Can someone help clarify the high-beam on rural Interstates Law (VT/NH)

[Pete from Boston]

Thanks.  If this is the threshold, most of us are probably perfect, so I want to be careful to share credit.

[Brandon]

Here's an example of the maximum separation between both north and south 91



someone in the opposite side still blinds me.

thoughts?

I'd say the trees make one heck of a blind, blocking any headlights (high or low beam) from the opposite side.  I wish that were done around here.

[adamjackson]

Here's an example of the maximum separation between both north and south 91



someone in the opposite side still blinds me.

thoughts?

I'd say the trees make one heck of a blind, blocking any headlights (high or low beam) from the opposite side.  I wish that were done around here.

Deceiving photo for sure. that's one exception (i.e.. trees) but most of the road has that divider width (pretty freaking wide) and absent of any trees so it still is blinding to people with light sensitivity like me.

[vdeane]

I hate the cars with super bright low beams.  Whenever I drive at night in rural areas I have to lean forward and avoid looking at the mirrors when there are other cars passing me to avoid being blinded.

[Alps]

Then I bow down and toss one in your honor of being the perfect driver.

The amazing coincidence of the most knowledgeable biker meeting the perfect driver.

[Duke87]

The amazing coincidence of the most knowledgeable biker meeting the perfect driver.

Now we just need the nimblest pedestrian, the seaworthiest ship captain, and the most alert train operator and we can summon Captain Planet.

[Pete from Boston]

The unerringest unicyclist takes umbrage.

[jeffandnicole]

The amazing coincidence of the most knowledgeable biker meeting the perfect driver.

Now we just need the nimblest pedestrian, the seaworthiest ship captain, and the most alert train operator and we can summon Captain Planet.

And, once again, Blimp operators from around the world are excluded.

[froggie]

If a person has trouble with night blindness they should not be driving at night.  They are a danger to themselves and everyone else.

However, in the northern tier where there is only 8 hours of daylight during much of the winter, this is not always possible.

And again, it's well within the legal limits and is statistically insignificant.

They may well be within legal limits, but they are still blinding and a potential safety hazard to drivers coming in the opposite direction.  I'm with Pete on this one.

[jeffandnicole]

If a person has trouble with night blindness they should not be driving at night.  They are a danger to themselves and everyone else.

However, in the northern tier where there is only 8 hours of daylight during much of the winter, this is not always possible.

It's a hinderance, for sure.  But because it's dark earlier doesn't mean the medical issue can be ignored.  If it's dark out and someone's eyesight can cause a danger to themselves or others, it doesn't matter if it's 5pm or 11pm.

[froggie]

I don't disagree, but there's a huge difference between night blindness and light sensitivity.  May not be as big of a deal in the big city/suburbs, but up here in the northern hinterlands, it can mean the difference between quality-of-life and living-off-the-government.

[Pete from Boston]

If a person has trouble with night blindness they should not be driving at night.  They are a danger to themselves and everyone else.

However, in the northern tier where there is only 8 hours of daylight during much of the winter, this is not always possible.

It's also a young person's privilege to make the "shouldn't be driving" declaration.  I'm not night blind, but as I've aged there is an inevitable steady change in responsiveness to dramatic contrasts in light.  This is typical, as anyone over 35-40 knows.  Given the general aging of the population, the DOT will inevitably have to keep an eye (no pun intended) on the standards as has been the case with street sign lettering.