magnetowasright 3y ago
I live in regional Australia. About half the roads I drive on are unlit, many are unmarked and have no bike lines/shoulder, and I'm surrounded by bush. We have roos instead of deer. Of course you'd be nuts to not use your high beams for that. Did I need to state that explicitly? My comment questioning low beams being dangerous was in opposition to the article's advocating for 'always on' high beams which is just not necessary and is extremely irritating in my admittedly unscientific opinion.

stonogo 3y ago

No they're not. Driving faster than your light coverage is what's dangerous. You can drive on low beams all your life if you slow down.

stubish 3y ago
Not quite. Since we are talking about wildlife, you have to remember that the kangaroo does not respect your speed limit and may be approaching at 50km/h. You can avoid the mobs if you can spot them at a distance.
Auracle 3y ago
I’ve been hit by deer twice (and the same happened to my mom in my car). I’ve never hit a deer. Also, driving slower than other people is even more dangerous. Why would I slow down so I can use my low beams when I can just use my high beams to go the speed limit?

whateveracct 3y ago

And on the flipside, low beams (and incandescents) are way safer than high beams (and modern LEDs) on the expressway, where the purpose of lights is to be seen as much or moreso than to see.

magnetowasright 3y ago

I live in regional Australia. About half the roads I drive on are unlit, many are unmarked and have no bike lines/shoulder, and I'm surrounded by bush. We have roos instead of deer. Of course you'd be nuts to not use your high beams for that. Did I need to state that explicitly? My comment questioning low beams being dangerous was in opposition to the article's advocating for 'always on' high beams which is just not necessary and is extremely irritating in my admittedly unscientific opinion.