Compulsory lid legislation?

[Ming the Merciless]

I cannot hit my head falling off my recumbent. Why on earth would I want to or need to wear one? Even for upright riders the risk is so low why on earth would you want to make helmets compulsory other than to see more people suffer an early death.

 

[Lozi]

Somebody mentioned this to me earlier and I thought NO WAY! I'm not sure I could bring myself to wear one, I had one once when I was a kid to do the cycling proficiency and I was not a fan

 

[david k]

I've posted this graph before.
View attachment 384643

Can anyone spot the year in which seatbelts were made compulsory and there was this supposed dramatic drop in car occupant fatality rates? No, me neither.

You can see a temporary drop following the 1967 introduction of breathalysers - even that was pretty temporary. But anyone who claims that the introduction of comulsory seatbelts in the UK saved lives needs to have the same sort of searching questions asked of them as do the people who claim cycle helmets save lives.

(It was 1983)

I wonder if one affect has been more kilometres driven in quicker time with the introduction of motorways and quicker cars.
An interesting graph may be a deaths per 1,000 hours of driving or similar. Not sure it would prove anything either way but may be interesting to see if my assumption is accurate, my guess is the graph would be less dramatic

 

[Hitchington]

One good thing is that the Tories do tend to be somewhat more libertarian and anti-regulation and "elf-n-saftety gorn maad" type stuff. Left-wingers tend to be more nanyish anout this sirt of thing.

I think you've fallen into that trap of confusing the lazy "health and safety/political correctness gawn maaaaad!" stereotype with decades of campaigning by unions to ensure that sensible legislation and regulation is introduced to protect people from be seriously injured or killed at work by unsafe practice and in the home by faulty consumer goods. But nice try though ;-)

 

[Nigel-YZ1]

Many want to see helmets made law to prevent them having to be responsible for the safety of the squishy thing on two wheels that they're desperate to pass. They want to punish us for 'being in their way'. Territorial dick waving.

Why would anyone think of the idea of protective gear if cars didn't hit us?

So the natural counter to helmet compulsion is a compulsory passing distance.

In helmet debates we're already flying through the air, no one ever asks what caused it.

So let's have the next paper article or radio debate about passing distances.
It'll degenerate into the same hate fest, but for me it's a more useful approach as cyclists suffer more than just head injuries. Passing distance laws would protect the whole body.

 

[Bonefish Blues]

I choose to wear a helmet on most occasions. I don't think I would

I wonder if one affect has been more kilometres driven in quicker time with the introduction of motorways and quicker cars.
An interesting graph may be a deaths per 1,000 hours of driving or similar. Not sure it would prove anything either way but may be interesting to see if my assumption is accurate, my guess is the graph would be less dramatic

...and indeed if there's anything to adjust for the fact that in those 1,000 hours/miles/km/whatever there has been an incremental increase year on year in the sheer number of other road users to bump into?

 

[Profpointy]

I think you've fallen into that trap of confusing the lazy "health and safety/political correctness gawn maaaaad!" stereotype with decades of campaigning by unions to ensure that sensible legislation and regulation is introduced to protect people from be seriously injured or killed at work by unsafe practice and in the home by faulty consumer goods. But nice try though ;-)

No, that's exactly the point I was making

 

[Hitchington]

No, that's exactly the point I was making

So you think that measures to protect people being injured or killed at work and home is "lefty nanny state health and safety gone mad"? Really?

 

[Drago]

I don't think anyone disputes measures with a genuine safety benefit, like ensuring machines have guards, stairs have guard rails, dim factory areas are well lit, that sort of thing. Its the Nanny State (tm) end of the spectrum that upsets folk.

Regulations insisting on fluorescent wear for road workers, when the research carried out by the very same government that introduced the legislation had found no proven safety benefit, would likely fall into that category.

That's why I'm deeply suspicious when the Government tells us that any helmet legislation form cyclists would be evidence based. They've ignored the evidence of their own scientists and statisticians in the past, so why should we suddenly believe them now?

 

[Hitchington]

I agree that any legislation has to come from evidence. If evidence does come to light that helmet wearing improves safety then I will wear mine all the time. If legislation is introduced which makes it compulsory then I will continue to ride and accept the rule.

Wearing hi viz vests on building sites aren't a problem of personal liberty, are they?

 

[Hitchington]

Why can't I edit my spelling mistakes in this thread?

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Hiviz was originally introduced on the railways to enable train drivers to pick out railway workers up to a mile out to allow for the high speed trains and increased stopping distances. Many rail tracks are straight and trains have much longer stopping distances. For the road these conditions do not apply and hiviz is not necessary.

 

[Crackle]

Why can't I edit my spelling mistakes in this thread?

Because it's pre-moderated, you have to report what you want changing.

 

[Cycleops]

I know many don’t like the DM and think they are anti cycling but Peter Hitchens has written a very good article making some excellent points:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5117751/Cycle-helmets-lives-risk.html

 

[MontyVeda]

If wearing a helmet became a legal requirement would you obey the law?

Dunno... probably not. It depends
I sometimes cycle on the pavement and I will jump a red light if it's midnight and there's no other vehicles around... some laws are optional in my book.