Fined for not wearing hi-viz?

[Donkey66]

I genuinely do not understand why people are hellbent on not wearing hi-viz. They cost less than a bale of hay if you go to a builders merchant, no horse owner can argue they can't afford a simple hi viz vest (with reflective strips). It can only be vanity or some strong principle about drivers should see you anyway.

Yes, drivers should always spot anything on the roads. I fully agree with that. However surely as a horse rider we owe a moral obligation to help being identified too.

Mind boggles.

I genuinely dont understand why some motorists drive too fast in low visibility conditions and are reckless with regard to other road user's lives.
As Goldenstar said."Too many people telling too many other people what they ought to be doing and seeking ways to compel them to do it, not nice, not healthy".
Lead by example, but stop short of legislating, please.

 

[fburton]

The reference material I have seen (examples below) would suggest that, with a few exceptions dictated by bylaw, there are no restrictions on photographing someone's private property from a public place. Photography of people is a bit of a grey area and hinges mainly around privacy (we can thank Europe for that) and exceptionally harrassment. In general, however, there are no automatic restrictions on having your photograph taken in a public place. Specifically the "use of long lens to take a photo of someone in a private place, such as their home, without their consent, is an invasion of privacy even though the photo is taken from a public place."

Photographers Rights: the ultimate guide
http://www.techradar.com/how-to/pho...otographers-rights-the-ultimate-guide-1320949

UK Photographers Rights Guide v2
http://www.sirimo.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/ukphotographersrights-v2.pdf

 

[fburton]

I genuinely dont understand why some motorists drive too fast in low visibility conditions and are reckless with regard to other road user's lives

I think it's because some motorists (which really means many of them) are oblivious to potential hazards most of the time. When not distracted by phone calls or conversation with passengers, they are focused on getting to their destination with a more or less heightened sense of urgency - at least until action is required to avoid an accident. Speed limits and traffic lights are a minor inconvenience which can more or less habitually be flouted with no serious consequence.

Sometimes it is obvious when drivers aren't attending to driving. For example, there is a right turn off the two laned Great Western Road at the Kirklee lights that I use regularly. Despite signaling to turn right
well in advance and giving plenty of opportunity for motorists behind me (but heading straight on) to move into the left lane (which tends to be empty despite what the Highway Code says about keeping to the left!), they don't realize what is happening until they are really close. So if the left lane is busy they end up having to stop behind me and wait until the left lane is clear. This happens more often than not - i.e. the majority of motorists using that bit of road are simply not paying attention to the road ahead.

In my opinion, the solution is better education. I would love to everyone to take advanced driving courses, such as IAM's RoadSmart. I'm sure that would reduce the number of accidents across the board.

 

[Fragglerock]

Some of the answers up the page are that ALL users should wear hi-viz including walkers. The trouble with framing these sort of laws is that there are often unintended consequences and this would get majorly complicated very very quickly - so, for example, a householder putting out rubbish before dawn steps on the public highway to be able to do it, without hi-viz/lights/glowstick stuck on the top of their head etc (whatever flavour of the month for the enforcers is........) is that a crime or not? This sort of thing happens so frequently with interpretations of the law that I can't support any more compulsion than what we already have.

I had to walk 3 miles home at 1am in the morning because the last train was terminated at an earlier station. All cabs had gone and it was below freezing. My husband and I had dark coats, no hi-viz and no lights. Despite the early hour I was very worried about walking the stretch of road without pavements or lights, luckily no cars came along. I'm just grateful I wasn't wearing killer heels that night as we had been out on our work's Christmas do.

 

[Fragglerock]

I'm another who thinks your insurance should be void if hacking on the road without hi viz. With being a road user on horseback, cycling and as a driver I would love to see it as compulsory.

Insurance isn't compulsory for horses or cyclists.

 

[Cecile]

The reference material I have seen (examples below) would suggest that, with a few exceptions dictated by bylaw, there are no restrictions on photographing someone's private property from a public place. Photography of people is a bit of a grey area and hinges mainly around privacy (we can thank Europe for that) and exceptionally harrassment. In general, however, there are no automatic restrictions on having your photograph taken in a public place. Specifically the "use of long lens to take a photo of someone in a private place, such as their home, without their consent, is an invasion of privacy even though the photo is taken from a public place."

