Why don't vehicles have running lights with tail lights lit as well? Would be much safer ya.

What, the parking lights? My tails come on with them. Or the DRLs, all cars have just front DRLs if your ranger is so equipped.

__________________
-Alex
'10 Ranger XL 2.3L Manual
Mods: Stereo, Tint, Weatherguard rain shields, Intake silencer removal, LED brake, turn signal, reverse, license plate, and dome lights, DDM HID's (currently removed), lowered, 17" wheels with spacers, Explorer autodim mirror with Autolamps, Magnaflow exhaust, Buggman LED 3rd Brake Light...

Because while on the street to someone that doesn't know what they are looking at it might look like your braking when in fact your not. Lights are on the front so people see you. People behind you are supposed to be paying attention to you so they don't rearend you.

__________________
1997 B2300 reg cab 2.3 Lima, 15x8.5 Mickey Thompson classic 2, 31x10.50 cooper discover at3, 7.5 open 4.10 rear, dynomax super turbo catback, alpine iva-w200 w/ nav, kicker 6x8s, alpine type R 8, alpine 250W mono amp, power bass 400.4, tool box & camper shell, compustar alarm/remote start.
1956 Ford F100 rust bucket with big plans!

You have reflectors on both the front and rear corners. For daytime driving, that's plenty. For nighttime driving, you have regular parking lights on the tail lights. The addition of DRL on the very front makes sense, but anything on top of that is overkill, potentially to the point of being more hazardous.

__________________
2003 Ford Ranger XLT
2.3L I4 Duratec DOHC, 5R44E 5-speed auto, RWD, 7.5" Open w/ 4.10 Ratio, Gibson split-rear catback
Sonic Blue Pearl with dark gray trim

Well I used to drls but now can't find problem why their not on. Doesn't really matter to me.