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

subway

i wouldnt wear one, at least until i had been stopped by the gardai a few times.
even if it is introduced, which i doubt, i cant see it being enforced tbh

silly law, why not just require bikes to have 4 wheels so they are more stable

MyKeyG

Wossack wrote: »

And yet theres no talk of anything in regards to actual protective gear, or the removal of lethal wire barriers or VAT exemption on motorcycle helmets etc etc

While victimisation may not be the word, if this law is passed, the onus will be on the biker, to make themselves more visible, not for the car driver to drive more carefully.

Well the VAT exemption is more an argument on unfairness rather than safety directly in my own opinion.

MyKeyG

sleepysniper wrote: »

Hi-Viz is not going to protect me/make me more visible when cage drivers simply dont look/use their mirrors!

That's as general a statement as saying all car drivers believe all motorcyclists break the speed limits wherever they can. Both are simply not true.

CJhaughey

MyKeyG wrote: »

That's as general a statement as saying all car drivers believe all motorcyclists break the speed limits wherever they can. Both are simply not true.

From another poster:
The EU MAIDS study states;

“in 65.3% of all cases, the clothing made no contribution to the conspicuity of the rider or the PTW [powered two-wheeler, i.e. motorcycle]. There were very few cases found in which the bright clothing of the PTW rider enhanced the PTW’s overall conspicuity (46 cases). There were more cases in which the use of dark clothing decreased the conspicuity of the rider and the PTW (120 cases)."

sleepysniper

MyKeyG wrote: »

That's as general a statement as saying all car drivers believe all motorcyclists break the speed limits wherever they can. Both are simply not true.

Im not saying every cage driver doesn't check their mirrors or have a proper look, but for the ones that cant be bothered to have a proper look, thats where Hi-Viz is pointless.

MyKeyG

sleepysniper wrote: »

Im not saying every cage driver doesn't check their mirrors or have a proper look, but for the ones that cant be bothered to have a proper look, thats where Hi-Viz is pointless.

Ok I actually take your point. I'm just speaking as someone who does check his mirrors and does genuinely think more visibility can't be a bad thing. I mean when you consider there are morons out there who crash into vehicles as visible as trucks I often wonder what hope bikers have.

simplybam

And that's still the main problem. It's not about bikers being or not being seen - it's about car drivers not looking! (I pointed that out with an example video clip in this thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056394851&page=18)

If a car driver isn't looking bikers can be lit up like the proverbial christmas tree and will still not be seen.

daenerysstormborn3

MyKeyG wrote: »

Well the VAT exemption is more an argument on unfairness rather than safety directly in my own opinion.

My helmet is not a luxury item it is a mandatory requirement as set out by the government so it should be VAT exempt.

If helmets were VAT exempt you would have a hell of a lot of bikers able to afford a decent helmet with decent protection (and extra protection) in it rather than just the only one they can afford or god forbid some piece of plastic out of aldi/lidl.

simplybam

Ahh, totally forgot, but NO I wil NOT wear high-viz, whether it's the law or not and I won't pay any fines either. If they wanna lock me up for refusing to be a complete twat, fine - go ahead. As long as there are still cyclists driving around completely locked, dressed in black with no lights and drunks stumbling around the roads in dark clothing and cars being driven by complete morons too busy chatting away on the phone, while having a smoke and a cuppa and digging around in their glove box or handbag - I WILL NOT wear a high-viz!

end of rant

MyKeyG

pixiebean22 wrote: »

My helmet is not a luxury item it is a mandatory requirement as set out by the government so it should be VAT exempt.

If helmets were VAT exempt you would have a hell of a lot of bikers able to afford a decent helmet with decent protection (and extra protection) in it rather than just the only one they can afford or god forbid some piece of plastic out of aldi/lidl.

No it should NOT be tax exempt!!! I was going to say this earlier on but refrained but if you want to push it then I will. You picked your mode of transport and you have to live with what comes with it. You want to ride a motorbike you have to wear a helmet. I'm sick of the poor mouth I've been getting from this thread! Ye can do whatever ye like and reap the eternal consequences if that's what ye want to do for all I care anymore.

MyKeyG

simplybam wrote: »

Ahh, totally forgot, but NO I wil NOT wear high-viz, whether it's the law or not and I won't pay any fines either. If they wanna lock me up for refusing to be a complete twat, fine - go ahead. As long as there are still cyclists driving around completely locked, dressed in black with no lights and drunks stumbling around the roads in dark clothing and cars being driven by complete morons too busy chatting away on the phone, while having a smoke and a cuppa and digging around in their glove box or handbag - I WILL NOT wear a high-viz!

end of rant

Yes cyclists travel around at 120kph. Great point, very well made...NOT! And in case you've been in a coma for the past five years using your phone in a car get's you a fine and possible penalty points AND they're planning on banning smoking in cars too so if you're going to use an example educate yourself on the facts and try to use a sensible one!

