Bradley Wiggins calls for safer cycling laws and compulsory helmets

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

dellzeqq

pre-talced and mighty
Location
SW2
[QUOTE 1973412, member: 45"]If that's going to be the case, and we're up for an honest debate, then we need to stop saying that it's more dangerous walking along the pavement than cycling and instead suggest that it's more dangerous crossing the road. Because, as it's been teased out on here, that's closer to the truth.[/quote]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...s-like-pedestrians-must-get-angry?INTCMP=SRCH worth a read..
 
But... What if the helmet chaps who died in the wool (or similar) are using this forum in exactly the same way?

I doubt it. Most of them have zero interest in cycling or cycling forums. The most we might get is a few motorists hoping to have a pop at cyclists and wind them up
 
1973374 said:
I don't suppose that there is an outside chance you might like to contribute usefully here at any point is there?

No chance at all.

I like to blend in with the other contributors. :laugh:
 
I doubt it. Most of them have zero interest in cycling or cycling forums. The most we might get is a few motorists hoping to have a pop at cyclists and wind them up

But when the imminent and threatened vote to erase our open-bonce cycling freedoms in one fell swoop comes to pass (as it surely will), the people who swing it will not be cyclists either.

They will be motorists. They may even be 'motorists hoping to have a pop at cyclists and wind them up'.

That means (if I read you correctly) the very people you are arguing the point with on this thread.

So really, you must keep writing and you must make sure you write more than them.

They are using you as proxies for the Final Debate just as you are using them!

Keep writing! Keep arguing! Keep winning the good fight! keep preserving my hard-won freedoms or similar!

There is an owl in those woods behind your back garden. Sometimes you can call to it.
 

Linford

Guest
I doubt it. Most of them have zero interest in cycling or cycling forums. The most we might get is a few motorists hoping to have a pop at cyclists and wind them up

Heavens above - Someone who uses a car as well and has the audacity to post on a cycling forum :eek:

You can't be both you know :rolleyes:
 

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
1973346 said:
IMAG0756.jpg

Any of you this consistent in the helmet wearing?

Don't underestimate the dangers of the mezzanine at Paddington, Adrian. I have even seen cyclists drinking there! I think he's just put on the lid because he's about to cycle down the escalator. The lift is painfully slow.
 

Linford

Guest
1973506 said:
You can be both, you can be just one. Obviously being just the non-cycling one leaves a person boxing uphill on the credibility front.

'Credibility' as in cycle helmet create more injuries than they save ?
 

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
Apparently, the validity of ones opinion is directly proportional to miles cycled.

Having done approximately 50 miles in total this year, I implore you, to ignore everything I say.

Thank you.

The imploring may not always be necessary... :smile:
 

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
1973559 said:
Credibility as in compulsory cycle helmets have a net negative impact on the population's health. Have you still not taken this on board? Is there any point whatsoever in discussing this with you, or are you blinded to reason?

You're missing the obvious. He doesn't mind this. He isn't bothered if people are put off cycling.
 

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
Its competely irrelevent to the issue of whether helmets are safe or not.

Freakanomincs logic

"Are helmets safe or not?" Is this really the level of debate we're at after a gazillion posts on the subject? Those who are interested in the minutiae of what difference helmets might or might not make in a given incident are best advised to read some of McWobble's stuff in the other thread. I'm not really interested in that stuff, although I'm mightily impressed by it. The issue is political.
 

MontyVeda

a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll
All of the serious ones on my local BMX track use them - but then they've probably fallen off a few times and as a result, now recognise that unprotected body parts get damaged easily when it connects with other things.....
riding a bike on a BMX track is different to just riding a bike in the road though isn't it. If i go rock climbing I'd wear helmet. If I go fell walking I wouldn't. If i go white-water canoeing, I'd wear a helmet. If I went wind surfing, I wouldn't. Crikey, if you go rally driving you'd wear a helmet but not when you're driving to Asda.
 
1973478 said:
The gadfly persona is not hitting the spot I'm afraid. You are just being a bit of an arse here.

I reserve the right to be both a gadfly and a complete arse.

By definition, I do not find one in any way exclusive of the other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom