this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2026
341 points (99.4% liked)

Canada

11785 readers
503 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The survey lasts until April 20. I'm glad transport Canada is looking into it.

Edit: thanks @Quilotoa@lemmy.ca for pointing out that I got the date wrong.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago (3 children)

uh, no. the only solution is instituting an appropriate maximum level of output

height only matters on flat smooth roads

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The law actually specifies a maximum wattage, which back before all the new technology like LEDs and Xenons actually did limit the brightness... But the laws haven't been keeping up with technology for quite a while...

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

There is actually no law in Ontario, nor a federal law for headlight brightness, but even if there was, police would not enforce it.

[–] SapphironZA@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I was referring to trucks and SUVs that are so tall they blind the cars in front of them even if they are pointed appropriately. Their headlights are at the eye level of other drivers in normal cars.

Output level is another matter that also needs attention

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 2 points 23 hours ago

I mean by definition they are not pointed appropriately if they're blinding other people in regular conditions

but I get what you're saying

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Neither of these are, in fact, the only solution.

We could, for example, have heights that identify other cars in the road and selectively dim the area around those cars.

We could have headlights that keep light below a certain level accounting for both the attitude of the car and the oncoming terrain.

Really how it is achieved doesn't matter, the regulation should just say that, within some cone in front of the vehicle, light levels must be limited to below x for the window areas around any other vehicles.

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

congrats on forgetting that non-drivers coexist with these vehicles

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

Congratulations on forgetting the justification people are using to restrict light brightness, which is that is blind other drivers dangerously.
I would consider motorbikes and bicycles to fall under that category, but I expected that people understood that I wasn't going into the minutiae of a hypothetical regulation that I'm not responsible for writing. There are, of course, lots of edge cases that I didn't include.

If you're making a case for pedestrians, or people indoors, I think that's gonna need to some more serious justification.