Should you have lights on during the day?

[Herts Audax]

No

[tykeboy2003]

In answer to the O/P.

Definitely No - unless it's peeing down with rain or there is a covering of thick black clouds. Pretty much the same as for motor vehicles I would say. The only exception would be if you're going through a tunnel on one of the former railway line paths.

[Xilter]

I come from a country where they reckon even in daylight having lights on can make a vehicle 1000x more visible. They believe in this statistic so much so that it is illegal to sell a car which does not automatically turn the headlights on as soon as the ignition is turned on. If importing a car, a conversion will need to be made.

So being raised where lights are mandatory regardless of time of day. I have never given it a second thought. I bought lights for my cycle. I might as well use them.

[Cyril Haearn]

I come from a country where they reckon even in daylight having lights on can make a vehicle 1000x more visible. They believe in this statistic so much so that it is illegal to sell a car which does not automatically turn the headlights on as soon as the ignition is turned on. If importing a car, a conversion will need to be made.

So being raised where lights are mandatory regardless of time of day. I have never given it a second thought. I bought lights for my cycle. I might as well use them.

Which country is that?

[Xilter]

Which country is that?

Canada

[drossall]

Again though, that's talking as though everything can just increase its visibility. Visibility is not some independent quantity. It's about being seen by humans with, in the end, limited attention that has to be divided among everything that happens around them. So, we cannot have some arms race in which everyone shouts, "Look at me". The visibility of the vehicle with lights is not the only, and arguably not even the main, consideration. It's what happens around it.

Has anyone measured whether fewer pedestrians are killed when vehicles have lights on?

[lankysnapper]

No, never.

[softlips]

I come from a country where they reckon even in daylight having lights on can make a vehicle 1000x more visible. They believe in this statistic so much so that it is illegal to sell a car which does not automatically turn the headlights on as soon as the ignition is turned on. If importing a car, a conversion will need to be made.

So being raised where lights are mandatory regardless of time of day. I have never given it a second thought. I bought lights for my cycle. I might as well use them.

Which country is that?

All new cars in the EU have had to have daytime running lights for several years now. At the time this was introduced Denmark, who already had mandatory DRL, were debating ceasing the practice.

[Xilter]

It’s like the helmets. I’m certain some people are dead against it for no reason than having something to gas about. Lights/helmets aren’t going to kill you. Just get on with them.

[rfryer]

So, we cannot have some arms race in which everyone shouts, "Look at me". The visibility of the vehicle with lights is not the only, and arguably not even the main, consideration. It's what happens around it.

But we're not competing with other road users. We're fighting for the attention of drivers who are prioritizing getting home quickly, or prodding their phone/satnav, over taking the necessary time to observe, especially at junctions. That's not the way it should be, but it's the way it is, and I wouldn't criticise anyone for trying to highlight themselves in such a driver's peripheral vision.

[drossall]

Neither would I. My comments were in response to something about their perceived benefits for cars. My point was that, overall, I still don't think they are a good thing (and, as a driver, I tend not to use the automated light setting on our car). Given that there is an arms race, I can completely understand why people feel obliged to compete. But it's obvious to me that, for example, as dusk approaches, when cars come the other way with lights on, I go from having a clear view of the road environment to being able to see nothing other than those cars. Which is, of course, good for the safety of the occupants of those cars, but not so good for anyone else.

[meic]

It’s like the helmets. I’m certain some people are dead against it for no reason than having something to gas about. Lights/helmets aren’t going to kill you. Just get on with them.

A call for blind obedience in contrast to considering the facts.
The attitude of "just getting on with it" would carry some weight if it was the existing status quo reached through either experience or logic. It carries no weight when it is a call to make a new initiative which involves us passing money to the instigators of the " services" which they are pushing.

[Cyril Haearn]

Lights at the front but not at the back, how crazy is that then?

[Airsporter1st]

Lights at the front but not at the back, how crazy is that then?

I guess the idea is to see others coming, not going.

[Cyril Haearn]

Lights at the front but not at the back, how crazy is that then?

I guess the idea is to see others coming, not going.

I keep under the maximum speed limit and need bright lights at the back to hold off normal drivers