I drive a lot around the northern parts of VT and NH where the dividers on 89, 91 and 93 can be 100-150 feet between the two directions. These are also highways where there is no light pollution, street-lights and especially no billboards (VT law prohibits billboards) so high-beams are essential at night especially now that deer are out in full force (i've seen 3 of them every night the past 7 days).
I always turn my high beams off when I see a pair of headlights no matter how far away they are or if they're crossing an overpass. Yet, no one seems to do this for me. I suffer from light sensitivity and have taken up wearing light sunglasses late at night to avoid the headlight blindness.
Since no one turns their brights off, are they just distracted by their phone, absent minded or is it truly not illegal they turn them off?
Here's an example of the maximum separation between both north and south 91
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F--UE0H88kG3s%2FTfvFYVz6whI%2FAAAAAAAAANo%2FPPiaFiRKWjM%2Fs320%2FI-91%2Brolling%2Bhills.jpg&hash=7830e5d266a580ef33a48dab6ef9819583102a42)
someone in the opposite side still blinds me.
thoughts?
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XXI/265/265-114.htm
NH - The driver of any vehicle upon approaching, overtaking or while following within a distance of approximately 150 feet of another vehicle on a way during the period from 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise shall dim his headlights." This seems to indicate that if the median is within 150 feet, they should be dimming their lights upon approach.
I literally can't find anything about VT. Their general laws, http://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/chapter/23/013 , doesn't seem to address anything about it.
Quote from: Cjzani on April 20, 2015, 10:24:38 AM
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XXI/265/265-114.htm
NH - The driver of any vehicle upon approaching, overtaking or while following within a distance of approximately 150 feet of another vehicle on a way during the period from 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise shall dim his headlights." This seems to indicate that if the median is within 150 feet, they should be dimming their lights upon approach.
I literally can't find anything about VT. Their general laws, http://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/chapter/23/013 , doesn't seem to address anything about it.
Thanks for the link.
So in VT, how do I proactively report this? Take down license plate and call state police's non-emergency number? I think flashing them a few times to get their headlights turned down is more of a safety hazard. I'm basically blinding them because they're blinding me and I don't want to be a jerk.
Quote from: Cjzani on April 20, 2015, 10:24:38 AM
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XXI/265/265-114.htm
NH - The driver of any vehicle upon approaching, overtaking or while following within a distance of approximately 150 feet of another vehicle on a way during the period from 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise shall dim his headlights." This seems to indicate that if the median is within 150 feet, they should be dimming their lights upon approach.
i would interpret it as "upon 1) approaching, 2) overtaking, or 3) following within a distance of ~150', meaning distance does not matter if you are approaching.
Quote from: adamjackson on April 20, 2015, 10:34:06 AM
Quote from: Cjzani on April 20, 2015, 10:24:38 AM
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XXI/265/265-114.htm
NH - The driver of any vehicle upon approaching, overtaking or while following within a distance of approximately 150 feet of another vehicle on a way during the period from 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise shall dim his headlights." This seems to indicate that if the median is within 150 feet, they should be dimming their lights upon approach.
I literally can't find anything about VT. Their general laws, http://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/chapter/23/013 , doesn't seem to address anything about it.
Thanks for the link.
So in VT, how do I proactively report this? Take down license plate and call state police's non-emergency number? I think flashing them a few times to get their headlights turned down is more of a safety hazard. I'm basically blinding them because they're blinding me and I don't want to be a jerk.
I'm not sure what calling the police will do. It's highly doubtful they're going to be on the lookout for someone who doesn't turn off their high beams. They're probably used to it actually when they hide off the side of the road; most vehicles probably won't even notice the cop in the trees.
Seriously? Reporting it? I'm sure the police have actual work they could be doing than chasing a phantom car that may have had their high beams on.
And I reiterate, "may." I have legal DOT projector-style lights in my Subaru Outback, with the bulbs replaced with a HID unit as the halogens were considerably dimmer than what I was wanting. It was a huge improvement in night driving, especially on rural two-lane roads. But I still get the daft drivers who think my brights are on when they are within the law - to the point that I flashed my brights at them, causing them to panic.
Some new cars equipped with LED lights have an adaptive light unit for the brights, which will disable or redirect the bright LED light out of the oncoming driver's way. The driver does not need to turn the brights off.
You can cut some people slack. I forget to turn my brights off on occasion, but I'm not texting or eating.
Quote from: odditude on April 20, 2015, 02:03:22 PM
Quote from: Cjzani on April 20, 2015, 10:24:38 AM
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XXI/265/265-114.htm
NH - The driver of any vehicle upon approaching, overtaking or while following within a distance of approximately 150 feet of another vehicle on a way during the period from 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise shall dim his headlights." This seems to indicate that if the median is within 150 feet, they should be dimming their lights upon approach.
i would interpret it as "upon 1) approaching, 2) overtaking, or 3) following within a distance of ~150', meaning distance does not matter if you are approaching.
I disagree. How do you define approaching without a distance? You are always approaching some vehicle somewhere, as long as you're moving.
