LIGHTS ON BICYCLES

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 79, Issue 107, 7 May 1936, Page 6

LIGHTS ON BICYCLES

WRITER on motoring advances the suggestion that bicycles snould carry a light at their rear rather than in the front, because to-day the danger is more likely to occur from a motorist: running down a Relist than in the latter running down a pedestrian. Jhere, is much to be said for this suggestion. The development of bitumen roads lias made the use of a front light almost unnecessary from the point of view of the safety of the cyclist himself. Anyway, the cyclist’s own safety from his own conduct is his personal affair. It may be suggested that the pedestrian may be inconvenienced by the proposed change, but it seems to be probable that his chances of being injured by a cyclist would not be greatly enlarged above the risks which lie runs already. Mhe.n a cyclist is run down the onus automatically falls on the motorist to prove that he was not to blame. Ihe lamp of the eyelist is invariably put out by the fall of the cycle and unless it is examined immediately to see whether it is warm, affords no information as to the likelihood of the cyclist having been seen. 'Where a tail light is shown the risks of running down would be minimised and that is the greatest danger which may befall the eyelist to which he himself is not. usually a contributor. The painted back mudguard and the reflector are useful substitutes tor a light, but a light would certainly be more effective. Two lights, one lore and the other aft would, of course, be the best method, hut the question is whether the lives of a few hundred road users would be really- worth that bother!