Cycling in Waterloo Region

[plam]

To bring it back to victim-shaming, I do think that biking at night without lights is a fact that is relevant in collision reporting. More than helmets to be sure. The reason is that lights actually do something.

I might agree, although it is still questionable.  For example, would clothing be valid to mention? There is no legal requirement, but a driver got away with killing a cyclist on the claim that the cyclist "wore dark clothing", even though by all accounts, they probably had a light. (this is absolutely true, no exaggeration, a driver killed a cyclist on King, the crown dropped charges when the driver made "the cyclist wore dark clothing" a defense, and folks here wonder why I'm sensitive about these issues).

Basically, every possible excuse is given to drivers who hit people, nobody ever asks "shouldn't that driver have been able to see the cyclist, with a light, on the well lit street, why were they unable to operate their vehicle safely...."

Is it a get-out-of-jail-free card? I have trouble with that. Probably not. But I have no qualms in saying that people really should have lights on their bike. I have more qualms with saying that people should wear helmets.

(Ever noticed how a lot of bikes have lame stickers telling people not to ride at night?)