Edit: to clarify: the message in the ad is actually ironic/satirical, mocking the advice for cyclists to wear high-viz at night.

It uses the same logic but inverts the parts and responsabilities, by suggesting to motorists (not cyclists) to apply bright paint on their cars.

So this ad is not pro or against high-viz, it’s against victim blaming

Cross-posted from: https://mastodon.uno/users/rivoluzioneurbanamobilita/statuses/113544508246569296

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        32 minutes ago

        From my experience, usually they don’t. Even the ones that do aren’t to the same degree as a car is required to. I want biking to be better than driving, so this is not an anti-bike comment. Maybe we need to add a requirement for bikes to have lights like we require for cars?

        • SirQuackTheDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 minutes ago

          In this thread: difference in worldwide laws. In the Netherlands you get fined 65+ eur per broken or missing light on your bike. Checks are frequent.

      • Mrfiddles@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Unless you’re in the Netherlands, where 2/3rds of the bikes will have the shitty “this is legally a light” LEDs from the convenience shops… Oh, and 2/3rds of those will be either out of battery, or installed facing the wrong way.

        • SirQuackTheDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          52 minutes ago

          Must be a big city problem. I do see them, but the majority uses proper mounted lights.

          One upside of those illegal fat bikes is that the lights usually work just fine, making them easy to see.