Poll of the Day > Annual reminder that wanting to "end DST" is fallacious and wrong

(+) Yeah! (+)

What most rational people mean when they complain about losing an hour of sleep and not wanting to do this shit anymore is to stay in Daylight Savings Time year-round. Sadly, the headlines usually talk of "ending DST", which is the opposite.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/08/health/daylight-savings-good-for-you-conversation-wellness/index.html

In an effort to avoid the biannual clock switch in spring and fall, some well-intended critics of DST have made the mistake of suggesting that the abolition of DST -- and a return to permanent standard time -- would benefit society. In other words, the US would never "spring forward" or "fall back."
They are wrong. DST saves lives and energy and prevents crime. Not surprisingly, then, politicians in Washington and Florida have now passed laws aimed at moving their states to DST year-round.

The evening rush hour is twice as fatal as the morning for various reasons: Far more people are on the road, more alcohol is in drivers' bloodstreams, people are hurrying to get home and more children are enjoying outdoor, unsupervised play. Fatal vehicle-on-pedestrian crashes increase threefold when the sun goes down.
DST brings an extra hour of sunlight into the evening to mitigate those risks. Standard time has precisely the opposite impact, by moving sunlight into the morning.
A meta-study by Rutgers researchers demonstrated that 343 lives per year could be saved by moving to year-round DST. The opposite effect would occur if the U.S. imposed year-round standard time.

Criminals strongly prefer to do their work in the darkness of evening and night. Crime rates are lower by 30 percent in the morning to afternoon hours, even when those morning hours occur before sunrise, when it's still dark.
A 2013 British study found that improved lighting in the evening hours could reduce the crime rate by up to 20 percent.

Virtually everyone in our society is awake and using energy in the early evening hours when the sun sets. But a considerable portion of the population is still asleep at sunrise, resulting in significantly less demand for energy then.
Having more sun in the evening requires not just less electricity to provide lighting, but reduces the amount of oil and gas required to heat homes and businesses when people need that energy most. Under standard time, the sun rises earlier, reducing morning energy consumption, but only half of Americans are awake to be able to use the sun.

Some great points from an excellent article on the subject. Of course, he doesn't even mention the most obvious reason to do permanent DST vs. permanent standard time:
We actually spend more time in DST currently than we do in so-called "standard time"! 7 months vs. 5 months!
Don't let the names fool you. Our bodies are conditioned to DST as our "standard" time.

Yeah, no. I want permanent standard time. The supposed benefits of DST are nebulous, and in general for every benefit mentioned there's conflicting evidence. For example, there's been various studies that show that DST actually costs more from an energy standpoint.

daylight savings time is very unethical - an hour of extra sunlight a day must contribute massively to global warming...

---

I don't care if we get rid of DST, or make it permanent - just so long as we do one or the other

---

DST complaints are the epitome of 1st-world problems. So many larger problems to fix.

---

SunWuKung420 posted...

DST complaints are the epitome of 1st-world problems. So many larger problems to fix.

Well it's not like it takes huge resources to fix it, some states don't even follow DST. In Arizona they don't observe it at all and just ignore the time changing. Statements like this act like every problem takes the same amount of effort to solve, fixing a leaky faucet is the same as solving world hunger.

sveksii posted...

Yeah, no. I want permanent standard time. The supposed benefits of DST are nebulous, and in general for every benefit mentioned there's conflicting evidence. For example, there's been various studies that show that DST actually costs more from an energy standpoint.

"Various studies"
Like...? And I hope you mean specifically that having sunlight later into the evening is less energy efficient than having sunlight earlier in the morning. If it's about how adjusting to the change twice a year wastes energy, then...permanent DST wouldn't cause that.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

32 of the 48 states that currently participate in DST want to make it permanent:
https://ktvz.com/news/national-world/2020/03/09/you-abhor-daylight-saving-time-32-states-do-too-but-its-up-to-congress-to-change-things/

Sure sounds like "most" to me! And why the fuck would you schedule things differently and erase the whole point of shifting sunlight hours to the evening?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

It cited studies for the points it made, but I guess "assumptions" is the new slang term for references.
"Waiting until it's dark again" ...Seriously? The point is they have one less hour of evening darkness to work with for committing crimes. It's not a matter of waiting for it to become dark...

