[mytochar]

My biggest trouble with cyclists at night, as a driver, has always been the ones that don't have any lights on their bike. Sometimes the reflectors don't even reflect very brightly (or aren't present).

When a bike is all lit up, I have no trouble seeing and reacting appropriately to them.

I'm probably not a typical driver, though.

[thrownaway2424]

Do you mean to say that you are worse or better than typical drivers? If you can't see objects in the road, you should slow down.

[ubercow13]

Are you saying there should be no need for rear lights on cars?

[thrownaway2424]

No, but you can't expect everything in the road to be light-emitting. There could very easily be a car in the middle of the road with its lights disabled. There could be a person walking down the road without crazy nanopaint, because he was in a car and wasn't expecting to walk, but the car broke down. There could be a horse or cow in the road.

[ubercow13]

I still think this doesn't shift any blame away from cyclists who don't use lights. A bicycle is moving, unlike those examples, and you need to be aware of it even when it isn't in your way yet or in the beam of your headlights.

[fennecfoxen]

Well, a driver needs to be careful, it's true. At the same time, it behooves a cyclist to take basic precautions to improve his own safety and to make things easier for drivers around him.

I narrowly avoided an accident with a cyclist who was riding at night, without lights, without a helmet, with crappy reflectors, wearing dark clothing. The area wasn't particularly well-lit (obnoxious San Jose low-pressure-sodium orange-hue lighting). The cyclist was riding along a busy street but his bicycle was on the sidewalk, behind a row of parked cars, heading the opposite direction of traffic on that street... and he headed out into the intersection with a side-street at full cycling speed, not pedestrian speed.

I really wouldn't have minded some extra help not-killing the guy, you know?