Headlights on

[sefer]

Err sorry to poke a stick at correctness here old chap.
But are you saying that we are a legal form of transport that is allowed to bend the rules?
I mean I let bikes go past regardless, but "legitimate" and "splitting" should not be in the same sentence in my mind. Its like "safe" and "chainsaw".

Ahhh, passing on the right within the same lane is perfectly legal, and if people actually were as far left as practical like they should be we could pass on the right, legally, with little problem (as oppose to on the left of the next lane because everyone stays as close to the centre line as possible).

[BMWST?]

no,but it would be crazy to think you have been seen just because you have it on.be paranoid and survive.
I have been riding non stop for 33 years WITHOUT LIGHTS.(i always use them if it is overcast/raining,or of course,Dark.)

the new law is bullshit.they cant see you if they arent looking/texting/arguing with the kids/daydreaming/stoned/drunk.or just dont care.

be aware and dont take anything for granted.

They dont see trains, and they are bright red and have really big headlights..

I used to ride with light of,, then tap the "pass" button if I thought a driver had not seen me, it seemed very effective.

My new bike can't turn the light off, so I flash "hi" instead.

My only concern (other than the fact I will have to put day running lights on my older bikes, is that a right light distorts distance perception.

So even though you may be seen, your distance and speed may be misjudged.

Oh yes culpable negligence, yesterday our only crime was riding motorbikes, today if your bulb goes and some twat t/bones you, it's your fault for not having your light on.

" Sorry mate I didn't see you, yes I know visibility's good and your covered from head to toe in dayglo yellow, as is your passenger and yes it is a fuckin enormous bright pink bike but you didn't have your light on did you ,see, that's what happens sunshine. Lucky for you I caught a glimpse of you past the messy kebab I was eating, as it is I've burnt myself with my fag and dropped coke all over the dashboard. You really should be more careful bud".

did make a submission on thiss?It has been on the cards for AGES...most people i see have their lights on any way on bike s of all size shapes and ages.I do on my 1989 r 100 gs.I will be looking at a daylight running lamps fitted to the indicators .Battery can handle it at the mo cause i have a good run against the main traffic flow with few holdups.Riding with healdlights on is only part of a bikers defence.You still have to assume the worst.

[martybabe]

So sorry but there's no sympathy for the increase in ACC fees,no sympathy toward the sportbike riders that still go past my front gate just like the dumb fuck that ruined his and his familys life outside my front gate did.
So while I know it's not you as such,thanks for the reminder anyway.

Mate, I'm sincerely sorry for your troubles, that is a terrible thing to have to go through for any family but I was actually agreeing with your post.

The bit following it was merely a silly tongue in cheek possible scenario designed to re-enforce your post as to how the new law may affect us in a two vehicle accident.

I shall not reply beyond this point for fear of upsetting you further but much as I don't know your personal circumstances, you also do not know mine and I am none of the things you raise objection to above.

[davereid]

That's a very good one eyed view of things mate,but it's also totaly wrong.

You are the one who is being one eyed.

In any group, there will always be some individuals who are extreme. Its going to mean there are some guys who ride really safely, and there will be some cocks too.

But, if you actually ever got to a run, you would find the vast majority of riders were in the middle.

A bit of a twist every now and then, but a good appreciation of risk, and good management of it.

Your comment that bikers deserve the new acc levies is a telling one. Maybe you should consider all the things that people do that give them cover without needing to insure for, and reflect a bit on how well ACC actually works, mostly because it doesnt (usually) focus on what you do.

So kids on bikes, skiers, snowboarders, rugby players, and little old ladies with dodgy hips enjoy the cover of ACC. Covered of course, by a subsidy, by the guy lying on the couch doing nothing.

As for your denial of the fact that this rule will pass blame to motorcyclists.

In fact, ACC already have a category of "motorcyclist partially to blame" to cover "I did not see him, his headlight was off".

[JohnC]

Mate, I'm sincerely sorry for your troubles, that is a terrible thing to have to go through for any family but I was actually agreeing with your post.

The bit following it was merely a silly tongue in cheek possible scenario designed to re-enforce your post as to how the new law may affect us in a two vehicle accident.

I shall not reply beyond this point for fear of upsetting you further but much as I don't know your personal circumstances, you also do not know mine and I am none of the things you raise objection to above.

Yes fair enough,I am still very pissed off over the whole thing,also very bummed out about the result for the guy involved,,wouldn't wished it on any body.
There was no insult intended toward you,,,and I'm sorry that it came across that way.

[Dealer]

I personally don't like the idea of cars with headlights as it makes it harder to see a single light of a bike agmongst all the other lights, just a perception .

Yeah, but on a rainy day, when your mirrors and visor are fogged or wet, it gets pretty hard to see dark coloured cars coming up beside you.
There should be more emphasis on headlights at times of limited visibility.
And its (relatively) easy to spot a bike headlight (for bikers), cos they are the ones flickering, as the bike bounces up and down.

My biggest problem is that my bike only has one (dipped) headlight, and when that blows, its high beam or nothing.

[JohnC]

You are the one who is being one eyed.

In any group, there will always be some individuals who are extreme. Its going to mean there are some guys who ride really safely, and there will be some cocks too.

But, if you actually ever got to a run, you would find the vast majority of riders were in the middle.

A bit of a twist every now and then, but a good appreciation of risk, and good management of it.

Your comment that bikers deserve the new acc levies is a telling one. Maybe you should consider all the things that people do that give them cover without needing to insure for, and reflect a bit on how well ACC actually works, mostly because it doesnt (usually) focus on what you do.

So kids on bikes, skiers, snowboarders, rugby players, and little old ladies with dodgy hips enjoy the cover of ACC. Covered of course, by a subsidy, by the guy lying on the couch doing nothing.

As for your denial of the fact that this rule will pass blame to motorcyclists.

In fact, ACC already have a category of "motorcyclist partially to blame" to cover "I did not see him, his headlight was off".

I don't recall saying we deserve it,what I did say is I have no sympathy about it.
As to being one eyed,,,I was one of the founding members of the Bikers rights organisation and I've stood up for bikers virtualy all my life while the vast majority have done nothing.
I've ridden for close to 40 years so impling I need to actualy go on a run is just funny to me,,,sorry about that one,I do realise you don't know me from the next joe.
I agree with your comment about most of us being in the middle.
But that agreement is also tempted by the fact I've been on three KB group rides and in each one somebody crashed by being stupid,,,there were no other vehicules involved,,,just plain stupid riding,so maybe we just shouldn't go there.
I also realise a lot of society gets carried by the rest of us,,not just in reguards acc and motorcycles either,but get to deep into that one and you'll spend your whole life arguing about the injustices forced on the common folk,and mate that's just to much for this commoner thanks.
Anyway the subject was about was head lights on,,and if you read my other posts on "that matter" you will see I totaly agree with you,so lets just keep it to that for now even though it was me that got swung off subject in the first place,,,it happens.
So yes we will get blamed for any accident we're involved in if we don't have our light on "our fault or not",,and yes the logic of not seeing somebody because their light wasn't on,while still knowing their light wasn't on has always been a bit of a stretch for me.
Now just to add fuel to the fire,,,what's the bet the charge of "no headlight" won't be classed an accident promoting one,and thus cost more when they get out the wet buss ticket.

[davereid]

Good as mate... I over reacted a bit, feeling a bit touchy about the entire ACC thing, so must count to ten before I post. !