[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: The fallacy of DRLs




In article <42jc9r$614@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu>, sorandi@wam.umd.edu (Persepolis) writes:
|> I am not an expert in safety aspects of DRLs but I simply feel that 
|> living/working/going to school in the Washington DC/Metro area I will 
|> probably never be caught next to a shady mountain a rural area, and if I 
|> do I will use my head and turn my headlights on (just as I do during dark 
|> hours of dusk/or when it is raining)- no need for spoon fed regulations for 
|> me.  A little driver education in this area can do alot more than alot of 
|> government regulation.  You have DRL's right now: its called a headlight 
|> switch- and its up to your discretion to use them.

You don't know what is a DRL. If you simply use low-beams during daytime as
a substitute, it will be too bright. DRL is reduced-brightness low-beams.
They don't cause unnecessary distractions, but still let other drivers
see you if you have DRL on. Some of the people who posts from the US find
that DRLs irritating. Maybe they are not seeing DRLs. They might be seeing
actual full-intensity low-beams. Who knows? Did those people stop and ask
all the drivers who have their headlights on to check whether they have
DRLs or real headlights?

-- 
Isaac Wong                | Protel Compiler Group
iwong@chat.carleton.ca    | Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa
cm644@freenet.carleton.ca | Dept. of Systems and Computer Engineering
TEL: (613) 763-6127       | Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada


Follow-Ups: References: