Skip to content

Discuss This Police target riders for not wearing hi-vis General news

You are in... Forums > Discuss This > General news > Police target riders for not wearing hi-vis

This is a discussion topic

This discussion topic is linked to an article on this site. You can navigate to the article by clicking on the article name in the first post.

Go to most recent reply




Steve Farrell  says:

Police target riders for not wearing hi-vis

Police in Sussex have admitted targeting motorcyclists for not wearing hi-vis bibs. The force stopped 150 commuters for not wearing hi-vis gear in a five-day operation and issued each with a bib which they were told they should wear in a road-side lecture. A force spokesman said: “Riders were given a free hi-vis vest and a talk about road safety,...

Reply to this Topic  
  • Posted 5 years ago (20 November 2009 17:27)

Post a message in General news

Fields marked with an asterisk * are required


Please note. You cannot submit more than 4000 characters as a message.

Upload image(s) from your computer (up to 3 images)


Terms of use

Use of our community areas and forums is subject to important terms of use. By joining our community and using the features you agree to be bound by these terms. See terms of use below. 



Nov 09

Posts: 1

Twinrider says:


The effect we are victim of is known as "looming", animals use it to stalk prey. Certain birds for example attack from on high, BUT the advantage is gained from not deviating in attack flight. The brain's image of the object approaching can not be detected as a threat till its too late.

If the brain is judging distance by size, and the common object being scanned for is a car, then that motorcycle size object must be a car (because it is small) and hence further away. But it isnt.

The training that should be given to riders is to "make yourself larger" or weave slightly (if you think you are not seen). The training given to drivers should be to look a little longer, till that image of the small object (us) is correctly assessed for the distance and speed, not just its size.


Reply to this Topic


Aug 09

Posts: 6

mick4188 says:

Does it Work?

I commute big miles by car and where possible will ride my bike in all weathers.  In the winter months I always check out riders to see what the benefit is of wearing hi-viz.  As far as I can see there isn't any.  From the front at night you cannot see the rider due to the bike/fairing and headlight.  From the back you will always see the tail light before your lights see the hi-viz and to be honest any big bike will be going at the same speeds if not quicker.  From the side it is often too late for hi-vis to make a difference.  The only benefits I can see are for small bikes and scooters.

Ok so emergency services wear hi-viz but that is because they have to work on the roadside without the protection of the vehicle.  All those wearing hi-viz if you believe you are safer or can be seen and if you do not drive a car let me tell you now hi-viz only works when you are stationary and off the bike.  You will always see the bike before you will see the hi-viz!

Reply to this Topic


Nov 09

Posts: 22

johncrosby says:

White helmet & bright lights better than hi-vis

Why can't the Police stick to facts rather than supposition. A light and preferably white helmet makes a statistically proven material difference in being seen. Having HID Xenons on my bike has also made a huge difference in terms of road presence and my ability to see every bit of road surface at night. Good lights and a white helmet should be what they're pulling people over for.

Reply to this Topic


Aug 02

Posts: 441

snave says:


Mick4188 hits nail on head, Johncrosby understands where the real benefits come from. And lets talk FACTS for a moment: Hi-viz is a fluorescent material that requires a reasonable amount of natural light to provide the high visibility. It does NOT work in conditions of night or twilight. That is why reflective strips are added. So, to target commuters on bikes is to target the wrong group. TWICE. Car drivers won't `see` any difference during typical commuting hours as it's dark in the evenings and twilight in the mornings at this time of year, so headlights and white helmets are the ONLY solution, along with road positioning, rider awareness - and the most swingeing of penalties for car drivers involved in SMIDSY accidents. The police simply don't have a CLUE what they're talking about, and therefore this amounts to nothing more than harassment of innocent individuals going about their lawful business.

Reply to this Topic


Aug 06

Posts: 322

davidh36 says:

Be Honest MCN

The Police cannot TARGET RIDERS for not wearing a high viz jacket, as it not law that we have to, the law says we have to wear a Helmet, other than that you could ride with your pants on.



Reply to this Topic


Oct 07

Posts: 754

windy12 says:

crap driving..

the stock excuse for pulling out in front of bikes is either, they were going too fast or I didnt see them.

