Lights on Bicycles

snaps

Is it illegal not to have lights on Bikes in the dark? The amount of bikes in Galway riding in dark with no lights on is unreal. All the cyclists i saw this morning at 7am had no lights or bright colours, sometimes its so hard to see them. They all jump the red lights as well. If i hit a cyclist with no lights etc, How do i stand in the eye of the law? I ask this as my friend the other night knocked off i cyclist who was riding on the patch and then jumped off the path into the road. My friend just never saw him and bowled him straight off. The cyclist is claiming its my friends fault. The garda that is dealing with it when he came to incident really didnt really know how to answer my friend when he stated the cyclist didnt have lights. The cyclist also stated that he didnt have to have lights and also didnt have to obey the same traffic rules that motorists do? Surely this is not right?

tunney

troll..............

cornbb

That irks me. I cycle a bit myself sometimes. Cyclists put up with a lot of unfair crap on the roads (I've been knocked off my bike twice during daylight hours by asshole/idiot drivers) but when they don't use lights they are not doing themselves any favours or making any friends.

snaps

It will just surprise me if the law doesnt cover cyclists thats all?

sprinkles

tunney wrote: »

troll..............

? Are you describing your self?

As for cyclists I would have assumed that the rules of the road apply to them also and that they would have to have lights when travelling at night and if they don't they are putting themselves at risk. Some cyclists in Dublin are just downright dangerous - overtaking other cyclists in cycle lanes on busy streets etc.. I'm surprised there isn't more accidents.

Yes cyclists are required by law to have light on their bikes.

I personally would never leave the house without my lights, such an easy way to stay safe.

Raam

sprinkles wrote: »

? Are you describing your self?

As for cyclists I would have assumed that the rules of the road apply to them also and that they would have to have lights when travelling at night and if they don't they are putting themselves at risk. Some cyclists in Dublin are just downright dangerous - overtaking other cyclists in cycle lanes on busy streets etc.. I'm surprised there isn't more accidents.

They should have lights when it's dark, it's a pet hate of mine.

What is wrong with over taking other cyclists on busy streets? Providing they indicate that they are doing so, the traffic behind them should be courteous enough to allow them the time and space to do this. I'm sure there are muppets who don't execute their manovueres too well, but on the whole there is nothing wrong with over taking a slow cyclist.

Danbo!

Im just suprised at how many cyclists are able to cycle without lights. now that its dark for my commute home i feel unsafe even with lights. as for your mate who hit the cyclist unfortunately in the eyes of the law he should be prepared to stop for anything, but the cyclist without lights needs to get his head checked, so many idiots out there.

snaps

it is extremely hard to see a cyclist who is wearing dark clothing and no lights. If you dont notice the cyclist in full view how can you notice the cyclist in the corner of your eye without lights?

Gavin

snaps wrote: »

The cyclist also stated that he didnt have to have lights and also didnt have to obey the same traffic rules that motorists do? Surely this is not right?

This is trolling. You want to know the answer, search for it.

From [URL="=http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/travel-and-recreation/vehicle-standards/lighting_of_bicycles_in_ireland"]CitizensInformation[/URL]

All bicycles used on public roads in Ireland must at all times display a rear reflector. A rear reflector means a red reflector that can be plainly seen for a distance of 99 meters (325 feet) to the rear when the headlights of a vehicle shine directly on it. The only exception to this rule is on a child's bicycle where that bicycle is used during the daytime.

During "lighting-up time", that is, the period beginning half an hour after sunset and ending half an hour before sunrise on the following morning, all cyclists are required to have fitted (and make use of) the following lighting on their bicycles:

* One front lamp
* One rear lamp

sprinkles

Totally diasagree. It isn't trolling! It's a discussion. Most things raised on this site can be answered via google but in raising them they start a discussion. Ergo... imo not trolling.

Tomas_V

OK then, here are some answers:

Is it illegal not to have lights on Bikes in the dark?

