Will you wear a high-viz if it is mandated by law?

phoenix0250

Seems like a silly question but, with the RSA's ignorant ambition to make the high-viz mandatory based on no scientific evidence what-so-ever; are you going to wear one if it becomes law and you have not previously?
I for one, am not. Do not get me wrong, i am no rebel and/or anarchist. i just blatantly refuse to be forced to wear one despite this silly law and will gladly accept the penalties.

Question is; Am I the only one?

gigawatt

I dont mind the viz vest proposal, I probably would wear one if it was a law that was enforced, but I dont agree with the stipulation about bikes over 6 years old being banned in urban areas, its ridiculous.

dev100

gigawatt wrote: »

I dont mind the viz vest proposal, I probably would wear one if it was a law that was enforced, but I dont agree with the stipulation about bikes over 6 years old being banned in urban areas, its ridiculous.

What happens if you wear a high vis vest and have a back pack as most bikers do? Whats this 6 year old bikes not allowed in urban areas? Howd the hell would that be enforced?

allthedoyles

Its a well-known fact that many motorists are blind to bikes , and they look out for cars coming and cannot see the motorbikes .

Many lives have been lost because of this .

Of course you can refuse to wear hi-vis , but if it is the law , then you may have to be held accountable .

In my opinion , if it just saves one extra life on the roads , it will be worthwhile implementing .

The message should not have to be repeated :

• be safe - be seen

numbnutz

No i dont think you will be the only one just read some of the motorcycle forums on the matter.I wear one everyday on the motorbike and to be honest it makes sod all difference people still ignore you.The only reason I wear one is if I happen to have an accident,then its one thing I have in my favour,feck all use if I'm unconsious or dead I know.As someone pointed out we have become immune to hi-viz wearers seeing as builders,guards....etc are wearing them everywhere.If cars are hi-viz colours will it reduce the amount of car accidents?....NO!!Driver education is the only way to reduce accidents not the introduction of health and safety hi-viz nannyism.
Right I'm off to shout and wave my fist at motorists,cyclists and pedestrians that cut me off and pull out in front of me!!:D

dev100

numbnutz wrote: »

No i dont think you will be the only one just read some of the motorcycle forums on the matter.I wear one everyday on the motorbike and to be honest it makes sod all difference people still ignore you.The only reason I wear one is if I happen to have an accident,then its one thing I have in my favour,feck all use if I'm unconsious or dead I know.As someone pointed out we have become immune to hi-viz wearers seeing as builders,guards....etc are wearing them everywhere.If cars are hi-viz colours will it reduce the amount of car accidents?....NO!!Driver education is the only way to reduce accidents not the introduction of health and safety hi-viz nannyism.
Right I'm off to shout and wave my fist at motorists,cyclists and pedestrians that cut me off and pull out in front of me!!:D

Make sure you have your lights on

Pataman

Yep, I wear mine everyday also. Anything that helps to be seen.

numbnutz

dev100 wrote: »

Make sure you have your lights on

have no choice they wont turn off by design!!:D

3D

I wont be wearing one either - was in an accident wearing one (guy didn't see me) so will rather take into account that drivers don't see me and ride appropriately rather than wear a vest think yeah they cant help but see me and they get hit.

Andromeda_111

My leathers are gorgeous so I'm not wearing a hi viz over them :pac:

Tigger

allthedoyles wrote: »

Its a well-known fact that many motorists are blind to bikes , and they look out for cars coming and cannot see the motorbikes .

Many lives have been lost because of this .

Of course you can refuse to wear hi-vis , but if it is the law , then you may have to be held accountable .

In my opinion , if it just saves one extra life on the roads , it will be worthwhile implementing .

The message should not have to be repeated :

• be safe - be seen

christ! can we ban *censored* from comming in here with their if it saves one live bull

i think all cars should have to slow to 30kmph if a bike or cyclist is withing 50 m of them
this will undoutably save many lives and is therefore a good idea

EvilMonkey

I will if all cyclists, pedestrians etc also have to wear them and when all cars have Battenburg markings or chevrons al over them.
I wont while motorcyclists are singled out.

They would be better off encouraging clothing manufactures to incorporate more hi vis designs into their gear.

Tigger

my jacket and helmet are both grey and black but the mother recently was in fits of laughter at me in a shop with her cos all the reflective strips were lighting up

goldie fish

dev100 wrote: »

Whats this 6 year old bikes not allowed in urban areas? Howd the hell would that be enforced?

It is a french proposal not included in the Proposed EU regulations that we are protesting about.

seanybiker

OasisGirl wrote: »

My leathers are gorgeous so I'm not wearing a hi viz over them :pac:

Sadly my hi-viz will have a rip in it so ill have it in my backpack until I get home and can use my other one

turbodiesel

I will not wear a full high viz jacket. I wear a high viz vest and that should be more than enough. If you can't see a 6ft 4 in biker on a TDM with light on you shouldn't be on the road....

Crazy Horse 6

Not a chance. If i want to wear one i will but you won't force me into doing it.

AgileMyth

I'm sure a lot of people said they wouldn't wear helmets. Or seatbelts in cars. I know this is different but if its brought in we'll all end up wearing them eventually, even if its just because its all thats sold in a lot of places.

My black jacket has plenty of reflective strips. My bike is white. My helmet couldn't be more noticeable (Brightly coloured Rossi rep). I won't be rushing out to buy one immediately but I'd replace my current jacket with a high-viz when its due replacing.

