Why do folks hate DRLs?

[bosco]

statistic? i don't need no stinking statistic to tell me i can see vehicles better with DRL's vs vehicles without. if you going to complain about your so called rights/liberties being violated at least pick a more meaningful subject. like why do we have rules in the first place? bosco

[Vimy101]

Turn signals are an activity based indicator, and are not the same as DRLs.

 

DRL are also activity based indicators. The lights are on in the daytime when running the car. There's no getting around that fact.

[JensL]

Driving without lights in the daytime doesn't put anyone in danger. your argument is that it is basically that DRLs are "extra insurance". so should I be forced, or not? just because you think it is an insane thing to drive around in the daytime without lights on...

 

DRL prevents some accidents from happening.

An airbag is an "extra insurance" when an accident happens.

 

and since when does the "rule of the majority" apply to forcing minorities to do whatever everyone else thinks is right? what implications does that have for freedoms in regard to race, religion, and sexual preference? 1%? why not 10%? or 49.9%

 

You can't prove that one race, religion, or sexual preference is better than the other (some might disagree), but you can prove that some measures are better for traffic safety than others.

 

Again, no one has proven that DRLs save lives. your quoted stats say they "help prevent" accidents, but can potentially cause negative side effects. I see no quantified net change illustrated, in terms of numbers of lives.

 

Studies in countries where obligatory DRL has been introduced, shows that the accident rate decreased significantly.

I can't put it any clearer than that.

 

And you are wrong about bureaucrats. This is just the kind of inane busywork that they get by on every day, by and large.

 

Things that sound good on the surface, clothed in topics like "safety" or being "for the children" or "to help the disadvantaged" or some other clause that is hard to defend against, but in the end makes very little difference in the grand scheme. It would be better if they trained safer drivers, let parents decide what is best for children, and lowered the tax and regulatory burden on the disadvantaged, and allowed them more opportunity to do well for themselves.

 

How does having automatic lights on every car on the road prevent parents deciding what's best for their children?

 

I know you are trying to make a joke, but that is a pathetic joke, and it is a pointed comment that I don't appreciate. You have no idea what I do for charitable causes. More than my tax dollars do, though.

 

Fair enough.

 

The UN, The US, UK, and everyone else who have fought for the lives of the iraqi people can't control the iraqi people if they won't control themselves. And that is why they have come out to vote for their own government in percentages that embarrass most other democracies.

 

Iraq is a rough situation, to be sure, but they won't be controlled until they control themselves, and the people themselves stop killing each other, when the consequences become too great to continue that.

 

Yeah, elect a new government....to control them.

I guess it's the degree of control that's important.

 

Certainly better than a madman and his crazy sons mass-murdering whoever they want to, on their whims.

 

Finally something we agree on. :-)

 

Sure... because having people not think about it is the way to encourage them to be responsible. People have to be responsible, they can't be forced to be by the law. they will just break the law.

 

It's just an aid to help people being more observant in the traffic. Not needing to think about turning on the aid, doesn't make then irresponsible.

Would you like to need turning on the brakes before you drive off?

 

Was hitler not a dictator? did he not....

 

That has very little to do with DRLs...

 

Agreed.

 

Ask yourself... what is your government doing for itself while they peddle DRLs on you, for safety's sake.

 

Well, probably something very safe...

[JensL]

Before third brake lights became common?

 

As in, the early to mid 1980s? Most cars since the mid 1980s have had third brake lights. Third brake lights make sense, especially, as you say, to differentiate brake lights from tail lights.

 

how are they the same thing as DRLs that are on all the time during daylight?

 

When did DRLs become something installed on even a fraction of private cars? mid to late 1990s....

 

DRLs became obligatory in 1985 in Norway. 1977 in Sweden.

Before that, very few cars had a third brake light (in those countries).

 

Every car imported into these countries has to have automatic lights (front and tail).

 

how are those statistics correlated then?

