But if it's late at night, why are you only driving with the DRL's?

 

DRLs reduce your insurance cost. You should be thanking Honda for saving you money!!! My opinion on this subject is that the DRLs are a nice visual touch to the HCHs. No practical need to disable them.

However, I would be furious if they had auto-sensing wipers that you could not disable, so I can understand the original post to this thread.

 

Oh but you're so wrong! You can't drive a car safely in the rain with the wipers off. There's NEVER ANY situation when you would EVER want to have your wipers off when raining - that's for sure because I can't think of any (and even if someone did have a valid reason I would not accept it), so you should be FORCED to have your wipers on AT ALL TIMES in the rain whether driving or stopped. It's impossible for there to be ANY situation that contradicts my flawless logic so I decree from on high that from now on ALL cars MUST have automatic rain sensor wipers that can NOT be disabled. Plus that will probably save you money on your car insurance too, so you should thank me for making this happen for you!


[THIS POST IS SARCASM... I came back to add this comment because apparently some of you thought I was being serious. I am just poking fun at the equivalent attitude about the lights.]



And hey while we're at it, let's ban white cars (hard to see in the snow) and black cars (hard to see at night) and silver cars (dangerous reflections) and......

 

First of all, a simple switch would not cost any more than all the microprocessor control required for the car to decide on its own when to turn them on and off. I could just as easily see the automatic control as an unnecessary expense. When you drive a car, you'll have to hold on to the steering wheel the whole time, you'll have to move your foot from one pedal to the other, repeatedly, if you have a manual you'll have to shift gears repeatedly. Given all those chores that driving involves, if I don't mind putting forth the miniscule effort required to turn on a light switch once per trip, why should i have to buy a bunch of bundled electronics to do that for me? Besides, the car already has headlights on it, so why should I pay for another set? Talk about a waste of money! I don't necessarily feel this way, it's just another way to look at your point from the other side.

Anyway, you miss my point about the lights. I don't dislike them or want them eliminated. I DO like having lights on during the day. I am not trying to fight that. All I want is to be able to turn them off at times when they're not needed and when they get in the way. That's all. I rarely drive with them off, but I do sometimes need to turn them off for very valid reasons which I have outlined earlier, and others have added to. It just shouldn't be that big a deal.

Interesting that this thread has become quite large. It's longer than most... I wouldn't have expected an issue like this to draw so much debate. I guess it's just more proof that "it's the small things in life."

 

Ever heard of Rain-X? I find it is superior to wipers. When it comes to rain, wipers are the lazy man's rain-x. I see the example you are trying to make, but you are stretching.

I haven't seen a deduction on any insurance policy for DRL's btw.

 

I hate DRL's.

They are a complete crock, anyone who isn't paying enough attention to see a car coming shouldn't be on the road to begin with.

Idiots who don't see a car coming with it lights off, but do see one coming with it lights on will soon stop noticing the cars with the lights on once that is the 'standard'. What they see now is the exception from the normal. Next it will be 'Hey, if I have a yellow strobe light on the roof, that is safer, everybody needs a yellow strobe light'.

It is the driver that is safe or unsafe, not the car, that is the fundamental truth.

If society was serious about making the roads safe, everyone would have to drive at least 2 years/20,000 mile on a motorcycle before being allowed to drive a car that may kill or injure someone other than the driver.

Only the safe drivers would survive - Automotive Darwinism at it's best

Seriously,
Bowdirk

 

OH so you mean I can't think up every reason myself and draw conclusions about everyone based on my limited view of the world? Wow, what a concept.


[I assume you can see my sarcasm here and in the post you replied to... thank you for helping to prove my point. But am I really stretching? Isn't a clear windshield more safety-critical than daytime driving lights? I would have expected automatic wipers would be a more popular idea than automatic lights. I would hate them both of course, because obviously there are good reasons to turn both of them off, RainX being an excellent example for the wipers.]

 

http://www.lightsout.org/

I found some of the points they made to be very interesting.

 

Wow. Thats an interesting read.

 

Thanks for the laugh. So in this scenario, anyone who drives a motorcycle and is killed or injured is essentially weeded out. Nice.