Photographers Rights: the ultimate guide
http://www.techradar.com/how-to/pho...otographers-rights-the-ultimate-guide-1320949

UK Photographers Rights Guide v2
http://www.sirimo.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/ukphotographersrights-v2.pdf

I would question anyone's sanity if they were using a long lens to take photo's of someone in their home, the same as upsetting people who do not wish to be photographed, I would feel very rude so it wouldn't enter my head to do it but if someone chose to take photo's of things which I wouldn't, that is their business

Its all about common sense really, I don't trust anyone not to rob me, create havoc around the stables or cause aggravation to my animals, so I put up camera's
I don't believe in redistribution of wealth, mine or anyone else's

With just about everyone buying dashcams, headcams, mobiles and all manner of other things to record images I can't see how anyone could put any laws on what you can and can't do regarding images.
2 family members flew into Dubai on Friday within minutes the photo's were on Faceache, so indeed the world is changing

My farrier made me giggle, he has a man cave in his garden all rigged up with sensor camera's to his phone, his phone alerted him as someone had gone into his man cave, he phoned his wife to ask what she was looking for in his man cave LOL she replied just a pair of wellies.........

 

[Corbie]

I cannot understand why anyone wouldn't simply put on hi viz to ride a horse, a bike, or to go for a run on the road (unless they don't drive themselves and cannot appreciate how much extra visibility it does give to drivers).
I just think of the pony I am riding, how much I love her and how terrible I would feel if she were hit by a vehicle. And also for drivers too and the terrible consequence of having an accident of this kind.
I am of the opinion though that this would make riding on roads much safer for all - recategorising country roads to lower safer speed limits. Many are national speed limit despite bends, blind hills etc. Crazy! There are so many more people enjoying cycling, and running now as well as horse riders out and about on these roads, all at the same time as a much higher volume of motorists on them too. A crazy mix!!!!

 

[Corbie]

I genuinely do not understand why people are hellbent on not wearing hi-viz. They cost less than a bale of hay if you go to a builders merchant, no horse owner can argue they can't afford a simple hi viz vest (with reflective strips). It can only be vanity or some strong principle about drivers should see you anyway.

Yes, drivers should always spot anything on the roads. I fully agree with that. However surely as a horse rider we owe a moral obligation to help being identified too.

Mind boggles.

Couldn't have put it better myself Mariew.

 

[Gloi]

Victim blaming.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Victim blaming.

Arghh, that trite phrase makes my teeth itch. Of course folk can modify their behaviour slightly to keep themselves safer.

This pic is doing the rounds on FB. Two hi viz less riders out for a hack on a foggy day. Yes, there are two horses, there's a bay as well as the grey.

 

[JennBags]

I cannot understand why anyone wouldn't simply put on hi viz to ride a horse, a bike, or to go for a run on the road (unless they don't drive themselves and cannot appreciate how much extra visibility it does give to drivers).

Me too, I have a friend who is an intelligent person, but absolutely refuses to wear hi-viz, she says she wants to blend into the countryside. I he u in Ely cannot understand her attitude.

It's not just about being seen in my experience. Where we are has very little road work, and it's a dead-end country lane so everyone using it is aware, although some are more tolerant than others! There are some farms and businesses at the end of the road, but the less tolerant drivers tend to be the "townies" who've bought the chocolate box cottages right at the end and have a 10 minute drive each way to get onto a "proper" road. I nearly always wear hi-viz, and I find drivers are more courteous than on the odd occasion when I go out without it. They are definitely more patient, slower and give us more room when passing. This is enough reason for me to wear it.

 

[fburton]

Me too, I have a friend who is an intelligent person, but absolutely refuses to wear hi-viz, she says she wants to blend into the countryside. I he u in Ely cannot understand her attitude.

Any clue at all about what she means by "blending in" or what motivates her to want to do it?

 

[Corbie]

Any clue at all about what she means by "blending in" or what motivates her to want to do it?

Well she might just find herself a little to much 'blended in' for her liking if she's not careful!

 

[JennBags]

Any clue at all about what she means by "blending in" or what motivates her to want to do it?

No, absolutely no idea, I've tried asking her, but she's just got it into her head that she won't wear hi-viz and that's that! Hardly anyone from my yard (almost 40 horses) wears it, it's beyond me.

 

[ester]

Maybe she is sneaking on to non permitted paths