On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 04:48:38 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:54:16 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 21:47:15 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:38:48 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:30:55 -0000, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 17:25:14 -0000, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 00:41:44 -0000, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

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.

I smell bull****. Just like global warming.

No wonder, for as much as you've posted.

Do grow up.
You seem to to have an opinion that everything done by the auto
companies in Canada and the USA, and the laws controlling what is done
are stupid, just because it's different than what is done in the UK.
You have strong opinions not supportable by facts.

You are entitled to your opinions - but you have to be ready to be
called on them when you keep spouting them off. You say you smell BS -
I tell you where it is coming from.

You don't like it? Too bad...

I wasn't referring to Canada and the USA, I was referring to the so called statistics about DRLs increasing safety, when it's bloody obvious they don't.
Obvious to your small mind perhaps.
The insurance companies definitely feel differently about it than you
do. And so do many other motoring safety groups In 5 minutes I could
likely find 10 or more studies showing there is a safety advantage to
counter every one of yours stating there is not.

http://www.dadrl.org.uk

--
Create instant designer stubble by sucking a magnet and dipping your chin in a bowl of iron fillings.