Cylists without lights - disproportionately annoys me!!

Dan_Gleebitz

NoSatisfaction wrote: »

And a motorist that hit them because they were riding in the dark, dressed in black with no lights would probably be sued and prosecuted!!!:mad:

To many motorists drive round in Christmas trees (they have every bloody light on that will turn on).
But does it help them see any better?
Very rarely, it just dazzles every oncoming road user.
Dan

flimsier

When I bought my bike (£700) I never got a bell.

Mupette

NoSatisfaction wrote: »

And a motorist that hit them because they were riding in the dark, dressed in black with no lights would probably be sued and prosecuted!!!:mad:

Isn't it against the law for cycling without lights, and if they were hit by a car, it is indeed the cyclist's fault as the driver was unable to see them?

Pound

Dan_Gleebitz wrote: »

And as a fellow cyclist. It really annoys me when I see people cycling without wearing a helmet. You can afford the bike so you can afford a helmet.

A helmet is good if the cyclists head comes into contact with concrete. But that's only going to happen if the cyclist falls off their bike and lands on their head; experienced cyclists aren't likely to do this. The biggest risk to cyclists is a collision with motor vehicles, a helmet isn't going to help a cyclist much when 3 tonnes of steel hits them.

I personally think helmets have very little safety impact compared with the risks that cyclists face. It's much more important to wear high-vis, use working lights, ensure brakes are in working order, etc. A common cause of fatalities for cyclists is cutting down the inside of HGVs, again wearing a helmet won't protect the body of a cyclist underneath the wheels of a HGV.

Dan_Gleebitz

Pound wrote: »

A helmet is good if the cyclists head comes into contact with concrete. But the biggest risk to cyclists is a collision with motor vehicles, experienced cyclists aren't likely to randomly fall off their bike. A helmet isn't going to help a cyclist much when 3 tonnes of steel hits them.

I don't think helmets have very little safety impact compared with the risks that cyclists face. It's much more important to wear high-vis, use working lights, ensure brakes are in working order, etc. A common cause of fatalities for cyclists is cutting down the inside of HGVs, again wearing a helmet won't protect the body of a cyclist underneath the wheels of a HGV.

So Motorcyclists shouldn't bother to wear helmets either.
Sorry I forgot that when in collisions with cars. The car and driver always aims for the head.

It is not what hits the cyclist or the other way round.
But how the cyclists lands after a collision/slip on ice/other.
Protection to the head is vital.
Adults and children alike should wear a helmet. Such a little outlay for a lot of protection.
Dan.

Dan_Gleebitz

Pound wrote: »

A helmet is good if the cyclists head comes into contact with concrete. But that's only going to happen if the cyclist falls off their bike and lands on their head; experienced cyclists aren't likely to do this.

I have to post again to take into account your edit.
Perhaps experienced cyclists spend more time learning how to fall off without hurting their head than actually riding the bike.
Experienced or not. In a fall you can go down on your front/back or side. But because your head is heavy and moves on your neck. Then it can/will bang down on the ground causing severe injury/trauma unless protected by a helmet.
Dan

NoSatisfaction

Mupette wrote: »

Isn't it against the law for cycling without lights, and if they were hit by a car, it is indeed the cyclist's fault as the driver was unable to see them?

Yes but lifes not fair!;)

Pound

Dan_Gleebitz wrote: »

Sorry I forgot that when in collisions with cars. The car and driver always aims for the head. It is not what hits the cyclist or the other way round. But how the cyclists lands after a collision/slip on ice/other.

I'm confused by your claim that the car and driver always aims for the head. Is this the justification why we should wear helmets?

If a cyclist is hit by a car going 40mph, the cyclist is probably dead regardless of how they fall or whether they're wearing a helmet.

Did you know more pedestrians are admitted to hospital with head injuries than cyclists? Should pedestrians wear helmets then?

The_Filipina_cleaner

On a similar theme, I get annoyed by other motorists who don't bother to turn their lights on. Just because you can still see where you are going, it does not mean that other people can see you clearly. They behave as though they have to pay for the electric to turn them on!

esuhl

Mupette wrote: »

Isn't it against the law for cycling without lights...?

Of course it's not illegal to cycle without lights. You only need them if it's dark. There are several reasons that bikes are not sold with lights. Firstly, the vast majority of cycle journeys are made during daylight, and also (if I remember reading the figures correctly) most cyclists never cycle after dark. Secondly, there are a wide range of lights available and most cyclists would prefer to select their own. I have a pair of bright front lights (cost over US$90) for cycling off-road when it's pitch black, and a flashing LED with >180 degree visibility for the rare occasion I cycle on the road. My rear light cost £20 and I'm thinking of getting a second one as a backup in case it ever fails. If I had been forced to buy a £10 set of "city lights" from the bike retailer, I would have completely wasted my money; similarly, a city rider would have wasted their money if they bought the lights I have. It makes sense for the bike and lights to be sold separately.

As for helmets, I read that drivers are less likely to make a "mental connection" with cyclists wearing helmets, lycra or face-masks. A study showed that drivers empathise less if they cannot see the facial features of a cyclist (in the same way that some drivers are more agressive with each other when they get behind the wheel because it is harder to interpret other drivers' body language), and (without being aware that they are doing so) drivers tend to see cyclists wearing a helmet and/or lycra as more experienced, and therefore tend to leave them less room when overtaking. In addition, it was shown that in general (i.e. not specifically relating to cycling), wearing safety equipment often makes the wearer feel safer, and thus engage in more risky activity. It is far from proven that wearing a helmet makes you safer as a cyclist.