Bob you can still have reflector if you want to. You can have a red light too! Sadly legal reflectors are almost invisible at night in an urban situation and definitely cannot be seen from 500 feet.
Mike Rewey ****************************************** On 19 Aug 2011 at 12:18, [email protected] wrote: > Kevin Luecke [email protected] wrote on Fri, 19 Aug 2011 10:26:01 > -0500: > > > Just a quick update: the Bike Fed is working on legislation that > will > tweak > > some existing laws to be more bicycle friendly: > [snip] > > - Legal use of a rear light instead of a reflector (currently > you have > to > > have a reflector even if you have a light) > > What is so "bicycle UN-friendly" about requiring reflectors? I am > not > aware of any good reason to drop the requirement. I would speculate > that > someone favouring this step backward would dismiss the reflector as > being > redundant for someone using a rear light. Well, so what if it is? > If a > reflector is always on a bicycle, you have at least that much, as a > backup > if nothing else, for when the light output isn't sufficient for > conditions > or batteries run down. > > Of course someone bicycling at night should use lights (front and > preferably also rear), but why would you want to drop the > additional > visibility benefit of a reflector? Unless I am missing some > completely > different reason for a change, I hope BFW will re-consider the > inclusion of > this item on its agenda and just leave that existing requirement in > place. _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
