@Steve O 193506 wrote:
If I were to run into someone walking on the trail who was hard to see, I would consider it my fault, just like if I were to run into a deer standing on the trail (although they do have those cool reflective eyeballs), or a fallen tree limb lying across the trail. If I cannot see far enough ahead to avoid these kinds of things, I am riding too fast. My fault.
I’d say it depends on where they are, if they are moving, what direction they are moving relative to you, etc. Just as a bike is required to have reflectors, etc. to have a reasonably minimum level of visibility. If someone goes out on a moonless night dressed in a black body-suit and runs back and forth across the trail in front of cyclists, I’m not going to hold the cyclists responsible if they are hit.
A person riding a bike at night without a light, however, is riding illegally, and I feel comfortable complaining about those types of ninjas.
I thought a ninja was a pedestrian in all black with no reflectors, etc. But why treat a cyclist with not light differently simply because the law requires them to have a light? Wouldn’t the same principle apply?
