And just because something is a law doesn’t mean it’s per definition a good idea. Or it doesn’t mean that it’s a law that should be enforced. Laws are created for all kinds of reasons, stating your argument in terms of the law does not make your opinion any more convincing.

Besides, if I did have a working light on my bike “at all times” and someone stole that light, _breaking the law_, then the only reason I would be breaking the law is because someone infringed upon my ability to follow the law. How is that then my fault?

Cars vs bikes depends on where you are, though. Not having a light on your bike I would say is definitely a bigger hazard in some places in Trondheim than it is in Utrecht. I mean the car traffic here is sort of choked, there are no heavy throughput roads. I guess they have successfully limited the amount of car traffic in the city to a certain level. If you live in a city where there’s more intense car traffic, then it’s a much bigger issue.

Besides you are permitted by law to have a working light at all times. It is your own responsibility if you choose to break that law.

But the lights on bicycle thing is a big problem. I’ve read the reports on bicycle-accident related deaths on an annual basis and the figures are startling. You yourself admitted visibility from a car is pretty bad, especially when it’s raining and dark: I’ve almost hit cyclists without lights *numerous* times while driving myself. You just can NOT see them coming.
And very few of them cyclists are skilled enough to be able to pull off cycling without a light.

Not saying that fining is the way to tackle the problem. I agree the theft and vandalism of bikes are the main causes and they’re doing zilch about those problems.

But a helmet-law in the Netherlands is just as likely as a gay-marriage law in Texas.