Any progress made on night vision for cars? That would make the high beam issue moot and even with high beams I don't see how you could avoid deer in that landscape!
I have a couple of friends who damaged their cars by hitting deer in that part of the country. I had to stop once on a rural NH road to let a family of deer cross the road. Luckily I saw them ahead of time. You just have to be hyper aware.
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on April 20, 2015, 02:45:19 PM
Seriously? Reporting it? I'm sure the police have actual work they could be doing than chasing a phantom car that may have had their high beams on.
And I reiterate, "may." I have legal DOT projector-style lights in my Subaru Outback, with the bulbs replaced with a HID unit as the halogens were considerably dimmer than what I was wanting. It was a huge improvement in night driving, especially on rural two-lane roads. But I still get the daft drivers who think my brights are on when they are within the law - to the point that I flashed my brights at them, causing them to panic.
Some new cars equipped with LED lights have an adaptive light unit for the brights, which will disable or redirect the bright LED light out of the oncoming driver's way. The driver does not need to turn the brights off.
You can cut some people slack. I forget to turn my brights off on occasion, but I'm not texting or eating.
I think I'm being misunderstood only slightly. I don't believe in at-moment reporting to cops as in "hey, go get this guy" but just me calling to say there are a lot of people near mile marker on X road that never turn off their high beams so if cops are looking for a place to keep an eye on that, they have some leads and they'll look out for high-beam only people that are also speeding..maybe if enough people complain, a small public complain on the radio might be issued, etc.
To your second point, I get flashed all of the time despite my HIDs being factory included and adaptive (turn when my wheel turns and raise / lower depending on the angle of my vehicle (ie. going up or down a hill). They don't move out of the way for oncoming traffic (a really cool feature that's optional on BMW 5-Series).
So yes people do flash me often and my condition is so bad that even a small flash will blind me for about 50 yards if I'm not wearing sunglasses. At night, a constant high-beam in my direction is even worse..I've pulled off the road a few times after being high-beamed for the entire approach of the other car.
I think overall, I'd just like some clarity on laws (which has been provided which is great) but high-beams hurt and it would be nice if more drivers were aware. I do think that if you don't know to turn your high-beams off when traffic approaches, you shouldn't be able to use them at all. :sombrero:
Quote from: odditude on April 20, 2015, 02:03:22 PM
Quote from: Cjzani on April 20, 2015, 10:24:38 AM
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XXI/265/265-114.htm
NH - The driver of any vehicle upon approaching, overtaking or while following within a distance of approximately 150 feet of another vehicle on a way during the period from 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise shall dim his headlights." This seems to indicate that if the median is within 150 feet, they should be dimming their lights upon approach.
i would interpret it as "upon 1) approaching, 2) overtaking, or 3) following within a distance of ~150', meaning distance does not matter if you are approaching.
I don't think that makes sense. The reason being that "within a distance of approximately 150 feet of another vehicle on a way during the period from 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise" is one big long chain of prepositional phrases that are all linked together. I don't think you can just break that up in the middle.
Still, though, this has to be the sort of thing that lawyers deal with all the time. I've been trying to look up if there's a rule of linguistic legal interpretation at play here (like the "last antecedent rule" but dealing with the scope of prepositional phrases), but so far I've found nothing. I suspect, though, that the strictest interpretation is likely to prevail.
In any case, in practice, I for one don't really consider the two carriageways of an interstate highway to be the "same road" for the purposes of light dimming. I'm very conscious of dimming my lights on two-lane roads, having lived for a while in rural Iowa, but on the interstate, it doesn't really cross my mind to dim the lights unless there's someone ahead of me. Especially in places like the picture of the OP where there are trees in the median.
I've driven I-91, 93 and 89 well north of Hanover, NH many times and I was lucky to even see another car at night so I'm curious to know how this is such a big concern.
If you call the police, they'd likely tell you the same thing.
Quote from: adamjackson on April 20, 2015, 09:10:33 AM
Since no one turns their brights off, are they just distracted by their phone, absent minded or is it truly not illegal they turn them off?
Here's an example of the maximum separation between both north and south 91
I feel like it's none of the above - oncoming drivers are not distracted or anything, they just aren't turning their brights off because there generally is no justification for doing so. From where the photographer is in your photo, the part of the opposing roadway you have a clear line of sight to is waay far away. And when an oncoming car gets closer, well, it's disappeared behind the trees and such. 99.9% of drivers would not experience any trouble from the light here.
I do sometimes think I'm oversensitive to headlights myself, but in my case it's horizontal separation that's the problem more than brightness. If I'm on a two lane road at night, it almost doesn't matter whether an oncoming car dims its brights - it will half blind me either way. Meanwhile if I am on a narrow-median multilane highway at night, I often prefer to stay in the right lane because an extra 12 feet of space between me and oncoming traffic is generally sufficient to prevent their headlights from interfering with my vision.
I also find this is only a problem in places with little other ambient light. In cities where there is plenty of "light pollution", I don't have a problem with oncoming headlights - I assume because my pupils have not widened as much in such circumstances.