We don't have DST here. It is the way to go.

---

DST is bad for health. It's needs to be phased out.
---

What sucka about it at my job is on o e you lose a hour of work thus a hour of pay on the other change you gain a hour of work so a 12 hour shift becomea 13.

---

Johnny Eagle posted...

I don't care if we get rid of DST, or make it permanent - just so long as we do one or the other

---

I don't care one way or another but it really seems to be a hot button issue with a lot of people. I don't get it. Of course, I work overnights so DST only really impacts whether I work an 11 hour shift or a 13.

---

Keebs05 posted...

I don't care one way or another but it really seems to be a hot button issue with a lot of people. I don't get it. Of course, I work overnights so DST only really impacts whether I work an 11 hour shift or a 13.

Thats my problem. 13 hour shift sucks at a job that majority of the time is so boring you struggle to stay awake and falling asleep by policy should be an automatic termination. Plus by policy having any form of entertainment that would help keep you awake is strictly prohibited.

---

Zangulus posted...

Keep reading into things I didnt say, thatll win your argument.

why do you always do this lol


---

My post:

streamofthesky posted...

"Waiting until it's dark again" ...Seriously? The point is they have one less hour of evening darkness to work with for committing crimes. It's not a matter of waiting for it to become dark...

Your reply:

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


https://i.imgur.com/iWKad22.jpg

Zangulus posted...

So you think keeping the clocks locked means theres less darkness and the rotation of the planet is affected.

Cool.

Criminals are more active late at night than they are in the early hours of the morning, as the article mentioned. If you shift an hour of daylight from the evening to the morning, it's not going to result in the same level of crime.
Why are you being so willfully obtuse?

streamofthesky posted...

Criminals are more active late at night than they are in the early hours of the morning, as the article mentioned. If you shift an hour of daylight from the evening to the morning, it's not going to result in the same level of crime.
Why are you being so willfully obtuse?

lmao this cant be a serious post


---

SunWuKung420 posted...

DST complaints are the epitome of 1st-world problems. So many larger problems to fix.

I feel it says something that this is a first world problem, and is something that really shouldn't be hard to fix, yet we are unable to fix it.

Johnny Eagle posted...

I don't care if we get rid of DST, or make it permanent - just so long as we do one or the other

Gotta go with this. I don't care which one it is. Just pick one and stop having the clocks move.

---

streamofthesky posted...

What most rational people mean when they complain about losing an hour of sleep and not wanting to do this shit anymore is to stay in Daylight Savings Time year-round.

Which would make it no longer Daylight Savings Time, since you're no longer saving anything, so the statement "End DST" is still technically correct.

---

That's an opinion TC.

But... if a political candidate wanted to get elected all they'd have to do would be to run on eliminating DST.

---

I just want light longer in the day. Its awesome when its light at 10pm.

In places like Canada where we have cold months that are cloudy as well, it makes sense to have the time change back and forth.

---

zebatov posted...

Its awesome when its light at 10pm.

the hell is the matter with you

---

I swear people with DST complaints need to go live somewhere without clocks so they can learn how truly pointless their complaints are.

---

While I havent read every post yet, I do have some questions, I guess. Like for the criminal thing, how do daylights saving stop lower it. Its going to be dark the same amount of time regardless of what the clock says, right? So, couldnt they just adjust their criminal time sheets to start at a different time?

Also, while some people complain about losing an hour of sleep, not that many complain about getting the extra hour on the other side...

Also, couldnt some jobs and school adjust hours around those times, anyway? Which would make the change to permanent one way of the other pointless?
---

streamofthesky posted...

The point is they have one less hour of evening darkness to work with for committing crimes. It's not a matter of waiting for it to become dark...

What does this mean, exactly? No matter what the clock says, its going to be dark the same amount of time. Whether its 7 pm to 7am or 6pm to 6am, they get the same amount of darkness. The amount of daylight on certain days are fixed. Changing the clock so it says a different time does nothing. Idk why you think it would mean anything...

streamofthesky posted...