Cyclists are required to have lights on after sunset and before sunset. So, if the incident was before 7:45 approx. Yes, it would have been illegal not to be showing lights. In low lighting conditions, it would certainly be advisable to wear reflective gear and have lights. The same applies to motor vehicles.

If i hit a cyclist with no lights etc, How do i stand in the eye of the law?

You must demonstrate that you were exercising appropriate care while driving, for example, driving at an appropriate speed, overtaking legally, driving on the correct side of the road and not running an amber or red traffic signal. In attributing blame/liability, account would be taken of any illegal or stupid behaviour by the cyclist. But the primary obligation not to hit someone rests with you. So, if your're aware that cyclists habitually cycle unlit in the dark at a certain place, you'd be legally obliged to take account of that.

When you collide with someone, a cyclist or another car, you're not automatically in the right even if the other person was breaking the law. It is a factor that might weigh in your favour.

For example, if a cyclist collides with an unlit parked car on a poorly-lit road (illegal), he's primarily to blame for his own misfortune.

Cyclists don't have to obey all the rules that motorists do, but they must obey the rules & laws that govern their behaviour. Most of these are the same as for motorists.

High&Low

I always drive with my lights on and when I cycle I always have my lights on.

If a driver is not paying full attention they may not see a cyclist even in daylight, but if their eye catches the light on your bike they are far more likely to notice you in time.

I cycle to and from work and am amazed at the amount of cyclists without lights and those that are too "cool" to wear a helmut.

Raam

High&Low wrote: »

... and those that are too "cool" to wear a helmut.

The words "can" and "worms" springs to mind.

HJ Simpson

If the accident happened the way you make it sound then the cyclist is liable. If you cycle off a path without checking and are hit by a car which couldnt see you then you are at fault. However if the cyclist checked and then cycled out and your friend wasnt paying attention and didnt see the cyclist until it was to late?

Just my opinion having been almost hit many times by drivers not paying attention. If the cyclist had no lights I think he is contributary negligent,

HJS

Mr. Presentable

I'd say you'd share the blame.

BTW, cyclists are also required to have a bell. When was the last time you saw a cyclist over the age of seven with a bell?

loyatemu

there's a big difference between lights and a bell - a cyclist with no lights is practically invisible from inside a car. Even with lights they're difficult to see against the streetlights and headlights. They should be wearing reflective clothing as well.

johnnyrotten

Many years ago I was going out with a girl. I cycled to her house one night and put the bike into her garage. hours later I cycled home but discovered that I had left the two lights on and as a result the batteries were flat in the rear and almost flat in the front.
I got pulled over halfway home by the Gardai who took my details.
A few months later I was summoned to court and fined £20.

So yes, they are a legal requirement

Mr. Presentable

loyatemu wrote: »

there's a big difference between lights and a bell

Good spot!

daedalus2097

Also something that a lot of people don't realise is that the front light should be a lamp, i.e. should be able to light your way so you can see where you're going. Flashing LED units on the front will improve visibility but won't be able to light up the road in front of you if there's no streetlighting. As for the rules of the road, cyclists are bound to these as much as drivers, and even have some extra or slightly altered ones to contend with, such as their hand signals, how to change lanes etc. You can't just cycle out in front of someone (first off it's ridiculously stupid) as much as you can't drive out onto a main road without waiting for a suitable gap.

daymobrew

snaps wrote: »

Is it illegal not to have lights on Bikes in the dark?

sprinkles wrote: »

As for cyclists I would have assumed that the rules of the road apply to them also and that they would have to have lights when travelling at night

It's surprising that people (even motorists) don't know the law with respect to cyclists. See Section 17 (page 155) of the new Rules of the Road.

Tomas_V wrote:

For example, if a cyclist collides with an unlit parked car on a poorly-lit road (illegal), he's primarily to blame for his own misfortune.