Quote from Duke 87:
Quote
I also find this is only a problem in places with little other ambient light. In cities where there is plenty of "light pollution", I don't have a problem with oncoming headlights - I assume because my pupils have not widened as much in such circumstances.
This is why lighted streets are so nice...the light makes the oncoming headlights not blind you.
That is one thing I hate about my area...no streetlights on arterial roads. As a result, they are unpleasant to drive on at night due to constant oncoming headlights hurting your eyes.
Vermont has no law requiring one to dim their high beams when approaching traffic. It's courtesy, of course, but Vermont does not legally require it. There is a Vermont State Supreme Court case (http://info.libraries.vermont.gov/supct/current/eo2005-561.txt) from 2007 that confirms this (paragraph 7).
(side note, Adam's photos is from northbound I-91 near milemarker 105...been on that straightaway far too many times)
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on April 20, 2015, 02:45:19 PM
Seriously? Reporting it? I'm sure the police have actual work they could be doing than chasing a phantom car that may have had their high beams on.
And I reiterate, "may." I have legal DOT projector-style lights in my Subaru Outback, with the bulbs replaced with a HID unit as the halogens were considerably dimmer than what I was wanting. It was a huge improvement in night driving, especially on rural two-lane roads. But I still get the daft drivers who think my brights are on when they are within the law - to the point that I flashed my brights at them, causing them to panic.
It's a bigger issue the older you get. I remember on MTR a lot of "not my problem you can't see/react/etc." Fortunately this is a more receptive and mature crowd.
The calls are to establish data points of complaints. I get it.
If off-the-shelf low beams induce regular "turn your lights down" flashes, it's not everyone else, it's you and your lights.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 20, 2015, 11:18:11 PMIf off-the-shelf low beams induce regular "turn your lights down" flashes, it's not everyone else, it's you and your lights.
quoted for emphasis.
No, Pete, not after it's been in the shop to have the lights calibrated and adjusted to ensure they are within DOT specifications. Out of the thousands of cars that I pass at night, if only a .01% of them flash their lights when mine aren't on high (and there isn't a cop/accident ahead), then it is statistically insignificant.
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on April 21, 2015, 08:25:57 AM
No, Pete, not after it's been in the shop to have the lights calibrated and adjusted to ensure they are within DOT specifications. Out of the thousands of cars that I pass at night, if only a .01% of them flash their lights when mine aren't on high (and there isn't a cop/accident ahead), then it is statistically insignificant.
For most of us that number is (and should be) 0%.
Then you are the perfect driver. Let's all bow down and congratulate you on your perfect and spotless driving record, where you have never had your high beams on less than 150' from another individual (or as the crow flies)!
I rarely use brights. Why blind the oncoming driver and maybe have them pile into you? We have lots of deer and curvy roads in Oregon and I only have hit a deer once. That was in 1976.
If a person has trouble with night blindness they should not be driving at night. They are a danger to themselves and everyone else.
Rick
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on April 21, 2015, 11:10:14 AM
Then you are the perfect driver. Let's all bow down and congratulate you on your perfect and spotless driving record, where you have never had your high beams on less than 150' from another individual (or as the crow flies)!
We're talking about receiving the "turn your brights off" flash with your low beams on, which is what you mentioned occasionally happening to you. This does not happen to most folks.
And again, it's well within the legal limits and is statistically insignificant. You should be used to it by now; most higher end vehicles sport projector style lamps with high-intensity discharge lights and more are moving into the LED lighting realm. The LED lights can be just as intense.
Zero is statistically significant.
Then I bow down and toss one in your honor of being the perfect driver.
Thanks. If this is the threshold, most of us are probably perfect, so I want to be careful to share credit.
Quote from: adamjackson on April 20, 2015, 09:10:33 AM
Here's an example of the maximum separation between both north and south 91
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F--UE0H88kG3s%2FTfvFYVz6whI%2FAAAAAAAAANo%2FPPiaFiRKWjM%2Fs320%2FI-91%2Brolling%2Bhills.jpg&hash=7830e5d266a580ef33a48dab6ef9819583102a42)
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.
Quote from: Brandon on April 21, 2015, 03:26:29 PM
Quote from: adamjackson on April 20, 2015, 09:10:33 AM
Here's an example of the maximum separation between both north and south 91
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F--UE0H88kG3s%2FTfvFYVz6whI%2FAAAAAAAAANo%2FPPiaFiRKWjM%2Fs320%2FI-91%2Brolling%2Bhills.jpg&hash=7830e5d266a580ef33a48dab6ef9819583102a42)
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.
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.
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on April 21, 2015, 12:34:45 PM
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.
Quote from: Alps on April 21, 2015, 10:45:45 PM
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.
The unerringest unicyclist takes umbrage.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 22, 2015, 01:21:12 AM
Quote from: Alps on April 21, 2015, 10:45:45 PM
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.
Quote from: nexus73If 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.
Quote from: Sherman CahalAnd 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.
Quote from: froggie on April 22, 2015, 11:51:19 AM
Quote from: nexus73If 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.
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.
Quote from: froggie on April 22, 2015, 11:51:19 AM
Quote from: nexus73If 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.