Going for walks in hi vis jackets

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 12:01PM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

cars have to have lights and be visible->

And yet, they often don't. I meet cars every day with one or two broken lights. Every week, I see a couple of cars with no back lights at all on a dark evening because the idiots don't know how their DRLs work. Last week, it was an Audi SUV with back lights on and only the tiniest of side lights on during darkness.

So why don't all cars have hi-vis stripes on all sides, to make sure they can be seen. Surely you care enough about safety to do this?

homerjay2005 wrote: »

why should it be an different for pedestrians and cyclists?

Possibly because pedestrians and cyclists don't weigh a tonne or more, and don't travel at speeds of 20-150 kmph and don't kill 2 or 3 people each week. It's a different league, so why would the same rules apply at all?

whisky_galore · 16-02-2019 12:10PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have a look at the statistics for secondary school girls cycling. We have more girls driving THEMSELVES to school now than cycling to school. And the former category is restricted to those 17 or over, which says a lot about the latter category - huge reductions over a decade or two.

Why? Because we've scared them off the road, and scared their parents into thinking that if the cyclists don't wear helmets and hi-vis, they are negligent parents. And what teenage girl aspires to look like a builder with helmet hair?

Is it any wonder we have a growing obesity crisis? All thanks to 'safety'.

Teen girls are notoriously faddy about appearance, they struggle to get them to do sports for godsakes so getting them to cycle with or without safety gear will be an uphill battle too.

boardise · 16-02-2019 12:11PM

As far as I'm concerned the world has gone stone mad crazy with this absolute obsessive mania about safety. I see cars going around with headlights on in the middle of the day and the sun shining. This hi-vis caper has gone too far as well. Sorry ,but here 's no way I'm putting on a bloody uniform just to go for a walk.

meeeeh · 16-02-2019 12:26PM

gctest50 wrote: »

An open-face wouldn't reduce much ? :

https://www.demon-tweeks.com/eu/motorsport/racewear-helmets/helmets-accessories/helmets/race-rally-helmets/shop-by/helmet_type/open_face/page/1/

When I was doing my driving test one of the things they were watching the most was turning your head and checking blind spot when going left to see that there are no cyclists there.

If you think that odd missed cyclist is an acceptable collateral damage to make car drivers safer then I think the helmet in your link is a good idea

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 12:39PM

meeeeh wrote: »

gctest50 wrote: »

An open-face wouldn't reduce much ? :

https://www.demon-tweeks.com/eu/motorsport/racewear-helmets/helmets-accessories/helmets/race-rally-helmets/shop-by/helmet_type/open_face/page/1/

When I was doing my driving test one of the things they were watching the most was turning your head and checking blind spot when going left to see that there are no cyclists there.

If you think that odd missed cyclist is an acceptable collateral damage to make car drivers safer then I think the helmet in your link is a good idea

It's amazing how cyclists and motorcyclists manage to cope quite well wearing helmets, isn't it?

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 12:40PM

whisky_galore wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have a look at the statistics for secondary school girls cycling. We have more girls driving THEMSELVES to school now than cycling to school. And the former category is restricted to those 17 or over, which says a lot about the latter category - huge reductions over a decade or two.

Why? Because we've scared them off the road, and scared their parents into thinking that if the cyclists don't wear helmets and hi-vis, they are negligent parents. And what teenage girl aspires to look like a builder with helmet hair?

Is it any wonder we have a growing obesity crisis? All thanks to 'safety'.

Teen girls are notoriously faddy about appearance, they struggle to get them to do sports for godsakes so getting them to cycle with or without safety gear will be an uphill battle too.

So let's pile on even more reasons for not exercising on top of everything else?

whisky_galore · 16-02-2019 12:42PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So let's pile on even more reasons for not exercising on top of everything else?

Whatever you think yourself.

meeeeh · 16-02-2019 01:24PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's amazing how cyclists and motorcyclists manage to cope quite well wearing helmets, isn't it?

