Last post on Dec 09, 2013 at 4:28 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views
What is this discussion about?
#21295 of 22406 Re: Idea: let's take the "in" out of "inconsiderate" [steve_]
Jan 20, 2013 (8:55 am)
Michigan says lights on a half hour after sunset to a half hour before sunrise and any other time you can't clearly see 500'.
Typically in Michigan Civil twilight extends just past that 30 minute mark. Civil twilight is considered to be to the time that the center of the sun is 6 degrees below the horizon. During Civil sunset on clear or mostly clear days one can still make out details and colors. So it makes sense that they have it at 30 minutes after sunset.
I didn't see a definition of "sunset" but Wiki says that's when the sun first completely sets below the horizon.
Sunset is when the geometric center of the sun dips blow the horizon. So when you can still see part of the sun (but less than half) it is after sunset.
Kind of surprised - thought it'd be a half hour before sunset.
Actually the hour prior to sunset (and the hour after sunrise) is considered to be the optimal lighting conditions. Photographers call this the golden hour.
#21296 of 22406 Re: Idea: let's take the "in" out of "inconsiderate" [snakeweasel]
Jan 20, 2013 (9:20 am)
Your case in point is nice, but unrelated to the original context.
" I would consider any time during civil twilight bright enough to drive without lights on if the skies are clear. "
And you would be in violation of the law, at least in my state, as that would be more than a half hour past official sunset. Twilight is not relevant. Why would someone want to be less visible, anyway? Especially if there are shady streets or kids around, the former of which is a constant in my area.
Still seeing nothing concrete about slowing down and living longer. Seems some places with faster traffic than this soon to be second world mess also have better life expectancies, and lower casualty rates. Hmm. Drive as slow as you want, just stay in the right lane where you belong. Then we can all go about our way.
#21297 of 22406 Re: Idea: let's take the "in" out of "inconsiderate" [snakeweasel]
by Stever@Edmunds HOST
Jan 20, 2013 (9:30 am)
It's funny that Alaska has the same requirement as Michigan, except the distance is out to 1,000 feet. In the summer, twilight literally lasts for hours. For most of June, there just isn't any twilight, even down in Anchorage. That time of year it helps to run your lights so the 10 year old kids playing in the street at midnight can see you coming.
I'm further west than Chicago yet on Eastern Time - that makes for nice long evenings with sunsets as late as 9:55pm and seemingly long twilights - really around 40 minutes at the peak.
Jan 20, 2013 (7:49 pm)
Drove down the south sound today - very little issues. Only one LLCer comes to mind, a Murano being passed by numerous cars on the right, showing no signs of having a clue. Otherwise, traffic was light and the slowpokes were kindly keeping to the right lane.
#21299 of 22406 Re: Idea: let's take the "in" out of "inconsiderate" [snakeweasel]
Jan 21, 2013 (9:25 am)
Headlights in urban/suburban areas are less about helping the driver see the road and more about letting *OTHER* drivers see that *YOU (the driver)* are on the road.
So as soon as it becomes difficult for other drivers to see your car, the lights come on. If you drive a fluorescent-yellow car, then you get to flick your lights on later, as it's highly noticeable to other drivers. But if you drive a silver-grey car, then those lights will probably need to come on anytime it gets cloudy.
Now, I know that people will argue about the premise, that lights are more to get you noticed by other drivers. But honestly, think about it. If you have an idiot driving with no lights on a rural road... does anyone really care if he wraps his car around a tree?
One less idiot on the road in my book.
#21300 of 22406 Re: Idea: let's take the "in" out of "inconsiderate" [gogogodzilla]
Jan 21, 2013 (9:30 am)
Now, I know that people will argue about the premise, that lights are more to get you noticed by other drivers.
I agree with that... to a point. Obviously if it's total darkness, there's two purposes for lights.
Jan 21, 2013 (9:35 am)
Traffic cameras remove judgement from enforcement.
For example, a cop might witness a situation where a car runs through an intersection that had just turned red. And also noticed that a semi was behind him, one foot from his bumper, and also ran the light.
Now, that cop will ticket the semi and let the car go, as he ran the light to avoid causing a collision. IE: the cop analyzed the situation and made a judgement call.
Traffic cameras do not do that. That car, in front of the semi, is a lawbreaker and will get a ticket. Which teaches to the driving public compliance with traffic law, NO MATTER THE CIRCUMSTANCE. Which means that the driver of the car will stop the next time, resulting in an accident and possible loss of life.
This is just ONE example of various situations that require judgement calls by police... something traffic cameras cannot ever do.
#21302 of 22406 Re: . [gogogodzilla]
Jan 21, 2013 (10:00 am)
There should be "compliance with traffic law, NO MATTER THE CIRCUMSTANCE."
Per your example - the semi is the proximate cause of the crash because the driver followed the car too close resulting in property damage & maybe physical injury.
IMO all semi vehicles should have a speed limit of 15 less than for cars because when they crash at higher speeds, they do more damage and the 53' box blocks all three lanes of the freeway.
Jan 21, 2013 (10:27 am)
Well, in the example given, if the car had stopped short, the insurance company would have tried to deny the claim because the driver had the opportunity but failed to try to avoid an accident.