Re: Riding at night: a strategy for survival?

In article <zd7ty9kauxwd$.1ugblsmw4ghta.dlg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
	_ <jtayNOSPAMlor@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:

>>>>> So how is it the blinking rear lights are OK? 
>>>> 
>>>> They aren't ok.
>>> 
>>> Why not?
>> 
>> There's a belief that it's more difficult for
>> an observer to determine the speed and vector
>> of a blinking, rather than steady light in the
>> darkness of night.  Perhaps blinking lights
>> confuse our human, pathological tendency of
>> Persistance Of Vision.  
> 
> Well, more than a "belief" would be required for any effort to attempt
to
> persuade others to adopt the same conclusion.
> 
> Unless Muller is being merely religious.

In my own empirical observations I've found my
above statement to be true.  I, however, don't
mind that blinking lights may make drivers'
brains work harder.  Whatever it takes to keep
'em on their toes & alert.  There's been too much
emphasis on dumbing-down driving, instead of
smartening it up.  When we dumb something down,
we end up with a bunch o' dummies doing it.

Some jurisdictions in various nations & countries
only allow blinking/fla****ng lights on emergency
vehicles.  Fair enough.

It's been suggested that blinking/fla****ng lights
attract drunk drivers and cause them to crash into
the vehicle with the light source, but I think
that's just a canard.

I think cyclists should be allowed to have blue
tail lights, either fla****ng or steady.

Anybody who can't tell the difference between a
Police/Fire/Ambulance cherry & a bicycle light
is too stoopid to be on the street.


cheers,
	Tom

-- 
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca