First of all, I find the thread title offensive.
Being injured is never a choice.
whichway wrote:I work in the construction industry.
You can't go on any worksite (or factory or mine etc) without high vis work wear.
Yet very few cyclists wear high vis clothing.
So you are comparing working on a construction site to cycling
Why ?
whichway wrote:If you ride in traffic, then for most of us, that is the riskiest thing we do.
Nope it is not.
whichway wrote:You can't go on any worksite (or factory or mine etc) without high vis work wear.
The reason for this is not safety. (as you would think)
It is more about liability in case of an accident.
As the builder is responsible for the whole site, and everything that happens there, but can't control every single company that is on site, as there are many.
So the hi-vis thing places the responsibility to the individual, taking away the liability from the shoulders of the builder.
(or something similair along those lines..)
There is a lot of 'push' for wearing hi-vis on site, but have you ever wondered/thought/done research about if it really works ?
Or do you just assume it works ? (I don't assume it works..)
Wearing hi-vis does not make you visible to 'idiots', as they are colourblind.
Wearing hi-vis does not prevent you from having an accident either.
And if everyone wears it, hi-vis is not as effective as you might think..
Hi-vis is overrated, and it don't believe it actually does anything for safety onsite.
And the main thing with safety for cycling is not that people don't see you, but it is becasue how motorists interact with cyclist while on the road.
The choice of clothing is irrelevant to this interaction.
On my commute I wear hivis, not because I want to but because I have to wear it at work, but cycling at hi-vis does not stop cars from hitting me.
For me it is very simply :
wearing hi-vis does not make cycling safer.