Law change - Daytime headlights and ban on handheld devices

[Voltaire]

I recall that the lights on rule was in Germany 20 years ago when I was touring around, I complied until my BMW battery went flat riding around Munich, after that I didn't bother....no one cared.

Seeing at the Police can't cope with what they have to do already....can't see them paying much attention to old bikes with no headlight on.
maybe when you are being grilled by the cop you can point out all the drivers on their mobiles.
I used to drive a 54 Beetle and drove it around with no seatbelt....much like a former MP...because I was entitled too, got pulled over a couple of times and it took a bit of explaining. In hindsight not a great idea....I would not do it now....wheres my slippers...?

[Ixion]

I ride a '51 BSA regularly on the road and use the lights only when I absolutely have too. Not everyone owns a modern that can run lights at all times. Its just another excuse to blame bikers when tin top owners don't pay attention to driving and actually look where they're going.
I've been hit (in 30 years of regular riding) by 3 cars while riding bikes, in none of those incidents would lights have made a difference as the drivers were all simply NOT paying attention, - checking mirrors, looking both ways etc. The last time on my GSXR1100 I had my lights on, as I did when hit riding my VFR750.

This rule is bullshit.

At least your Beeza probably has a magneto. Spare a thought for the poor sod on a 5T or 6T Triumph with 6V dynamo charging and coil ignition!

This is going to be a real pain for classics. Will it mean that the present daylight WoF exemption for machines too old to have effective lights will no longer be available?

A lot of the 'middle aged' Jap bikes , the era with electric starter only and no kickstart , but weak charging systems, can run the battery down if used for prolonged periods at low speeds (like, round town).

I foresee a lot of bikers having to bump start their machines

I am investigation the possibility of finding LED lights that will comply with the rules.

[Goblin]

So how about *555? Will cops still tell drivers to stay on the phone and follow an alledged offender til they arrive? How will this work for concerned drivers who see a possible drunk driver weaving through traffic?

[MikeL]

The concerns about older bikes with electrical systems not designed for continuous headlight operation are valid, and I hope that some allowance or exemption can be applied here. The other worry is about bulb life. I may be wrong, but I have a suspicion that bulbs for lights on bikes that have the headlight permanently on may be longer life than others. I know that I have replaced the bulb on my Honda (not hardwired) twice already, but not on my Yamaha, although it has done almost the same mileage. It's not a problem provided the replacement bulbs are readily available, but for some older bikes this may be an issue.

[2wheeldrifter]

Just wondering... Is it true that it's harder to judge the speed of an oncoming vehicle with it's headlight/s on? Remember some years back that there was some form of debate about it.

Must admit though, with these new high powered lights they can be bloody blinding even during the day.... or is that just me with my screwed up eyes!?

[skidMark]

You were my target audience, no point going above that age now was it?

Nah thats the age of the girls you date.

[Atlas]

If they don't have an exemption for classics this is a nasty option, fifties and earlier machines had shitty 6v magdyno's that were made by the prince of darkness and even 60's bikes (which had better generators and 12v) were often vibrators that shook the bulbs to bits (and encouraged bolts to fall off).
I dont fancy being considered at fault simply cos my battery had gone flat or my bulb had fallen to bits half way to the cold kiwi.
I usually check my headlight works every 6 months when I see the nice WOF man.

I thought we'd got rid of Helen's PC mob, but sadly the bureaucrats remain.

[CookMySock]

Two-way radios specifically excluded from the ban - probably more to do with cops than truckies though...

It's quick and easy to throw the mic on the seat if you need both hands, and its quick and easy to find it again. Traditionally, if you put your cellphone on the seat beside you, and are guaranteed to never see it again.

Also, two-way radios are for professionals to use, and with any luck they have more than half a brain than an know-it-all idiot-consumer does. They should anyway, since they do it for a living.

Steve

[Badjelly]

Also, two-way radios are for professionals to use, and with any luck they have more than half a brain than an know-it-all idiot-consumer does. They should anyway, since they do it for a living.

Just as, in the case of cops, their superior skills and experience let them do U turns where no other driver can.

[The Stranger:Me]

Nah thats the age of the girls you date.

So I take it that's why you are behaving like a 5yr old girl then, trying to lure me into a date. Damn you're a sick fuck.

[ready4whatever]

cant do anything without a fine these days

[cambridgedan]

i have ma lights on anyway lol

[Metalor]

IT's a good idea i reckon. I can't turn mine off if the bike is on, but always had the light on when riding the volty.

[skidMark]

So I take it that's why you are behaving like a 5yr old girl then, trying to lure me into a date. Damn you're a sick fuck.

Admit it, it's working.

[Genestho]

A kneejerk political reaction. Dumb law, because it's unenforceable. If people are so stupid that they need a law to stop them doing something that logic and reason suggests they shouldn't be doing anyway, then we're doomed.

If having a law makes people sleep better at night, so be it. I guess now drivers can use their handhelds to dob in other drivers they see driving around using handhelds -- god forbid, they could even use the camera in their handheld to snap photos of offenders and then send those to *555.

**Wades In*** (You've been waiting for me eh Hitch? )
I'm on the fence and can see both sides!!!!here.



A copy and paste from a post I made, from an earlier thread.

"David Strayer, PhD, of the Applied Cognition Laboratory at the University of Utah has studied cell-phone impact for more than five years. His lab, using driving high-fidelity simulators while controlling for driving difficulty and time on task, has obtained unambiguous scientific evidence that cell-phone conversations disrupt driving performance. Human attention has a limited capacity, and studies suggest that talking on the phone causes a kind of “inattention blindness” to the driving scene.

Strayer and his colleagues compared data for hand-held and hands-free devices and found no difference in the impairment to driving, thus, they say, raising doubts about the scientific basis for regulations that prohibit only hand-held cell phones

Drivers should also be aware that whether a cell phone is hands-on or hands-free makes no difference in terms of mental distraction.
According to the research, the mental activity of conversation, whether in person or over the phone, is what takes one's mind off the road. What happens in the head happens regardless of what happens with the hands."

I found it interesting they say "Disturbingly, forthcoming research will show that talking on a cell phone (even hands-free) hurts driving even more than driving with blood alcohol at the legal limit (.08 wt/vol). When talking on a cell phone, drivers using a high-fidelity simulator were slower to brake and had more “accidents” than when they weren't on the phone. Their impairment level was actually a little higher than that of people intoxicated by ethanol (alcohol)."