neil46:
MrFlibble:
God, no. They’ll fit the [zb]iest lights they can legally get away with, so they’ll be virtually useless, and the people who buy them will just assume that they’re good enough, whilst those of us who want something actually useful will have to spend money on something that’s just going to be thrown away. I’d rather that the law was better enforced.At night your cycle MUST have front and rear lights lit. It MUST also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85). White front reflectors and spoke reflectors will also help you to be seen. Law RVLR regs 18 & 24
Yes, I don’t disagree with you that they should have lights at night. Just that bikes shouldn’t be forced to be sold with them. I’ve seen what they’ve done with the bell legislation (what a useless piece of [zb] that is), and I don’t think it will be worthwhile because the lights you’ll end up with will be worse than useless.
Like I said, I’d rather we had better enforcement.
neil46:
and another thing how often do you see cyclists riding along busy main roads and just to their left is a nice shiny cycle lane
Except that those cycle paths:
(a) often don’t go where you want to
(b) take a much more circuitous route
(c) force you to stop every 10 metres to wait for crossing lights to change
(d) force you to stop every 30 metres at a give way on a side road
(e) are full of pedestrians who are always wandering into your path with no warning
and
(f) are statistically more dangerous than roads. Did you know that?
And the reason why it’s shiny? That’s the light reflecting off the broken glass that most of the cycle paths around here are strewn with.