End of the day, evidence or not, coroner's report or not, court case or not, you as an individual chooses to wear one regardless of what other people think. If you don't wear one - that's cool. If you do - then that's cool too. Each and every one of us (me included) has our own opinions on the matter and it will be an argument to the end of time as to which is better. I personally wear one, although I don't have a go at others if they don't. Their head, not mine and by that, their decision. I don't understand why people get so arsed up about it. You aren't spending the money for those who want one to wear one, so why be bothered?
Why it matters is that while no-one is out there campaigning for a ban on helmets, there are plenty of people lobbying for them to be mandatory and it is creeping in through the back door - how many cycling events are left that don't require you to wear a helmet to take part? If it were left totally to individual choice I would be happy with a live and let live approach but when my freedom of choice is being increasingly curtailed and Ministers are being pilloried in the press for riding without a helmet, I will challenge the misinformation that claims:
- cycling in unusually dangerous
- cycling is an unusually productive source of head injuries
- cycle helmets reduce head injuries.