Criminals are more active late at night than they are in the early hours of the morning, as the article mentioned. If you shift an hour of daylight from the evening to the morning, it's not going to result in the same level of crime.
Why are you being so willfully obtuse?

Why wouldnt criminals just moved their crime times by an hour?
---

streamofthesky posted...

"Various studies"
Like...? And I hope you mean specifically that having sunlight later into the evening is less energy efficient than having sunlight earlier in the morning. If it's about how adjusting to the change twice a year wastes energy, then...permanent DST wouldn't cause that.

For example: https://thinkprogress.org/daylight-saving-wastes-energy-c013a479f032/

SunWuKung420 posted...

I swear people with DST complaints need to go live somewhere without clocks so they can learn how truly pointless their complaints are.

You say some pretty asinine shit on a regular basis. But this was a true gem. You might as well have said "Go live in a world without disease so you can see how truly pointless your complaints about disease are."

Most of us don't have a wife that supports us and allows us to ignore the clock. Most of us have lives that are essentially ruled by the clock. We don't get to hang out at bars and try to spin our part time line cook job into some sort of world class chef position.

And most people's complaints about DST are nothing more than casual complaints. Yet you act like people are totally getting bent out of shape about it in this topic.

LinkPizza posted...

What does this mean, exactly? No matter what the clock says, its going to be dark the same amount of time. Whether its 7 pm to 7am or 6pm to 6am, they get the same amount of darkness. The amount of daylight on certain days are fixed. Changing the clock so it says a different time does nothing. Idk why you think it would mean anything...

Shifting when people get up also shifts when people go home and when they go to bed. Take the crime of burglary for example, you want to wait until the business is closed and all the staff have gone home or when everyone in the house is sleeping. Or auto theft. Better to wait until the owner has gone to bed or when the parkinglot isn't active with people still out for the night. If everyone now goes to bed one hour later you lose an hour of darkness to work with because you are waiting for streets to clear a little or for people to go to bed.

It's not so much about the level of light, but the level of normal people being active at that time.

---

I hate the time change, and would rather get rid of it.
I personally would rather stay in DST for the simple reason, the sun is up later into the evening. It sucks when the sun is going down at 4:30pm December. And in the summer it is nice that the sun is up till 10pm about. Another thing I would hate is the sun being up at 5 or earlier in the summer.

---

Bugmeat posted...

Shifting when people get up also shifts when people go home and when they go to bed. Take the crime of burglary for example, you want to wait until the business is closed and all the staff have gone home or when everyone in the house is sleeping. Or auto theft. Better to wait until the owner has gone to bed or when the parkinglot isn't active with people still out for the night. If everyone now goes to bed one hour later you lose an hour of darkness to work with because you are waiting for streets to clear a little or for people to go to bed.

It's not so much about the level of light, but the level of normal people being active at that time.

Thats assuming if everybody kept the same shift times. But that doesnt mean they will. Their are also people who go to bed once it gets dark, or before, as well. The most the criminals would have to do is change their route to hit certain places first. Not to mention, thats if they even lose their that time. Some places may change their hours twice a year instead if they get rid of DST...
---

@TentacleDemon

You need to stop taking the opinions of potders as fact. I work hard at my job and get paid well for that. My wife and I support each other. Your disease analogy is so fucking dumb.

---

dst is pointless, but it also doesn't affect me.

---

Johnny Eagle posted...

I don't care if we get rid of DST, or make it permanent - just so long as we do one or the other

Pretty much. The time change is what sucks, not the exact time at which dawn/dusk happens. Pick one or the other so I can enjoy it being light when I get up in the morning without having to later deal with it abruptly becoming dark again. I don't care if that light starts in February or April, I just want it to last more than a couple weeks.

LinkPizza posted...

Thats assuming if everybody kept the same shift times.

They probably would, given that most places currently keep the same shifts despite the time change. Most businesses benefit from having consistent hours. Changing them periodically to account for changes in daylight would result in a loss of business as people got confused and bitter about it.

---

Mead posted...

the hell is the matter with you

Lit. nothing. No one cares if its dark in the morning because they should be inside and if they arent theyre getting paid not to be.

---