A quick search verified that Canada *requires*, not just
headlights to be on, but that vehicles from 1990 on must
be equipped to have the headlights on when moving.  In
addition, laws in several European countries require the
driver to use headlights in daytime driving.

Experts totally disagree with that statement.

Canada saw an 11% reduction in the first year their law required
daylight use of headlights.

 Arora, H.; Collard, D.; Robbins, G.; Welbourne, E.R.;
 and White, J.G. 1994. Effectiveness of daytime running
 lights in Canada. Report no. TP-12298. Ottawa,
 Ontario: Transport Canada.

A US study showed a 7% reduction in multiple-vehicle crashes
when equipped to have headlights always on.

 Stein, H. 1985. Fleet experience with daytime running
 lights in the United States. SAE Technical Paper
 Series 851239. Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive
 Engineers.

A ten percent accident reduction was found in this study:

 Elvik, R. 1993. The effects on accidents of compulsory
 use of daytime running lights for cars in
 Norway. Accident Analysis and Prevention 25:383-98.

This study found a 7% reduction in accidents (including
a 37% reduction in left-turn accidents).

 Hansen, L.K. 1993. Daytime running lights in Denmark:
 evaluation of the safety effect. Copenhagen, Denmark:
 Danish Council of Road Safety Research.

This one found a 6% reduction (34% in left-turn accidents).

 Hansen, L.K. 1994. Daytime running lights: experience
 with compulsory use in Denmark. Lille, Denmark:
 Proceedings of the Fersi Conference.

This study found a 5% decline for two-vehicle crashes
and a 12% decline in fatal crashes with pedestrians and
bicyclists.

 Tessmer, J.M. 2004. An assessment of the
 crash-reducing effectiveness of passenger vehicle
 daytime running lamps (DRLs). Report no. DOT
 HS-809-760. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic
 Safety Administration.

In the US this feature has been offered on vehicles
since 1995, and today is standard on all General Motors,
Lexus, Mercedes Benz, Saab, Subaru, Suzuki, Volkswagen,
and Volvo models.  It is also available on some
Chrysler, Honda and Toyota vehicles.

The science is fairly well known.

Vehicles of different colors appear to be different
distances from the viewer, for example.  It has
significant effects.  The bright headlights make the
vehicle more obvious and make distance judgments more
uniform.

You'll notice that (because virtually all states require
it???)  motorcycles are an example where headlights are
always on.  The number of lives saved on that alone is
significant.

I don't think there is any question at all, for more
than two reasons.  One is that the picture is clearly
taken in Canada, where the law requires any car made
after December 1989 to have the headlights on when
moving.  That does pretty much end the discussion, but
since it is also plain as day in the photo that the one
headlight that can partially be seen from the front is
in fact quite brightly lit...

There is no evidence that it isn't on either.  It's just
a case of we can't see it directly, so we don't know.

It is just as bright as the headlight on the red car.

That is rather obviously false.  The mechanics of how
most headlights are mounted would shade the left side
(looking in the direction the headlight is beamed) much
more than the right side.  We can't really tell if that
is true or not with this vehicle though, but it appears
to be so.

That is not a valid point either.  It often happens with
the lights mounted on the rear (stop lights etc), and is
also common with parking lights.  In both cases the
enclosure/bezel is designed to spread the light output
over a wide angle, which allows sunlight to come in at
one angle and exit at another.  But of course headlights
are *not* designed that way, so it is much less likely
even if it does happen.  But in this instance the
sunlight is coming from an angle to the right of the
camera and nearly directly overhead, which is not
something that could reflect back out of a head light
that is aimed in the opposite direction and shaded by
the hood of the vehicle from direct sunlight.

That is also a valid point, even though you missed on
all of the reasons.  The EXIF data etc have virtually no
value.

Look at the shadow under the vehicles, particularly the
vehicle seen from the rear.  The sun is clearly almost
directly overhead, just barely (say about 1 oclock)
directly to right (the passenger side) in relation to
the orientation of that vehicle.

Which does mean it is possible that the bright light (it
is nearly blocking, with values only a couple less than
maximum) is a reflection off the hood or from chrome
near the light fixture.

Regardless, the vehicle is clearly one that is more
recent than 1990 manufacture, is in Canada, and
therefore almost certainly has its headlights turned on.