Tigger

MyKeyG wrote: »

Jeez guys it's a Hi-viz jacket not a rucksack full of bricks. What's the big deal, or are you all just stubborn?

this is your first post in motorcycles, the question in the op is would you wear a hi viz, you don't ride a bike so your answer is either "i don't ride a bike but i would if i did " or compleatly off the f**king topic

i really don't understand why yopu thisk this is your busines and i feel yer just looking for attention

MyKeyG

Tigger wrote: »

this is your first post in motorcycles, the question in the op is would you wear a hi viz, you don't ride a bike so your answer is either "i don't ride a bike but i would if i did " or compleatly off the f**king topic

i really don't understand why yopu thisk this is your busines and i feel yer just looking for attention

This is a public forum my friend so you don't reserve the right to tell me what's my business. And as a road user I think I have the right to make comment in all matters regarding road safety or do you seriously think your mode of transport has no affect on mine? How arrogant! It's no wonder decent road users abhor bikers! And please don't swear at me censored or otherwise, thank you!

MyKeyG

I am now removing myself from this lunatic asylum of a topic!

thewatch

MyKeyG wrote: »

This is a public forum my friend so you don't reserve the right to tell me what's my business. And as a road user I think I have the right to make comment in all matters regarding road safety or do you seriously think your mode of transport has no affect on mine? How arrogant! It's no wonder decent road users abhor bikers! And please don't swear at me censored or otherwise, thank you!

That right is it?:rolleyes:

MyKeyG wrote: »

I am now removing myself from this lunatic asylum of a topic!

You should never have turned up. You haven't a clue. Go troll elsewhere

Paparazzo

This isn't going to happen. How is this thread still going?

longhalloween

dev100 wrote: »

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?

Most are loose enough to be worn over a backpack.

daenerysstormborn3

MyKeyG wrote: »

No it should NOT be tax exempt!!! I was going to say this earlier on but refrained but if you want to push it then I will. You picked your mode of transport and you have to live with what comes with it. You want to ride a motorbike you have to wear a helmet. I'm sick of the poor mouth I've been getting from this thread! Ye can do whatever ye like and reap the eternal consequences if that's what ye want to do for all I care anymore.

Jaysus for someone who doesn't care you seem to have an awful lot to say on the subject.

Talk about anger! You are a perfect example of exactly the type of driver that we have all been complaining about in this thread.

Yes, my mode of transport, my choice. My comment was merely a suggestion that if the government are going to take, take, take from bikers how about they give a little bit That seems simple enough to me.

Glad you ejected yourself from the thread anyway. Happy days

daenerysstormborn3

longhalloween wrote: »

Most are loose enough to be worn over a backpack.

I own a hi viz vest and it doesn't fit over my backpack. If you are suggesting I wear one that doesn't fasten, you shouldn't wear loose fitting clothes that could easily catch in the wind on a bike.

goldie fish

MyKeyG wrote: »

Oh my god. Are you trying to tell me that a light weight Hi-viz vest is such a burden on top of normal attire and a leather jacket? Really?:rolleyes: Plenty of people wear Hi-viz jackets every day. Loading docks, security, police etc but no as always bikers are exempt from everything.

Who says you have to wear leathers?

NOBODY, thats the problem. As long as you wear your eu spec helmet and gayglo vest, you are good to go.

They will regulate the wearing of a lightweight yellow vest, telling you, the motorcyclist that you will be safer wearing, just that.
So when you skid into the steel cable barriers after skidding on gravel, as long as you are wearing your lightweight dayglo bikini, you'll be grand.

That is what the RSA is telling us.

Evaex

Motorcyclists should grow up and wear their high vis jackets. It might save their lives. It's time they stop acting like 2-year olds and worrying about not looking cool in front of their fellow motorists :rolleyes:

Wossack

Evaex wrote: »

Motorcyclists should grow up and wear their high vis jackets. It might save their lives. It's time they stop acting like 2-year olds and worrying about not looking cool in front of their fellow motorists :rolleyes:

its not just about aesthetics, read the thread, troll

goldie fish

MyKeyG wrote: »

No it should NOT be tax exempt!!! I was going to say this earlier on but refrained but if you want to push it then I will. You picked your mode of transport and you have to live with what comes with it. You want to ride a motorbike you have to wear a helmet. I'm sick of the poor mouth I've been getting from this thread! Ye can do whatever ye like and reap the eternal consequences if that's what ye want to do for all I care anymore.

Dead right. Making it exempt of VAT would impact on the dealers and complicate their tax affairs.
That is why it should be zero rated.

