Use of multiple-beam headlamps.

Checkout our iOS App for a better way to browser and research.

347.12 Use of multiple-beam headlamps.

(1) Whenever a motor vehicle is being operated on a highway during hours of darkness or during a period of limited visibility, the operator shall use a distribution of light or composite beam directed high enough and of sufficient intensity to reveal a person or vehicle at a safe distance in advance of the vehicle, subject to the following requirements and limitations:

(a) Whenever the operator of a vehicle equipped with multiple-beam headlamps approaches an oncoming vehicle within 500 feet, the operator shall dim, depress or tilt the vehicle's headlights so that the glaring rays are not directed into the eyes of the operator of the other vehicle. This paragraph does not prohibit an operator from intermittently flashing the vehicle's high-beam headlamps at an oncoming vehicle whose high-beam headlamps are lit.

(b) Whenever the operator of a vehicle equipped with multiple-beam headlamps approaches or follows another vehicle within 500 feet to the rear, the operator shall dim, depress, or tilt the vehicle's headlights so that the glaring rays are not reflected into the eyes of the operator of the other vehicle. This paragraph does not prohibit an operator from intermittently flashing the vehicle's high-beam headlamps as provided under par. (a).

(2) Subsection (1) (a) and (b) does not apply to the use of alternately flashing or pulsating headlamps under s. 347.25 (1r).

History: 1989 a. 69; 1991 a. 316; 1999 a. 66; 2015 a. 165.

Sub. (1) (b) does not require proof that the headlights reflected into the eyes of another driver. The statute directs drivers operating within 500 feet to dim their headlights and concludes by describing the purpose of this requirement: to prevent the glaring rays from reflecting into another driver's eyes. An interpretation that would require an ordinary driver using high beams to know whether his or her headlights will impair another driver's vision is absurd. State v. Tomaszewski, 2010 WI App 51, 324 Wis. 2d 433, 782 N.W.2d 725, 09-0385.


Download our app to see the most-to-date content.