The Irish courts don't follow such logic - recently a guy received a ton of money for jumping out in front of a bus. And let's not forget the guy who lost a limb when he passed out on the train tracks - "He's a ton of money for being an idiot." :rolleyes:

Raam

daedalus2097 wrote: »

Also something that a lot of people don't realise is that the front light should be a lamp, i.e. should be able to light your way so you can see where you're going. Flashing LED units on the front will improve visibility but won't be able to light up the road in front of you if there's no streetlighting.

The flashy ones are great for getting noticed when in traffic at night time. It gets the attention of people joining from side streets. The constant beam just doesn't get the same attention. For dark roads, non-flashy is definitely the way to go. I've been caught out with a flat battery on the road from Baldoyle to Portmarnock a few times. It's very scary and incredibly hard to see.

snaps

The cyclist my friend hit was cycling on the path apparently, He had to jump of the path into the road when he came to a corner on the path and there was pedestrians (Witnesses) walking away. The cyclist had to swerve to avoid them, thus jumping into the road. My friend didnt even notice him on the path as it was an unlit road, and the cyclist was wearing dark blue coat, jeans and dark shoes. Was the cyclist allowed on the path?

Raam

snaps wrote: »

Was the cyclist allowed on the path?

no

snaps

I nearly hit a guy today coming out of my drive this morning. He was to my side (Wearing black) and because to my side no lights were shining that way. Of course it was my fault according to him "As i wasnt looking!"

So on the way across Galway from west to east at 7am i counted the bikes on the road/path. Here was my finding: 24 cyclists observed 0 with lights on, 5 or 6 with bright yellow vests on!

Now i think that is disgracefull, not one cyclist with lights on their bike. Perhaps i should see what the gardai have to say about this in Galway.

Stark

It's illegal to cycle without lights. Personally I find it easier to see cyclists with high vis jackets on than to see cyclists with blinkers though.

snaps wrote:

The cyclist my friend hit was cycling on the path apparently, He had to jump of the path into the road when he came to a corner on the path and there was pedestrians (Witnesses) walking away. The cyclist had to swerve to avoid them, thus jumping into the road. My friend didnt even notice him on the path as it was an unlit road, and the cyclist was wearing dark blue coat, jeans and dark shoes. Was the cyclist allowed on the path?

I pick up the pace and sprint directly for those gob****es when I meet them out jogging

daymobrew

Stark wrote: »

It's illegal to cycle without lights. Personally I find it easier to see cyclists with high vis jackets on than to see cyclists with blinkers though.

With high viz gear you are harnassing the power of the car lights (which are going to be much more powerful than bicycle lights, unless you are spending lots of money).

Alun

daymobrew wrote: »

With high viz gear you are harassing the power of the car lights ...

snaps

Sorry Daymobrew, youve lost me a little there??

Gavin

harnessing. jaysus, it's not hard to guess.

If you see a cyclist without lights, then why not complain to the Gardai ? I don't think you'd get any cyclist here complaining about that.

Tomas_V

I think drivers should leave their lights on when parking at night on a public road. Also they should park in the same direction as traffic.

Stark

Tomas_V wrote: »

I think drivers should leave their lights on when parking at night on a public road.

Will you volunteer to help push start the cars the next morning?

Tomas_V

Stark wrote: »

Will you volunteer to help push start the cars the next morning?

Road safety should be the primary concern. Unlit cars are difficult to see at night.

daymobrew

Tomas_V wrote: »

Road safety should be the primary concern. Unlit cars are difficult to see at night.

If they are parked in the same direction as traffic then the rear reflectors will make them easy enough to see. Even when parked the 'wrong' way, the registration plate should reflect car lights. Even on a bike with (relatively) low powered lights, I don't think I've ever had an issue seeing a parked car.

Verb wrote: »

If you see a cyclist without lights, then why not complain to the Gardai ? I don't think you'd get any cyclist here complaining about that.

