As much as I love all cars It does not make me blind to the fact that the
girlys in atrocious weather (as it was today) - pelting rain, deep puddles,
water thrown up making visibility real poor do NOT put on even their
side/parking lights - Why?

There are atleast 3  "types"

Girlys in 4*4s
(they feel safe so don't actually think!)

young men hoping that the cameras cannot see their number plates ?
(I assume this is the reason as when visibility is good they put on their
front fogs)

Old Gits saving the battery  ?
(remembering the good old days before alternators)

"Tommy"  dribbled ...
> As much as I love all cars It does not make me blind to the fact that the
> girlys in atrocious weather (as it was today) - pelting rain, deep 
> puddles,
> water thrown up making visibility real poor do NOT put on even their
> side/parking lights - Why?
>
> There are atleast 3  "types"
>
> Girlys in 4*4s
> (they feel safe so don't actually think!)
>
> young men hoping that the cameras cannot see their number plates ?
> (I assume this is the reason as when visibility is good they put on their
> front fogs)
>
> Old Gits saving the battery  ?
> (remembering the good old days before alternators)
>
>

It always amazes me that for the simplest of reasons we are now expected to 
drive with our side/headlamps on.  If conditions were that bad how come you 
saw the cars without lights at all let alone tell the difference between a 
girly in a 4X4 or a young man or an "Old Git" as you so charmingly put it ?

It's like when drivers complain when they knock a motorcyclist off that they 
didn't see them, but it's funny how many could see my motorcycle when the 
headlamp blow on the way home one evening and repeatedly flashed their 
headlamps to warn me!

How much longer before all our cars have to wear High visibility vests ?

The worlds gone health & safety mad!

stupid  troll-
visibility (or lack of)  is not the same as being invisible


"RT"  wrote in message
news:fk64l1$25sa$1@energise.enta.net...
>
> "Tommy"  dribbled ...
> > As much as I love all cars It does not make me blind to the fact that
the
> > girlys in atrocious weather (as it was today) - pelting rain, deep
> > puddles,
> > water thrown up making visibility real poor do NOT put on even their
> > side/parking lights - Why?
> >
> > There are atleast 3  "types"
> >
> > Girlys in 4*4s
> > (they feel safe so don't actually think!)
> >
> > young men hoping that the cameras cannot see their number plates ?
> > (I assume this is the reason as when visibility is good they put on
their
> > front fogs)
> >
> > Old Gits saving the battery  ?
> > (remembering the good old days before alternators)
> >
> >
>
> It always amazes me that for the simplest of reasons we are now expected
to
> drive with our side/headlamps on.  If conditions were that bad how come
you
> saw the cars without lights at all let alone tell the difference between a
> girly in a 4X4 or a young man or an "Old Git" as you so charmingly put it
?
>
> It's like when drivers complain when they knock a motorcyclist off that
they
> didn't see them, but it's funny how many could see my motorcycle when the
> headlamp blow on the way home one evening and repeatedly flashed their
> headlamps to warn me!
>
> How much longer before all our cars have to wear High visibility vests ?
>
> The worlds gone health & safety mad!
>
>

"Tommy"  wrote in message 
news:oZw9j.10450$h35.2871@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
> stupid  troll-
> visibility (or lack of)  is not the same as being invisible
>
Idiot, if you can see a vehicle coming then why the need for lights on all 
the time, perhaps you shouldn't be on the road without prescription glasses.

RT wrote:
> Idiot, if you can see a vehicle coming then why the need for lights
> onALL THE TIME, perhaps you shouldn't be on the road without
> prescription glasses.
Surely seeing a car with lights around 10 seconds  earlier rather than
seeing it 10 second before you hit it is common sense

Are you really saying lights on a car are only to see rather than also to be
seen?

Arethe red  rear lights a bad idea in RT World?

PS ALL THE TIME? did you read my post before ranting? DUh :)

> Idiot, if you can see a vehicle coming then why the need for lights on all 
> the time, perhaps you shouldn't be on the road without prescription 
> glasses.
>
>
>
If you can see it coming without lights on, then you will see it coming a 
hell of a lot sooner with its lights on.
Perhaps you could explain the disadvantages of seeing vehicles earlier?

On 2007-12-25, SimonJ  wrote:

> If you can see it coming without lights on, then you will see it coming a 
> hell of a lot sooner with its lights on.
> Perhaps you could explain the disadvantages of seeing vehicles earlier? 

Depends on how bright the lights are, when it's beginning to get dark
I find it easy to see oncoming vehicles but if they've got their
lights on dipped beam it's harder to see the road as the lights are
bright and your eyes are accustomed to the dark, in those situations I
can see less of the road and verges because of the lights, more
without them.  I usually drive with the lights on the lowest setting
until it's dark enough for the higher settings actually illuminate the
road.  I do drive a lot of narrow, winding roads though, it doesn't
make much difference in cities and dual carriageways.  Bright lights
help you see the oncoming car for sure, but they can quite easily mean
that you can see precious little else.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

"SimonJ"  wrote in message 
news:4_qdncljCbyaEuzanZ2dnUVZ8u6dnZ2d@bt.com...
>> Idiot, if you can see a vehicle coming then why the need for lights on 
>> all the time, perhaps you shouldn't be on the road without prescription 
>> glasses.
>>
>>
>>
> If you can see it coming without lights on, then you will see it coming a 
> hell of a lot sooner with its lights on.

No not in normal daylight, you will actually misjudge speed & distance when 
lights are used inappropriately.

RT wrote:

> No not in normal daylight, you will actually misjudge speed &
> distance when lights are used inappropriately.

We were discussing attrocious weather, rain pouring down and 95% of drivers
had headlights on but one group NOt doing the sensible thing was "girls" in
4*4s who buy /use them because they are accessories and because they don't
feel  "safe" in Fiestas - sexist? realist!

"Tomm-y"  dribbled .......
> RT wrote:
>
>> No not in normal daylight, you will actually misjudge speed &
>> distance when lights are used inappropriately.
>
> We were discussing attrocious weather,

No you weren't, you were stereo typing 4X4 drivers.

I could stereo type BMW drivers for not using their indicators, but I don't, 
because I'm not a narrow minded H&S nutcase.

RT wrote:
> I could stereo type BMW drivers for not using their indicators, but I
> don't, because I'm not a narrow minded H&S nutcase.

Surely Cadburys ? H&S do shampoo

On a serious note - just drive with your eyes open - generalisations are
stated because they're based in fact

> "Tomm-y"  dribbled .......
>> RT wrote:
>>
>>> No not in normal daylight, you will actually misjudge speed &
>>> distance when lights are used inappropriately.
>>
>> We were discussing attrocious weather,
>
> No you weren't, you were stereo typing 4X4 drivers.
>
> I could stereo type BMW drivers for not using their indicators, but I 
> don't, because I'm not a narrow minded H&S nutcase.
>
>

Tommy the twat - Killfiled.

RT wrote:
> Tommy the twat - Killfiled.

The computer version of kids sticking fingers in ears and going
lalalalalalalal at anything unpalatable?

RT wrote:
>> No you weren't, you were stereo typing 4X4 drivers.
>>
The way Insurance companies "steretype" facts :)