Everyone says it when involved in an accident with a bike, it does not mean that this is the truth.

My headlight is on all of the time so no vest is going to make me more visible from the front, I could be sitting bollock naked and they wouldnt see due to the bright light in front of me.

The terrible truth is there are a high percentage of people who have to push or be near to the front in a queue, they have to get out of a junction as quickly as possible so not matter what vehicle is coming, they will get out in to the small space even if there is nothing behind the next vehicle coming where it would be totally safe to exit with no risk, this is in their nature.

To these people it doesnt matter if it is a motorcyclist or an artic out they go.  When it is a motorcyclist the rider comes off worse, when it is a truck the truck driver gets in to trouble, hopefully the driver gets squashed enough not to get out and injure someone else.

There are also a growing amount of people on the roads which have entertainment going on in their cars as if it was a playroom, toys flying about, dvd players, drivers passing things back on the move to children in childrens seats etc.  It is amazing to watch if following these people on a bike where you can see right in to their car, how they wander about on the road manage to make corners etc, I marvel at how they stay on the road.

The Police do not target these people and all they have to do is get a camera on to a junction and watch people's antics then pull them over warn them and show them the video and threaten prosection next time they do it, but they will not.

The same people who cut you up while walking in the shopping malls and push in front of you at the Post Office, takeway, shop or bar queue act exactly the same way in their cars then simply make an excuse the same way they make an excuse for pushing in, they are lies we all know they are, in an accident pushing in it is no different.

Cyclists, pedestrians and wildlife get the same terrible treatment from these people.  Somehow it is accepted in society, as are the people who drive on to a main artery of the highways and drive slowly and sight see creating a moving obstacle for everyone else to get round. 

It needs sorting as it is not acceptable behaviour, people lose limbs and lives through these peoples behaviour, they may well be shaken up and sorry afterwards but afterwards is no good.

If a load of these people we officially warned then on second offences prosecuted then their driving would be modified and improved, if no-one but other angry motorists tell them they may never change.








Reply to this Topic


Feb 09

Posts: 4759

philehidiot says:

Twin rider

is correct. The other issue with bikes is the single light or twin lights close together. A car has two lights and this allows a more accurate assessment of distance and closing speed.

My preference when someone at a junction hasn't seen me is to begin to take the escape route I'd have to take if they did pull out - the advantages are that the movement to the side makes you stand out and they see you, you've already planned and begun evasion without it being a panicked last minute move and, if the surface is dodgy, you avoid having to do emergency braking should they pull out.

Hivis provide a larger surface area - yes they require ambient light to work but the simple fact is that most of the time they'll provide a bigger target to be seen, rather than a single headlight.

Reply to this Topic


Oct 09

Posts: 103

BarbaricCub says:


To be honest if a car driver hits you, no matter wether they or you or indeed maybe nobody was particularly in the wrong, theyre going to say they didnt see you just to cover themselves in an investigation, if youre wearing hi-vis gear, it takes away that excuse or at least weakens it.

Though personally i feel that hi-vis is not entirely nessessary for me seeing as my bike gear whilst being mostly black and red, has bright white bits on the back and front and reflective seams etc

Reply to this Topic


Nov 08

Posts: 6

mackireland says:

hi viz

a load of balls i wonder is this the  start of another eu directive,to make us wear this crap ,i shall wear them if they can get the hells angels to wear them, so they can f off

[This Reply has been modified by the Author]

Reply to this Topic


Oct 07

Posts: 754

windy12 says:

re philehidiot

But if one light is harder to judge speed than two, then you are telling me even though the driver couldnt assess the vehicles speed they pulled out anyhow?

If I see a bike headlight or a bike I do not pull out in front of it, if it a moped I simply wait a bit longer, why pull out in front of anyone who is more vulnerable to injury?  Motorcyclist, cyclist or pedestrian??

Maybe that is the easiest law to bring in, dont pull out in front of any of those and a horse?

Then the excuses go.

Reply to this Topic


Compare Insurance

Save money by comparing quotes. It's quick and easy

Motorcycles for sale


It's only £13.99 to advertise your motorcycle on MCN

Sell your Motorcycle

Motorcycle pricing tool

New! Find used bike prices