9cfd13ef   
   XPost: comp.mobile.android, comp.mobile.ipad   
   From: liamoconnor@example.com   
      
   On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:08:12 -0400, nospam wrote:   
      
   > requiring headlights when visibility is not affected, such as in a   
   > sunshower, is dumb.   
      
   I agree with you.   
   On highway 17, which is a dangerous road, no doubt, I can't   
   imagine how headlights make *any* difference in daylight   
   hours for automobiles.   
      
   Most of the accidents are likely to be people running off   
   the edges of the pavement on the curves, where headlights   
   aren't going to make any difference.   
      
   I guess for those *entering* the roadway, a 60mph vehicle   
   with headlights may seem more imposing than a 60mph vehicle   
   sans headlights?   
      
   Is that the reason for the law?   
      
   It can't be visibility, per se, since headlights don't   
   appreciably increase visibility (IMHO) of automobiles in   
   daylight.   
      
   I think the law just makes people feel good that they're doing   
   something (anything) about the accidents on that roadway.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)