Paparazzo

Let the rider decide. I definitely wouldn't wear one. Can't imagine it coming into law anyway.
The mantra "if it saves one live it's worth it" is such rubbish! Bikers know the dangers. And most of them choose not to wear one.

goldie fish

seanybiker wrote: »

Sadly my hi-viz will have a rip in it so ill have it in my backpack until I get home and can use my other one

Strange, same happened mine. It got ripped just before I turn up tomorrow. I'll have to wait till the missus returns next week and she can sew it fixed....:rolleyes:

gipi

I've no problem wearing a hi-vis vest (tend to wear one most of the time anyway), but I'm not happy about being told to wear a hi-vis jacket all the time. I wore one during a training course, over my bike jacket, and I felt like the bloomin' michelin man - there were so many layers around my shoulders and upper arms, I'm certain it was restricting my movement.

And I'm sure that's not safe!!!

What colour will they force us to wear if this does come in - yellow that becomes invisible, or orange that the RSA has been handing out free for the past few years? Maybe white? Yeah, that might work.....(not!)

Thinkingaboutit

I wear a sam brown, otherwise something orange. Hi-vis looks stupid, and barely helps.

uncle betty

allthedoyles wrote: »

Its a well-known fact that many motorists are blind to bikes , and they look out for cars coming and cannot see the motorbikes .

Many lives have been lost because of this .

Of course you can refuse to wear hi-vis , but if it is the law , then you may have to be held accountable .

In my opinion , if it just saves one extra life on the roads , it will be worthwhile implementing .

The message should not have to be repeated :

• be safe - be seen

I don't think parroting old and worthy slogans is quite satisfactory.

There are more important principles here, like individual liberty.

By the way - people gave their lives to assert those principles for us, and it wasn't because they didn't have their high-viz vests on.

It is really, as far as I'm concerned, a lot more to do with the incessant interference in every aspect of our daily lives by Eurocratic a$$h0les.

I am bloody fed up to the eyeballs with all of it.

Only a matter of time before high-viz will be compulsory for pedestrians. After all, they too are vulnerable road-users, and if it just saves one extra life on the roads... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

TheUsual

I have a cheap hi-viz jacket always on my bike to wear.

Do we need it ? Not really.

Why i use it ? I was coming up to a junction at night and a Biker pulled out, now he was totally invisible to me, and I was on a Bike. So I should have seen him, but I didn't he was at 90 degrees to me and invisible. So just for that reason at night, I would wear one. In daylight, kiss my ass.

Stark

allthedoyles wrote: »

In my opinion , if it just saves one extra life on the roads , it will be worthwhile implementing .

That would be a pretty pathetic result. If we all lived by the motto that anything that "saves one life" is worth doing, we'd be paralysed.

I'm not convinced that shifting the burden of responsibility onto victims of traffic accidents is the way to go. "So you hit a motorcyclist in broad daylight? That's okay, he wasn't wearing his hi-viz". The downside of conditioning drivers to only look out for day-glo on the roads could well offset that "one life" saved.

skippey

Silly needless laws
If you want to wear it, do
if you don't, Don't
It still won't make riding any safer in my opinion
So even if it becomes law I won't wear it
Picture the following
Me getting pulled over by the law and getting points and a lecture for not wearing hiviz bib/clothing
All while I'm wearing jeans, tee shirt, sneakers and an open face helmet
Not clever maybe but at least I have freedom of choice to wear what I want on a bike at the moment

paddy147

A motorbike has lights and indicators for a reason.

A car has the same too,for a reason.

Does a car driver and his/her occupants have to wear a hi-viz by law too???

paddy147

Will they make cyclists wear them too,by law.

Will they prossecute every cyclist that sees nothing wrong in cycling through a red light,when there are people crossing the road at the traffic lights or cars are driving through the opposing junction???

the_syco

numbnutz wrote: »

Driver education is the only way to reduce accidents

For the people on the two or four wheels. I'm thinking both, but from your post it seems only those driving on 4 wheels need the education... :pac:

Del2005

Pataman wrote: »

Yep, I wear mine everyday also. Anything that helps to be seen.

If the driver can't see the bike with it's lights on how will they see the high viz until their lights are shinning on it?

I like the way they are proposing this to save bikers but aren't making it law to wear protective clothing. If they really wanted to save bikers from harm they'd make PPE compulsory and test road users eyes more often then once, when they are usually 18-20 and so have great eyesight!

But no they are going to make the biker more "visible" or partly to blame if they aren't wearing hi viz

paddy147

Del2005 wrote: »

If the driver can't see the bike with it's lights on how will they see the high viz until their lights are shinning on it?

I like the way they are proposing this to save bikers but aren't making it law to wear protective clothing. If they really wanted to save bikers from harm they'd make PPE compulsory and test road users eyes more often then once, when they are usually 18-20 and so have great eyesight!

But no they are going to make the biker more "visible" or partly to blame if they aren't wearing hi viz

Heres a question/scenario for you.

If a car smashes into you (car is at fault for arguements sake),and you didnt have a hi-viz on you.

Whos fault would it be for the accident,with regards an insurance companies point of view??

Who would be done for the accident by the law?

And would your accident claim/compensation be null and void too with regards solicitors and the courts???




This is so typically IRSIH.....................as in just slapped together and no thought given to it.

Its a fcuking joke to be perfectly honest and I cant see this even getting part the 1st stage.

Its so flawwed from the word go,that it wont be made stick.








Is Gay Bryne lurking behind this stupid idea aswell???