Bradley Wiggins calls for safer cycling laws and compulsory helmets

[jonesy]

Yes, and the discussion has been made easier for the kids to understand since one of my son's teachers was put in a wheelchair by his helmet snagging in an accident which might have left him with nothing worse than a broken collar bone if he hadn't been wearing the helmet.

Fortunately, my family understand risk and understand my reasoning for choosing when to wear, and when not to wear, a lid.

Wiggo can, IMO, screw himself for what he said about helmets and hi viz, especially after abusing and disrespecting the memory of someone who would be no less tragically killed by going under a bus. It might be a futile gesture but I'll be voting for the women's pair to get the SPOTY.

I sympathise with your sentiments, though I suspect poor Wiggo will now be bitterly regretting what he said and the hornets nest he has blundered into. I'm sure had not intended at all to be pinning blame on the victim. Unfortunately, this shows what can happen when somone is collared under pressure by the press on something they weren't expecting or prepared to talk about. He isn't a politician, a campaigner or a otherwise trained media professional...

 

[jonesy]

I am always bemused about how exercised some cyclists get when someone like Wiggons dares to speak their mind and say they are in favour of compulsory helmet use.

Reading some of the comments on Twitter - where there is a really lively debate going on - you'd think he was guilty of apostasy of the highest, and I'd be surprised if someone doesn't put a fatwa on him.

Personally I think it is a good thing he has sparked a debate on cycle safety.

I don't think it is the support for helmet wearing per se that has caused upset, rather it is the (entirely unintended, I'm sure) link to the recent cycling tragedy and the implication in subsequent press covereage that a helmet may have been relevant to this case.

 

[lulubel]

You know, what's so ridiculous about this discussion is that those of you who are trying to put me down are so desperate to be right that you're completely missing the point of what I said in my first post.

I simply asked BB if he had considered how his son would feel. He answered that he had, and chose to go into more detail to explain his personal reasons for the choices he makes. I respect him, both for having thought it through, and for taking the time to explain.

Personally, I know that my parents (like any parents) would be devastated if their daughter was killed in a cycling accident. They're not cyclists - Mum has never even ridden a bike - so all they know is that a helmet is a safety device for cyclists. If I was killed while not wearing one, they would always question whether it might have made a difference, and I wouldn't want to put them through that extra agony as well as losing their daughter.

That's one of the explanations for my choice to wear a helmet, and also why I asked BB if he'd considered all the implications of his choice. It isn't about whether or not helmets save lives, but about people's perceptions of whether or not they save lives.

I'm going to stay out of this thread now because I didn't come here to argue with people who my question wasn't even addressed to.

 

[The Brewer]

Think I've Sussed the Daily Mails thinking..... Nazis wore helmets

 

[Danny]

I don't think it is the support for helmet wearing per se that has caused upset, rather it is the (entirely unintended, I'm sure) link to the recent cycling tragedy and the implication in subsequent press covereage that a helmet may have been relevant to this case.

Hmm...I am not sure if most of the anti-wiggo tweets I've seen are quite so reasoned.

And I don't think anything he said directly implied that a helmet would have helped in this case.

 

[Inertia]

He isn't a politician, a campaigner or a otherwise trained media professional...

^ This, i want him to say what he thinks, he seems a nice bloke, I don't believe he intended to imply a link either. We are also allowed to agree or disagree and to say so if we want.

 

[Red Light]

I am always bemused about how exercised some cyclists get when someone like Wiggons dares to speak their mind and say they are in favour of compulsory helmet use.

Reading some of the comments on Twitter - where there is a really lively debate going on - you'd think he was guilty of apostasy of the highest, and I'd be surprised if someone doesn't put a fatwa on him.

Personally I think it is a good thing he has sparked a debate on cycle safety.

Its mainly because of the strong imbalance of the options. There are plenty of people who want to force me to wear a helmet by law and there have been around five attempts in Parliament over the past few years to make it happen. There is no-one AFAIK trying to ban helmets. Those countries that have introduced helmet laws have seen no improvement in safety as a result but they have seen a big drop in numbers cycling, especially teenagers, and a big increase in obesity, the second biggest preventable cause of death after smoking.

