The implication you gave, or at least that I read, is those that use high vis are misguided and reinforced by your reply "its use is a false security blanket."
That was not my intended meaning.
I can see how specific words chosen from a complete statement can certainly give that wrong impression however.
I do not think that my statements, when taken in their entirety, do convey that message.
Had I stated
"those that use high vis are misguided", that would definitely give the impression that I do not support its use.
My statement of;
for the consideration of anyone who is under the misguided impression that hi-viz clothing is a miracle product that solves the invisibility problem for them.
was intended to highlight that the notion that hi-viz clothing alone can solve the invisibility problem is a misguided belief, not that the use of hi-viz clothing is misguided.
The words preceding and following, when included, hopefully convey that message.
Similarly,
"its use is a false security blanket." does give the impression that using it is foolhardy.
My statement of;
over reliance on hi-viz in the belief that one is safe because of its use is a false security blanket.
was intended to point out that over reliance on hi-viz clothing for one's safety is false security. It is the over reliance on this one safety aspect that is a false security, not that the use of hi-viz clothing is a false security. I don't believe that this is any different from the inherent danger of over reliance on any one of the other crash avoidance methods that have been mentioned.
I believe that you and I probably agree that a rider that considers hi vis as a way to mitigate risk is also cognizant of other risk mitigation tools, both strategic and tactical, and employs them.
I am not thouroughly convinced about that corelation with many riders whom I observe. I have often had the impression that they feel that they are invincible based on how they simply ride through traffic without any apparent defensive strategy being employed. It is as if they think that their hi-viz jacket is a defensive shield protecting them, which is partly why I wrote what I wrote.
If they only use the one tool of hi vis then I agree with you, they are misguided.
One should use all the strategic and tactical tools at hand to reduce risk and not rely solely on bright colors or technology to prevent accidents.
Complete agreement.
It's better than a "what Moly should I use?" thread...
Let's see, Hi Vis haters, check! More lights please haters, check! Modulating headlight haters, check!
