"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
The highway code is not actually law.

The bits marked 'must' are.

Well if you can show me where the highway code has been enacted into law
please do.

It says in the introoduction to the Highway Code that where it says that
something "must" or "must not" be done, this is related to a law mentioned
in the Code, either in the Rule itself, or in the index.

The Highway Code is not law, and it admits this in the introduction,
however, it contains references to laws which *must* be obeyed.

It is someone's interpretation of the law.


When it say that dipped headlights *must* be used in conditions of reduced
visibility, this is a law which must be complied with. When it says
foglights *may* be used, then they are optional, so, in conditions of
reduced visibility, it is against the law to use foglights without also
having dipped headlamps lit as well.


Which law states this?
The construction and use doesn't.

It is, however, perfectly legal to use dipped headlamps without folglamps,
even when visibility is everely reduced. This is whay the vast majority of
vehicles that I drive have the foglights wired in such a way that if the
dipped headlamps are off, then the foglights will not work. The foglights
also turn off when the main beam headlamps are on.

Which cars?