So giving support to those who would have the same happen in the UK, many of whom are not cyclists and have no interest in cycling, and take away my freedoms is a thoroughly bad thing

 

[Red Light]

You know, what's so ridiculous about this discussion is that those of you who are trying to put me down are so desperate to be right that you're completely missing the point of what I said in my first post.

I simply asked BB if he had considered how his son would feel.

Its known in the trade as shroud waving and a thoroughly disreputable way of trying to coerce people.

Personally, I know that my parents (like any parents) would be devastated if their daughter was killed in a cycling accident. They're not cyclists - Mum has never even ridden a bike - so all they know is that a helmet is a safety device for cyclists. If I was killed while not wearing one, they would always question whether it might have made a difference, and I wouldn't want to put them through that extra agony as well as losing their daughter.

Would they not be equally devastated if their daughter was killed in any accident? Or does cycling bring a different degree of devastation from other accidents? If the prevention of devastation is your objective then we are back to many more lives being saved if helmets were made compulsory in cars and when walking than when cycling. Fact.

 

[Danny]

Its mainly because of the strong imbalance of the options. There are plenty of people who want to force me to wear a helmet by law and there have been around five attempts in Parliament over the past few years to make it happen. There is no-one AFAIK trying to ban helmets. Those countries that have introduced helmet laws have seen no improvement in safety as a result but they have seen a big drop in numbers cycling, especially teenagers, and a big increase in obesity, the second biggest preventable cause of death after smoking.

So giving support to those who would have the same happen in the UK, many of whom are not cyclists and have no interest in cycling, and take away my freedoms is a thoroughly bad thing

There aren't "plenty of people" who want to force you to wear a helmet. A handful of individuals have attempted to make helmet use compulsory and these attempts have been easily batted away by those who agree for free choice.

Even so you get an hysterical reaction your get from the anti-compulsion brigade every time someone dares to suggest that helmets be made mandatory.

 

[calibanzwei]

Just heard...

 

[MrJamie]

Personally, I know that my parents (like any parents) would be devastated if their daughter was killed in a cycling accident. They're not cyclists - Mum has never even ridden a bike - so all they know is that a helmet is a safety device for cyclists. If I was killed while not wearing one, they would always question whether it might have made a difference, and I wouldn't want to put them through that extra agony as well as losing their daughter.

My mum bought me one of those cheapy thick polystyrene unvented helmets when i was about 12 and rather than wear it I stopped cycling soon after. Roll on nearly 20 years later and my nephew is using one of those cheap halfords helmets and hating it too. I ordered him the kids version of the Specialized Align and so my mum ordered me the adult's version Like you say, I cant go out cycling incase something did happen to me and Id left my helmet at home (although I do sometimes nip to the local shop without it).

 

[Paul Walters]

....... Department of Transport........ announcing an additional £30 million for better cycle routes and facilties. ........”

​

.

which no doubt means building more off road cycle routes rather than investing measures to make riding on roads safer.

 

[StuartG]

There was a poor debate on BBC Radio 4 One 'O Clock news. A rabid helmeteer who saw the only problem of brain damaged cyclists entering hospital and quite closed to the wider questions put forward by the CTC chappie. He produced the usual dodgy stats (helmets save 63% to 80% of deaths).

The presenter rather let the whole thing go. The helmeteer in overdoing his case was rather more effective in destroying it. A classic was when the CTC bloke quoted the statistics on the impact of Australian laws he dismissed them with "But an Australian politician told me in his experience ..." Doh!

 

[ohnovino]

Wiggo himself has now back-tracked on Twitter, saying he was never calling for compulsion. Maybe he'll go back to doing interviews in French instead, just to avoid any further confusion.

 

[Red Light]

There aren't "plenty of people" who want to force you to wear a helmet. A handful of individuals have attempted to make helmet use compulsory and these attempts have been easily batted away by those who agree for free choice.

You think? There is more than a handful on here alone who keep lecturing us about it