Lights on bikes.

[Benipete]

I think the person who trains guide dogs which side is which should get a medal

[MUMMIBOO]

Originally Posted by jambutty

Eh! Since when?

Go to Halfords! Not one of their bikes has a bell.

Highway Code for cyclists states:
“60
At night your cycle MUST have white front and red rear lights lit. It MUST also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85). White front reflectors and spoke reflectors will also help you to be seen. Flashing lights are permitted but it is recommended that cyclists who are riding in areas without street lighting use a steady front lamp.”

“64
You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.

“66
Let them know you are there when necessary, for example, by ringing your bell if you have one. It is recommended that a bell be fitted”

Jambutty im am not wrong it must be a long time since you were looking for a bike at Halfords! here have a look at this http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...10/nbike10.xml.

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by MUMMIBOO

Jambutty im am not wrong it must be a long time since you were looking for a bike at Halfords! here have a look at this http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...10/nbike10.xml.

I admit that it was well over a year since I found myself in Halfords but at that time none of the bikes on display had bells. However the salesperson was offering to put a bell on if the customer wanted him to. For a fee of course.

Do you know the difference between present and future tense?

Your original quote:

Dont you think its strange how its illegal for a bike to be sold without a BELL!

That is wrong. It is not illegal to sell a bike without a bell. Not yet!

Quote from the Telegraph, the link for which you so thoughtfully supplied:

Labour plans to bring in new laws requiring every bicycle to have a bell …..

That makes you wrong.

Having said all that it used to be a legal requirement for all bikes to have a bell or horn, if ridden on the public highway.

[MUMMIBOO]

Originally Posted by jambutty

I admit that it was well over a year since I found myself in Halfords but at that time none of the bikes on display had bells. However the salesperson was offering to put a bell on if the customer wanted him to. For a fee of course.

Do you know the difference between present and future tense?

Your original quote:
That is wrong. It is not illegal to sell a bike without a bell. Not yet!

Quote from the Telegraph, the link for which you so thoughtfully supplied:
That makes you wrong.

Having said all that it used to be a legal requirement for all bikes to have a bell or horn, if ridden on the public highway.

Jambutty i am not wrong if you had bothered to read the whole page you will see it says "Current laws require bells to be fitted to new bikes before being sold, but cyclists do not have to keep them on. Ministers want to close the loophole when harmonised European Union cycle construction standards are enforced this autumn." This is in the 5th paragragh! the paper is saying they intend to make it law for you to have to use the bell which is not current law but the law IS that the bike has to be sold with a bell this has been the law since 2004 a simple google will show you this.

[jambutty]

Oooops! I missed that.

You can blame Israel. They scored their second goal to beat the Ruskkies to give England half a chance of qualifying for the European Cup as I was reading the article.

And now Northern Ireland has equalised to give them half a chance.

That’s it. I’m off.

[slinky]

Originally Posted by jambutty

Oooops! I missed that.

You can blame Israel. They scored their second goal to beat the Ruskkies to give England half a chance of qualifying for the European Cup as I was reading the article.

And now Northern Ireland has equalised to give them half a chance.

That’s it. I’m off.

I think that's an apology Mummyboo

[MUMMIBOO]

I think thats about as close as im going to get to one eh slinks! lol Blame the footy its a male thing just cant admit that hes just wrong! not to worry.

[katex]

Originally Posted by cashman

might be an idea if bikes could NOT be sold without lights? or would that be too simple? ya dont get a motorised vehicle without em, goverment should make manufacterers take some responsibility, after all they are "Road Vehicles"

Does seem to make sense, doesn't it Cashy ? Probably more of commercial pressure on this, as lots of support industries would be affected, and cyclists do like to spec. their own bikes anyway.

Suppose could do as the bell, and provide with less appealing lights, some people would change them, some not .. so still some loss to the manufacturers of these additional items.

Don't think the idea of road tax for cyclists is a good idea either .. particularly when the Government is spending money attempting to persuade people to use public transport more, walk or cycle to work.

[MUMMIBOO]

I just dont see the point in bells on bikes as Law to come before wearing a helmet or having lights on the bike a bell will save no one because you should be riding the bike in the road not on the pavement and im sure you would shout before you used your bell just as natural reaction!

[katex]

Well, already illegal to ride a bike on the road in the dark without lights and suspect that the helmet issue will not be far behind.

As for a law selling bikes with lights, think this may never happen, we'll see.

Agree about the bell Mummiboo, bit of a waste of space .. which cars are going to hear you too, specially as most people in their cars drive with music. A few pedestrians may be aware, but yes, you would shout first. Always think car horns are a little useless too, due to the fact that if you see a danger coming along, spend your thoughts and reactions avoiding it. Most motorists only seem to use it after the event as a telling off, which makes matters worse as the offender is startled by this.

[Benipete]

Didn't think the bell was to warn cars,they don't come second very often