Edit: to clarify: the message in the ad is actually ironic/satirical, mocking the advice for cyclists to wear high-viz at night.

It uses the same logic but inverts the parts and responsabilities, by suggesting to motorists (not cyclists) to apply bright paint on their cars.

So this ad is not pro or against high-viz, it’s against victim blaming

Cross-posted from: https://mastodon.uno/users/rivoluzioneurbanamobilita/statuses/113544508246569296

  • FatCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    The satire misses the mark since cars already have strict mandatory visibility requirements by law. In the EU, you must have working headlights, brake lights, turn signals, daytime running lights (since 2011), fog lights, reverse lights, and reflectors. Driving without any of these gets you fined, points on your license, and fails vehicle inspection (TÜV/MOT). These aren’t optional safety suggestions like cyclist hi-viz - they’re legal requirements with real penalties.

    I don’t know about yankee laws…

    • Tudsamfa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      Huh? Could you explain once more why this doesn’t work?

      Keep in mind that cycling also has a lot of visibility requirements, it is illegal to drive without lights at night, you need to have reflectors front, back, in the spokes and on the pedals. This also results in fines and points on your drivers license. Keep any remarks on enforcements for yourself, car drivers don’t check or even fix their headlights the moment they break either as my last few drives showed me.

      Comparing the optional wearing of hi-vis west to the optional painting cars a brighter colour makes sense when the goal is to mock the immediate question “well, was the cyclist wearing hi-vis?” that always seem to pop up when a crash happens.

    • Ham Strokers Ejacula@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      You can’t make stupid people safe. I drive home in the dark now and I typically see at least one person driving with their lights turned completely off per day.

      I also knew one guy who had a light that didn’t work but his highbeams did, so he just used his highbeams 100% of the time. When I told him he was being dangerous he said something to the effect of “I’m not going to jeopardize my safety for some rando on the road”. And was legitimately confused why I would want to put him in danger, and upset that people kept flashing their beams back at him. Some people have absolutely no desire to be a functioning member of society.

      Edit: and that’s completely ignoring the idiots who go in the complete opposite direction and use cheapo light bars they got off amazon that are 600x brighter than led headlights on urban roads. I hope there is a special place in hell for them.

    • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      State dependent. Maryland for example legally requires a front headlamp and a rear reflector in low visibility conditions. Also must have a bell or horn but can’t have a siren (?).

      • bluewing@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s less state dependent than you think. The feds have the last say in the safety equipment that comes on your car from the factory. They write the regulations on safety equipment for all highway vehicles.

        What is interesting is that the NFPA, (the US National Fire Prevention Association), which writes the guidance for US public safety departments, has learned that you can have too much flashy-flashies and woo-woos and sparkles hanging on your vehicle. We used to hang as much as that stuff as we could on fire trucks and ambulances. Now, new rigs are toning it down to reflective chevrons and marker lights on the back end to prevent dazzling and confusing traffic as they approach a scene. The NFPA national tracking has shown a marked decline in tertiary accidents.

        Reflectives and markers are important, but you can do too much can have worse outcomes because of it.

        • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          If you need a rear light or not actually varies state to state. The reflectors are fed policy and that’s why all bikes sold in the US have them. The siren thing seems to be because kids were rigging sirens to their wheels attached to a chain and being a general nuisance at some point in the 50s. That said, that’s about all a car would hear that’s not electronic. That or an canned air horn.

          https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PpQFt3biKMA

          A video of the wheel siren in action.

        • Ham Strokers Ejacula@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          24 hours ago

          I wish those laws were enforceable. I passed someone the other day whose car was completely covered in Christmas lights. I don’t mean, “they had a lot of lights”, I mean every square inch of the exterior was covered in blinky flashy lights.

          It takes a special kind of stupid to think that is a good idea, and a special kind of police incompetence to allow it on the road.