Which statistics?

 

I don't automatically trust statistics either, and agree with John. They can be used in slanted and even dishonest ways, in how they are figured and portrayed.

 

Statistics have to be well proven to me before I will give them heed by themselves, without corroborating evidence and common sense that is more than skin deep.

 

Sure, lot's of statistics can be falsely used. It's also an easy way to disregard facts.

[LittleBlueGT]

I haven't been reading all the posts here because I just don't have time.

 

I did however take notice of a situation today that shows how valuable DRLs are.

 

Every single day on my drive to work (90 kph narrow hwy close to the city) the road I go on has a gradual S turn in it. The road curves left and then curves right. Quit often I am behind slower moving traffic and wish to pass just before this curve. The problem comes in when there are a fair number of same direction cars ahead of you and there are a few cars opposite direction. The S curve screws up your perception a bit. Impossible to tell which side of the road the cars are on, and when there are a number it is hard to tell which are coming towards you and which are going away. But 99% of cars here have DRLs so it is not hard at all. I have had a number of occasions when it looks like all the cars are same direction (no DRLs coming toward you) and there has actually been an opposite direction car w/o DRLs!

 

Maybe in most occasions a half decent driver with half-decent vision can easily tell if a car is opposite or same direction. But if you have the right curves in the road it is not.

 

I consider myself an above average driver, with excellent eyesight (better then 20/20, they are 20/15). I am also an ATC (Air Traffic Controller) so I think my sight (which gets checked every year) and my speed perception is pretty good.

 

Take of it what you want, but if you drove with me to work I would bet a couple hundred grand that I could show you situations where DRLs make cars safer. Regardless of weather.

 

Also, no good driver who selectively puts on his lights just when he discerns they are neccesary would think, "Oh it is a nice day, good visibilty, but there is a S curve in the road, I better turn on my lights"

 

FWIW passing is allowed in all areas of this road.

[bosco]

I haven't been reading all the posts here because I just don't have time.

 

I did however take notice of a situation today that shows how valuable DRLs are.

 

Every single day on my drive to work (90 kph narrow hwy close to the city) the road I go on has a gradual S turn in it. The road curves left and then curves right. Quit often I am behind slower moving traffic and wish to pass just before this curve. The problem comes in when there are a fair number of same direction cars ahead of you and there are a few cars opposite direction. The S curve screws up your perception a bit. Impossible to tell which side of the road the cars are on, and when there are a number it is hard to tell which are coming towards you and which are going away. But 99% of cars here have DRLs so it is not hard at all. I have had a number of occasions when it looks like all the cars are same direction (no DRLs coming toward you) and there has actually been an opposite direction car w/o DRLs!

 

Maybe in most occasions a half decent driver with half-decent vision can easily tell if a car is opposite or same direction. But if you have the right curves in the road it is not.

 

I consider myself an above average driver, with excellent eyesight (better then 20/20, they are 20/15). I am also an ATC (Air Traffic Controller) so I think my sight (which gets checked every year) and my speed perception is pretty good.

 

Take of it what you want, but if you drove with me to work I would bet a couple hundred grand that I could show you situations where DRLs make cars safer. Regardless of weather.

 

Also, no good driver who selectively puts on his lights just when he discerns they are neccesary would think, "Oh it is a nice day, good visibilty, but there is a S curve in the road, I better turn on my lights"

 

FWIW passing is allowed in all areas of this road.

 

+1, you are correct. bosco

[LittleBlueGT]

+1, you are correct. bosco

 

Thank-you.

 

I knew there was a real reason why I felt so strongly about it, and today driving to work it dawned on me! I should try and take a pic sometime, but in certain situations even the best driver with the best sight in the best weather has a hard time telling which direction a car is going. In the situation I am talking about it looks like cars that are farther are actually closer because of the curve.

[SWP-LegacyGT]

I love this thread when I need a good laugh!