On 2/12/2016 6:30 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:


Those stupid things should be banned, they're a distraction. Lights are
to inform you of.... someone making a turn, an ambulance, etc, etc. If
everybody has lights, you no longer notice things you should, you don't
see unlit things like pedestrians, etc. In countries like Austria where
they did proper surveys, they found that they INCREASE accidents by 12%.

Austria is not mentioned, but overall, accidents are reduced.

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811029.pdf

A majority of the European studies consistently found that a DRL law was
associated with a
reduction in crashes. The effects varied from 4 percent to 27 percent
depending on crash type,
crash severity, season, roadway conditions, and light conditions. The
DRL effects found in the
U.S. studies were less consistent and more uncertain
European Studies
A 1976 study in Finland found that DRLs would reduce daytime
multi-vehicle crashes and
pedestrian/pedalcyclist crashes on rural roads by 21 percent.12 A 1981
study in Sweden based on
two years pre-law and two years post-law data concluded that the DRL law
would reduce
daytime crashes by 11 percent, pedestrian/cyclist crashes by 17 percent,
and bicycle/moped
crashes by 21 percent.13 In Norway, a 1993 study by Elvik14
found that DRLs would reduce
daytime multi-vehicle crashes by 15 percent in the summer. However, the
same study found that
DRLs had no effects on multi-vehicle crashes in the winter. Also, there
was no effect on crashes
involving pedestrians or motorcyclists. None of the results were
statistically significant.
Two studies in 1993 and 1995 evaluating Denmark's 1990 DRL law showed
consistent results.
These studies concluded that two years after enactment of the law, DRLs
reduced daytime
multiple-vehicle crashes by 6 to 7 percent, and reduced
motor-vehicle-to-pedalcyclist crashes by
4 percent. However, the second study also showed that DRLs significantly
increased motor
vehicle-to-pedestrian crashes by 16 percent.15 16

Canadian Studies
Sparks 1993 study20
which examined Canadian government fleet data found that DRLs reduced
twilight, two-vehicle crashes by 15 percent. The effect was
statistically significant. Two reports
produced by Transport Canada also showed positive DRL effects. Of these,
Arora et al.21
concluded in 1994 that DRLs significantly reduced daytime two-vehicle
opposite direction

U.S. Studies
In contrast, DRL effects from U.S. studies were less consistent. DRLs
are not required in the
United States, thus all studies in the United States were
vehicle-fleet-based analyses. In 2000,
NHTSA conducted a preliminary study23
to evaluate the effects of DRLs. The estimated effects
ranged from -8 to 2 percent for fatal two-vehicle opposite-direction
crashes, 5 to 7 percent for
non-fatal crashes, and 28-29 percent for single-vehicle-to-pedestrian
crashes. The range of
effects primarily resulted from two different statistics. In 2005, the
agency reexamined the
effectiveness of DRLs using the same statistical techniques as in the
2000 report but used a
different set of crash data.24
Conclusions from this updated study were similar to those in the
earlier study: -7.9 to 5 percent for daytime two-vehicle opposite and
angle crashes, 3.8 to 12
percent for single-vehicle-to-pedestrian/cyclist crashes, and 23 to 26
percent for single-vehicleto-motorcycle
crashes.