Okay, what you said was "running lights", but what that
means in context is in fact "headlights".  The term DRL
refers to headlights...  (which makes your statement a
bit of nonsense in context, which is why I thought you
might mean parking lights where it would actually makes
sense).

You realize that "DRL" means the *headlights* are on.

Now that is an interesting claim!  I cannot ever
remember being bothered by "other drivers by shining
headlights" in my eyes in daylight.  At night, yes, but
not in daylight.

(Heh heh, on the other hand, the first vehicle I ever
drove that was equipped with with a DRL resulted in
someone calling the cops on me!  It was a company
vehicle, and I had to wait for an airplane to arrive, so
I parked (at night), but couldn't figure out how to get
the darned lights to shut off and yet keep the engine
running to keep me warm.  A cop showed up, and told me
that people in the house that my lights were directed at
had called them.  I said, "I have no idea how to shut
them off.  He laughed, and said, "Put the parking brake
on."  (He was driving an identical GM vehicle...)

That is an bit of an absurd claim.  Given the size of
the US market, a lighting system with $2 few parts would
be worth millions...

Another absurd claim.  See the cited studies above, two
of which were done in the US.  (And there have been
others.)

I can't much do more than laugh.  They sound a wee bit
prejudiced...   but you did find it on the Internet, so
it must be true, right?  ;-)

That "waste fuel" argument, as one example, is related
to wasting a fraction of a mile per gallon.  GM for
example estimates that it costs the average driver $3
per year.  Insignificant!

One of the things you will notice though is that
virtually all of the countries that have mandated
daytime headlight use are northern countries.  Canada,
Norway, Demark, Finland, Iceland, and Sweden are all
north of everywhere in the US except Alaska.  In fact
the one and apparently the only valid criticism of the
various studies is that they are all being done at
northern latitudes and may not be as valid at lower
latitudes such as in the contiguous United States.

Here is one list of studies:

 http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/DRLs/studies.htm

The current Kia Optimas have an "auto" position on the headlight switch
that does the same thing.  In either "on" or "auto", the lights turn off
with the ignition so you can't leave them on accidentally.

The signs do contradict each other.  Since the painted arrows and the sign
at the intersection match and it doesn't seem that the center lane has a
path to turn left, the sign in the foreground is wrong.

Lights on, even at sunny noon, increases the likelihood that you are
seen.  This all began in Sweden with a study showing that if headlights
were left on the daytime highway (2 lane) collision rate went down.

In Canada since about 1991 all new cars come with DRL (Daytine Running
Lights) which typically use the headlights at less than full power.

Some use the front "parking" lights as DRL.

It is on.  Just the angle reduces the intensity.  IAC, all new cars
since about 1991 can't help but have them on (in Canada).

Tripe of the worst kind.

1) Headlights in the daytime have much lower contrast than at night, so
it does not "shine" in anyone's eyes.

2) The DRL's are implemented at lower than full power.

It is in most US models but not enabled in most US cars sold.  Some in
the US do have it enabled (or have had it enabled in some years of sale).

Sounds like an "agenda" driven study to me.

Cheers,
Alan

If there is one (and so far I haven't seen conclusive evidence - the "bike" in
the near weeds might be a grocery cart), it's probably Alan's. He's the one
who spotted the road sign error, and he just said that he goes through that
intersection daily. So it stands to reason that he's the one who took the
picture.

Bob

When the law came out to have running lights, I had to install a relay in my
company truck to turn the lights on with the ignition, since I drive a federally
regulated vehicle.

The 'running lights' used in some cars are actually the high-beams in the
headlights. Since the high beam filament is not used that much, and it isn't a
big loss if you don't have it, it makes sense to use it during the day. The
power is cut down though, possibly by connecting the 2 lamps in series.

The reason I say this is because I have had lots of Canadian cars, and when I
turn the headlamps "on" after dark, there is a change of pattern in the light on
the street, not just a brightness change. Also, since they brought out this law,
I have had to replace lots of headlamps because the high beam was burned out -
and I almost never drive at night with them on. Most of my night driving is in
the city with low beams. AND before 1990, burned out high beams were a rarity.
It's the opposite now.

There are a few cars on the roads with no lights in daytime, but they risk a
ticket or a crash up! Since we are used to looking for "2 lights" in our
rearview before making a lane change, we can't see cars with no running lights..
I've almost hit a few of these idiots!