Evaex

Wossack wrote: »

its not just about aesthetics, read the thread, troll

The rest of it is mumbo jumbo. The reality of the situation is motorcyclists are afraid they will lose their "rebel status", be reduced to the level of "cage" drivers who have to wear seatbelts. They are afraid they will look like gardai.

Given motorcyclists are 25 times more likely to die than car drivers, the next step from the EU should be to limit motorcycles to 120kmp/h or even enforce a lower speed limit for them given they have on seat belt, air bag or crumple zones. Yes it may disgruntle a few riders with a death wish, but it will benefit society as a whole.

goldie fish

Evaex wrote: »

The rest of it is mumbo jumbo. The reality of the situation is motorcyclists are afraid they will lose their "rebel status", be reduced to the level of "cage" drivers who have to wear seatbelts. They are afraid they will look like gardai.

Given motorcyclists are 25 times more likely to die than car drivers, the next step from the EU should be to limit motorcycles to 120kmp/h or even enforce a lower speed limit for them given they have on seat belt, air bag or crumple zones. Yes it may disgruntle a few riders with a death wish, but it will benefit society as a whole.

Troll alert.

thewatch

Evaex wrote: »

The rest of it is mumbo jumbo. The reality of the situation is motorcyclists are afraid they will lose their "rebel status", be reduced to the level of "cage" drivers who have to wear seatbelts. They are afraid they will look like gardai.

Given motorcyclists are 25 times more likely to die than car drivers, the next step from the EU should be to limit motorcycles to 120kmp/h or even enforce a lower speed limit for them given they have on seat belt, air bag or crumple zones. Yes it may disgruntle a few riders with a death wish, but it will benefit society as a whole.

:pac: Good Gawd man are you mad!!

I'm convinced now that there are people just on a wind up with these replies

What a load of pure ignorance. :pac:

Evaex

goldie fish wrote: »

Troll alert.

If you truly love riding, you will be a law abiding citizen and put on your high-vis jackets. What you are wearing doesnt matter

If you are obsessed with aesthetics, you will have a hissy fit that someone might see you in a yellow jacket. The grandfathers of the keyboard warriors on here were protesting over the introduction of helmets many decades ago. Some people dont like change, just resist for the sake of it.

EvilMonkey

Evaex wrote: »

The rest of it is mumbo jumbo. The reality of the situation is motorcyclists are afraid they will lose their "rebel status", be reduced to the level of "cage" drivers who have to wear seatbelts. They are afraid they will look like gardai.

Given motorcyclists are 25 times more likely to die than car drivers, the next step from the EU should be to limit motorcycles to 120kmp/h or even enforce a lower speed limit for them given they have on seat belt, air bag or crumple zones. Yes it may disgruntle a few riders with a death wish, but it will benefit society as a whole.

Any evidence that suggests a lower speed limit would save any lives?
The evidence for the Hi Vis is not so strong

in 65.3% of all cases, the clothing made no contribution to the conspicuity of the rider or the PTW [powered two-wheeler, i.e. motorcycle]. There were very few cases found in which the bright clothing of the PTW rider enhanced the PTW’s overall conspicuity (46 cases). There were more cases in which the use of dark clothing decreased the conspicuity of the rider and the PTW (120 cases).

Remember the government is broke the RSAs goal is to look like they are doing something without spending too much money. Anything that costs allot of money to be enforced wont be implemented by the government.

Motorcycle deaths have been falling for the past few years, more training for all road users is the only way to increase the rate they are falling.

daenerysstormborn3

Evaex wrote: »

If you truly love riding, you will be a law abiding citizen and put on your high-vis jackets. What you are wearing doesnt matter

If you are obsessed with aesthetics, you will have a hissy fit that someone might see you in a yellow jacket. The grandfathers of the keyboard warriors on here were protesting over the introduction of helmets many decades ago. Some people dont like change, just resist for the sake of it.

So you would be happy to be told what to wear going about your personal business?

I'm not obsessed with aesthetics. It's my right to dress how i want. I'll wear a hi viz vest if i want to. Why do i get less choice just because of my mode of transpirt?

daenerysstormborn3

Evaex wrote: »

The rest of it is mumbo jumbo. The reality of the situation is motorcyclists are afraid they will lose their "rebel status", be reduced to the level of "cage" drivers who have to wear seatbelts. They are afraid they will look like gardai.

Given motorcyclists are 25 times more likely to die because of car drivers, the next step from the EU should be to limit motorcycles to 120kmp/h or even enforce a lower speed limit for them given they have on seat belt, air bag or crumple zones. Yes it may disgruntle a few riders with a death wish, but it will benefit society as a whole.

FYP.