I didn't know you have a head rest on your bike. I'm surprised that you of all people are so dismissive of cyclist safety. It's almost like it suits your agenda to have an odd accident.

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 01:53PM

meeeeh wrote: »

I didn't know you have a head rest on your bike. I'm surprised that you of all people are so dismissive of cyclist safety. It's almost like it suits your agenda to have an odd accident.

What's a head rest got to do with visibility through helmets?

Anyway, these helmets wouldn't impact visibility at all. Why wouldn't all motorists wear these? If it saves one life, right?

DrivingHelmet%25255B5%25255D.jpg?imgmax=800

DrivingHelmet%25255B5%25255D.jpg?imgmax=800

meeeeh · 16-02-2019 01:59PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What's a head rest got to do with visibility through helmets?

Anyway, these helmets wouldn't impact visibility at all. Why wouldn't all motorists wear these? If it saves one life, right?

I like my neck a bit too much to use that but be my guest. Also is there a reason you posted a photo with a bucket seat? Do you also want to encourage racing on the roads and more cyclists getting killed?

railer201 · 16-02-2019 02:00PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Here we go...

....in never ending circles.

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 02:15PM

meeeeh wrote: »

I like my neck a bit too much to use that but be my guest. Also is there a reason you posted a photo with a bucket seat? Do you also want to encourage racing on the roads and more cyclists getting killed?

Never noticed the seat tbh, but there's loads of different options out there - something for everyone in the audience. Do motorists really not care enough about their own safety to wear a simple helmet?

cyclist-helmet.jpg.860x0_q70_crop-scale.jpg

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 02:17PM

railer201 wrote: »

....in never ending circles.

Isn't it funny though how these response only come up when we start talking about the things that MOTORISTS must do? When it comes to talking about the things that pedestrians and cyclists must do, we just cant get enough of that stuff.

freshpopcorn · 16-02-2019 02:24PM

I've seen a user on boards say listen to the experts or those involved and get very high and mighty about it.
The experts this time really are the RSA and Gardai. These are the people involved and are dealing with these issues every day.

meeeeh · 16-02-2019 04:15PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Never noticed the seat tbh, but there's loads of different options out there - something for everyone in the audience. Do motorists really not care enough about their own safety to wear a simple helmet?

Right now you want to kill pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. Is there no end to your bloodthirst?

odyssey06 · 16-02-2019 04:33PM

meeeeh wrote: »

Right now you want to kill pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. Is there no end to your bloodthirst?

At any moment, our atmosphere could burn away due to a quantum fluctuation.
One should always go for walks dressed like these guys.

Not preparing for this is of couse the same behaviour as not considering that dressing like a ninja on a wet night may not be the best strategy to be seen by drivers.

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 04:49PM

meeeeh wrote: »

Right now you want to kill pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. Is there no end to your bloodthirst?

I'm confused now. The killing is happening on the roads every week, including 1 or 2 motorists each week. Mandatory helmets would surely save lives. What killing are you referring to?

meeeeh · 16-02-2019 04:55PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm confused now. The killing is happening on the roads every week, including 1 or 2 motorists each week. Mandatory helmets would surely save lives. What killing are you referring to?

The one you are trying to achieve with suggesting equipment no road safety organisation or carmaker recommends or designs for. I don't think you'll be happy until more people dressed in black will hit by drivers wearing equipment that reduces visibility because then you will able to point out to bad driving. At the moment road fatality statistics don't support your claims but if you work really hard at stupid suggestions then they might.

Allinall · 16-02-2019 05:05PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm confused now. The killing is happening on the roads every week, including 1 or 2 motorists each week. Mandatory helmets would surely save lives. What killing are you referring to?

Your arguments are utterly stupid.

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 05:05PM

meeeeh wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm confused now. The killing is happening on the roads every week, including 1 or 2 motorists each week. Mandatory helmets would surely save lives. What killing are you referring to?

