Sometimes the reflector falls off or is removed to mount a rear light. Other bikes - especially high end or hand built bikes - may not have a rear reflector. Instead of risking the police being nit-picky about whether someone with a very bright, flashing red light - i.e. someone who is highly visible at night - actually has the required rear reflector, it would be best if the law allowed a light instead of a reflector.
Madison cops aren't going to be rigid about this, but you never know elseswhere. Not all police officers around the state use as much common sense in enforcing laws with regard to bicyles and bicyclists. Robbie Webber On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 11:18 AM, [email protected] <[email protected]>wrote: > Of course someone bicycling at night should use lights (front and > preferably also rear), but why would you want to drop the additiona > visibility benefit of a reflector? Unless I am missing some completely > different reason for a change, I hope BFW will re-consider the inclusion of > this item on its agenda and just leave that existing requirement in place. > >
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
