So, do you think that no one should wear hi-viz? what about the bin men and the roads workers? Shouldn't we know to 'expect' to see them?
You raise a good point, and I would be genuinely interested to know whether fewer bin men get mown down as a result of their choice of clothing.
I suspect the answer is no, but inconveniently there is no research to tell either way, and my anecdotes have no more weight than anyone else's. I would only suggest that, if there is a safety benefit from high-viz it should be easy to measure, and given the huge value of the high-viz market, a good body of research ought to exist. What we actually have is assumption straight out of "Bad Science".
For those of a practical disposition, you can conduct one of my favourite experiments at your leisure. Walk towards a zebra crossing while traffic is approaching, but look steadily and continuously in the wrong direction. You'll find it quite easy to see the car out of the corner of your eye (so that you don't actually end up under the wheels in the name of science). Miraculously, even if you do this at night with normal clothes on, the car will stop, every time. (I spent some years around the zebra crossing on Marchmont Rd and loved every minute of it)
I have friends who hate zebra crossings because they're convinced drivers won't see them, and in fact when they walk up to a crossing and timorously wait for the traffic to pass, it does keep passing. But what they confuse as the drivers looking for them *but being unable to see them* is in fact quite different to the reality.
There is no obvious reason why car drivers can see people in dark clothes at night, but massacre binmen were it not for their protective neon suits. Unfortunately, "common sense" is so heavily entrenched here that it's almost impossible to argue against (as we will see here, I'm sure).
I think it would be nice if we could trust every idiot driver to be totally au fait with road conditions, driving skills, highway code etc, but honestly, the obsession with bashing hi-viz is starting to really annoy me.
So you don't find it annoying that instead of having a focus on drivers taking responsibility for their actions, we have a culture of victim blaming that is even pursued by potential victims against each other? (witness this discussion).
It's quite depressing that even cyclists consider it to be too hard for drivers to avoid ramming into people without visual aids, because of all that "road conditions, driving skills, highway code etc" stuff that must be so taxing for them!
At the end of the day however, much of this is besides the point. Suppose we reversed this story and a driver died because a cyclist pulled out in front of them, causing them to swerve into a tree. The authorities, newspapers, and drivers associations could make a big noise about how the accident could have been prevented if the driver had only covered their car in luminous paint (you can do this, and it is quite cheap).
It would be equally valid and, indeed, it might be just as effective (or not) at preventing accidents. But it would never be mentioned, because the same common sense that says that luminous cyclists will never be killed, says that your car is fully visible in grey or green, and cannot be improved.
Strange world, eh? The least we can do is mock it.
posts