The one you are trying to achieve with suggesting equipment no road safety organisation or carmaker recommends or designs for. I don't think you'll be happy until more people dressed in black will hit by drivers wearing equipment that reduces visibility because then you will able to point out to bad driving. At the moment road fatality statistics don't support your claims but if you work really hard at stupid suggestions then they might.

How would they reduce visibility when they work fine for motorcyclists, cyclists, F1 drivers? Lots of models without the full face if that's what you need - what's not to like?

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 05:07PM

Allinall wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm confused now. The killing is happening on the roads every week, including 1 or 2 motorists each week. Mandatory helmets would surely save lives. What killing are you referring to?

Your arguments are utterly stupid.

Aren't they the exact same arguments used to justify mandatory safety equipment for cyclists and pedestrians?

meeeeh · 16-02-2019 05:20PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How would they reduce visibility when they work fine for motorcyclists, cyclists, F1 drivers? Lots of models without the full face if that's what you need - what's not to like?

I might be extremely dense but in my 30 years of watching f1 I don't rember them navigating 2 way traffic, crossroads, cyclists or pedestrians on the road.

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 05:29PM

meeeeh wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How would they reduce visibility when they work fine for motorcyclists, cyclists, F1 drivers? Lots of models without the full face if that's what you need - what's not to like?

I might be extremely dense but in my 30 years of watching f1 I don't rember them navigating 2 way traffic, crossroads, cyclists or pedestrians on the road.

True enough, but they do have to see approaching cars on either side.

And you saw the bit about how they don't cause visibility problems for motorcyclists or cyclists?

meeeeh · 16-02-2019 05:57PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

True enough, but they do have to see approaching cars on either side.

And you saw the bit about how they don't cause visibility problems for motorcyclists or cyclists?

Did you actually ever see how much f1 driver sees in the mirrors?

As for others, they are even more irrelevant.

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 06:13PM

meeeeh wrote: »

Did you actually ever see how much f1 driver sees in the mirrors?

As for others, they are even more irrelevant.

I'm not clear on your F1 point. Are you saying that mirrors eliminate the need for visibility?

And are you really saying that motorcyclists don't need all round visibility?

Stephen15 · 16-02-2019 06:39PM

I hope your simply using helmets for car users as an analogy for people who believe that helmets should mandatory for cyclists as it's a ridiculous proposition. Btw I also believe helmets for cyclists are unessecary and I agree they don't completely prevent the potential for serious head/brain injuries. Hi-vis and lights is also only nessecary when cyclists mix with motorised traffic.

lawred2 · 16-02-2019 06:40PM

blue note wrote: »

What's the story with this? I sent for a run last night. I was almost entirely in black and I didn't realise that until I started looking at the people I was running past. There were a decent few walkers wearing hi vis jackets. They were going for a walk, putting on their running gear, and then throwing on a hi vis vest. Then they're walking around a town, with footpaths and streetlights on every road.

I just wonder why? I drive and have never said thank you to someone in my head for wearing a high vis vest on a footpath. I wasn't going to drive there anyway.

It's obviously very different if you're in an area without streetlights or footpaths.

You wonder why?

Lol

AndrewJRenko · 16-02-2019 06:43PM

Stephen15 wrote: »

Hi-vis and lights is also only nessecary when cyclists mix with motorised traffic.

Why would hi-vis be necessary with lights? Do you have trouble seeing lit cyclists?

is_that_so · 16-02-2019 06:49PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why would hi-vis be necessary with lights? Do you have trouble seeing lit cyclists?

It's really better to have both. Hi-vis is a much larger surface to see than a light.

07Lapierre · 16-02-2019 07:25PM

is_that_so wrote: »

It's really better to have both. Hi-vis is a much larger surface to see than a light.

Rubbish! Lights may be small, but they are far more effective than hi-viz

https://youtu.be/57IOduT8hg8

Going for walks in hi vis jackets

Comments