Agreed. I would praise the Gardai if they stopped fellow cyclists who don't have lights.

Turbulent Bill

I drove home yesterday from Dublin city centre at rush hour, something I don't do very often, and I was shocked by most of the cyclists. I used to commute by bike fairly often so I make a special effort to watch out for cyclists, but the numbers without lights or any high-vis clothing was scary.

daedalus2097

Tomas_V wrote: »

Road safety should be the primary concern. Unlit cars are difficult to see at night.

If you have a headlamp instead of just white or green LEDs you'll have no problem seeing the reflectors on the back of a car.

Raam wrote:

The flashy ones are great for getting noticed when in traffic at night time. It gets the attention of people joining from side streets. The constant beam just doesn't get the same attention. For dark roads, non-flashy is definitely the way to go.

Nothing against the flashing ones as they do get your attention... But they should be used as well as a headlamp according to the law and common sense.

Stark

I've never had a problem with unlit parked cars or any stationary object for that matter when cycling. I think certain posters need to have an eye check/consider getting the bus.

Mr. Presentable

daymobrew wrote: »

With high viz gear you are harnassing the power of the car lights (which are going to be much more powerful than bicycle lights, unless you are spending lots of money).

Which is bugger all use when the cyclist is coming at at me from the side as in the case of coming out the driveway as above

Tomas_V

Stark wrote: »

I've never had a problem with unlit parked cars or any stationary object for that matter when cycling. I think certain posters need to have an eye check/consider getting the bus.

Similarly, motorists posting here seem to no problem seeing cyclists with no lights.

Everyone agrees that cyclists should have lights and many insist they should wear reflective bibs.

There is a legal requirement for cars to be lit at night when street lighting is inadequate. I'd like to see this enforced.

Cars coming or going from wrong-side parking spots at night are a safety hazard. Their lights blind oncoming traffic. This needs to be stopped.

snaps

Tomas_V wrote: »

Similarly, motorists posting here seem to no problem seeing cyclists with no lights..

Mate i dont think so, have you read the thread? If your looking for the cyclists with no lights/wearing dark clothes then yes you have a chance to see them. If there coming from the side, not in full view or suddenly jump into the flow of traffic of a side road or path then no!

a 100% rate of cyclists with no lights is unacceptable (My findings the other morning).

Tomas_V

snaps wrote: »

Mate i dont think so, have you read the thread? If your looking for the cyclists with no lights/wearing dark clothes then yes you have a chance to see them. If there coming from the side, not in full view or suddenly jump into the flow of traffic of a side road or path then no!

The real topic is 'how can we improve the safety of cyclists at night?'

I understand and agree that cyclists should have lights and wear light-coloured clothing. Its also important for cyslist to observe the existing rules. None of this need debate. You're preaching to the choir.

Let's move on to other effective measures.

1: Motorists should wear safety clothing when entering or leaving their cars at night.

2 All cars should be properly lit when on a public road at night, whether moving or stationary.

3: Cars should park in the same direction of traffic.

4: Cars should be parked in such a way as not to endanger other road users. By parking on the road, they're forcing cyclists out into the middle of the lane.

Victor

In the space of 5 minutes last night I saw one motorist with no headlights on and another with only 'parks'.

snaps

We should have a law in this country all cars should have their lights on at all times of the day during winter months (Like some euro countries) I think in Scandinavia cars have their lights on all year round.

Tea drinker

Tomas_V wrote: »

Similarly, motorists posting here seem to no problem seeing cyclists with no lights.

Yeah, but will be be on the bonnet when ya see him? It was raining cats and dogs last night and there was a fecking eejit going along with dark clothes / no lights. Didn't see him till quite late.
Course it's his lookout if he wants his hips smashed.

Anyway, can the modern he-man who rides a bike not power a dynamo? Is it THAT hard to fit and push?
I do agree with the blinky lights as well though, they are light / cheap and attention getting.

The old saying is "Be safe - Be seen!"