ASHLAND — Twenty-six Amish who refused to pay their fines for violating a law that requires flashing lights on their buggies appeared in court on Friday.

Once there, Ashland Municipal Court Judge John Good ruled out the possibility of jail time for them and instead said he would impose liens on their real estate.

  • roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    By victims I assume you mean unsuspecting drivers coming across a dark, unlighted vehicle in the road at night who could be injured or killed by an accident or swerving to avoid one, right?

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      If they can’t see a fucking cart with their headlights on, then what chance do they have of avoiding a cyclist or a pedestrian out for a walk?

      Some people shouldn’t be allowed to drive.

      • roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        They have a very good chance of seeing me while I’m cycling because I’m lighted. If I’m forced to walk on the road at night without a light I’ll stay out of the roadway when cars are coming. Doing otherwise would be stupid, just as stupid as driving an unlighted vehicle with a significant speed differential at night.

        • SlippyCliff76@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          They should see you with only your reflectors. Headlight “safety” ratings have steadily improved since 2016. [https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/ranks-of-top-safety-pick-winners-swell-as-automakers-improve-headlights] I use the air-quotes as IIHS tests favor more light for the driver at the expense of glare for others.

          In any case, if they can’t see you at night, then they need to slow down as the maximum speeds supported by current low beam technology is around 40-45 mph. Bicycles shouldn’t be on roads with such high prevailing speeds, 50 mph+. Rather they should be on a separate path. In that case the risk is far lower to the cyclist then what some flashing lights could’ve achieved.

      • SlippyCliff76@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        What’s depressing is that now headlights are glaring LED supernovas, and yet drivers still can’t stop hitting things at night.

    • Blaine@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 month ago

      No, by victims we mean the people using a road in the way roads were used for centuries, completely legally. The ones being hit from behind by people in too much of a hurry to use proper caution in area where Amish frequently travel and they are not the only users of the roadway.

      If I drive through a neighborhood with a “Children at Play” sign and run over a kid, I can 100% guarantee you that I am not the victim. That is some very cringe logic. The road exists first for pedestrians, secondly for non-motorized vehicles, and lastly… for automobiles.

      • SlippyCliff76@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        It would be interesting if separate bicycle infra ever makes its way to that part of Ohio. I wonder how the buggies would be treated in that case? Would they be permitted to ride on the bike paths, or would they only be allowed on certain parts of the paths?

    • Michal@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Well i assume the drivers used headlights at night so they can see where they’re going and if there are obstacles in the way.