Cyclists' responsibility for their own safety *warning* infractions given liberally for trolling etc

I do cycle, and run lights whenever I am on the bike (day or night), except for when racing.

However, whatever the contributory factor of the person being hit after lighting up time, the person driving knew that he had had hit something/ someone and didn't stop. For me, this is the far bigger crime and I don't see anything the person on the bike did or didn't do in anyway mitigates that. What the cyclist did or didn't do also doesn't mitigate the roadworthiness and legality of the car the person was driving.

On the wider point, it could've been someone walking the hard shoulder, with no legal requirement to do anything but walk facing the traffic (assuming there's no footpath).

Your cyclist hating posts speak for yourself Spook. You've been at the negativity for years.

Ignore me all you like, but I'll keep pulling you up & educating you.

Look at you pulling up stats, researching daylight hours, looking up the weather to see if it was dull, going to every effort to apply blame to the man that was tragically killed by a scumbag just because he was a cyclist. You should stop doing this, it's not a good luck, your efforts would be better used in a helpful way.

I gave up commuting when I changed working conditions before covid. But being an ex commuter cyclists gives me a much broader perspective as a road user. I'm much more aware than you are and have much more consideration towards other road users.

I still use the bike for various stuff, bakery, butcher, shops, short runs etc...

Can't say you're not a cyclist if you keep re-cycling the same dogma every other thread. Must be taxing...

I have no doubt you do your research, you'd go to the ends of the earth to apportion blame to the victim.

Nice.

Reports mention other drivers seeing and avoiding the cyclist. Described as near misses or such. That it was 100 limit was also mentioned.

Which suggest to me there was a multitude of factors at play. Cyclists requiring lights is a requirement for a reason. Good reason.

Even with lights cyclists would do well not to assume they can be seen. As someone else suggested, assume the worst.

Reflective detail is pretty much standard on cycling gear. But lights, as per the legal requirement*, are better than a builders vest. The discourse is skewed that too many utility cyclists see the builders vest as the requirement over lights.

*only to say that most LED bike lights don't meet the lens size minimum requirements(?!) of the 1963 Act! We unfortunately don't have a defined standard, unlike Germany.

Need a video of cat cycling in Hi Viz or it didn't happen.

Need pictures of your car with upgraded lights and hi viz.

Goths banned from going out at night.,

The question is did you AND the dog have hi viz AND lights on.

Car colour is actually an interesting one, you're statistically more probable to be in an accident in a black car over a white one. Makes sense really.

I commute cycle every day myself and have noticed that on some particularly grey, rainy days, some matt grey / silver type cars which seem quite in at the moment do go stealth mode a little bit.

That could simply because there are more black cars.