if helmets became compulsory...

[Red Light]

cyclists protective head gear for children bill.... well thats gonna stop a lot of kids from cycling.

(my opinion based on no facts other than personal experience)

But backed up by facts. It did in Australia and New Zealand. Up to 90% reduction. And there were fewer kids riding with helmets after the law than before despite the wearing rate going up in response to the law.

The beauty of this particular law is the proposed punishment is to show the police proof of helmet purchase within 28 days of being stopped or face a fine. Any child with a head worth protecting will be able to work out they can buy a helmet on line, show the helmet and receipt and then return it within 7 days for a full refund. Its what the students in Oxford did when the police tried a similar strategy for riding without lights.

 

[Bicycle]

It would be foolish to assume it won't.

I believe it won't.

I'm not sure I assume it won't, but that's partly because because I dislike the word.

I may be foolish; that's for others to judge.

 

[MontyVeda]

But backed up by facts. It did in Australia and New Zealand. Up to 90% reduction. And there were fewer kids riding with helmets after the law than before despite the wearing rate going up in response to the law.

The beauty of this particular law is the proposed punishment is to show the police proof of helmet purchase within 28 days of being stopped or face a fine. Any child with a head worth protecting will be able to work out they can buy a helmet on line, show the helmet and receipt and then return it within 7 days for a full refund. Its what the students in Oxford did when the police tried a similar strategy for riding without lights.

I agree... my brother won't let his kids out on their bikes without 'proper protective gear' so they seldom play out on their bikes. Which is a shame seeing as me and my brother spent so much time playing Evil Knievel on our bikes as kids with no protective gear and a multitude of ramshackle ramps.

As for students in Oxford riding around with no lights, the police need a different approach... here's your fine, which you will pay, go and buy some lights, we don't need proof, but if we pull you again the fine will double.


(my typo in this thread title is really starting to annoy me!)

 

[PpPete]

You've made the point that the benefits of modern cycle helmets are minimal, therefore would the standards not also have to be looked at?
That would result in more robust helmets? Wouldn't this be to our advantage?

Regrettably not.... that's not how the law relating to standards works. EN standards take precedence.
The only way of overturning the woefully inadequate current EN standard may be by getting an ISO standard adopted, but that is highly unlikely to ever be agreed, because it needs agreement from a much larger group of nations - and the representatives appointed by each nation are "industry experts" - often from the manufacturers themselves !

 

[Bicycle]

I agree... my brother won't let his kids out on their bikes without 'proper protective gear' so they seldom play out on their bikes. Which is a shame seeing as me and my brother spent so much time playing Evil Knievel on our bikes as kids with no protective gear and a multitude of ramshackle ramps.

This is one very odd aspect of the 'safety-first' argument.

I too did absurdly dangerous things as a child and am lucky not to have been seriously hurt.

I now stand by as my children do likewise... It is not easy, but they need to find their limits.

I am rare (alone) among my peers in not forbidding or strongly discouraging my children from buying motorcycles. None has yet bought one, but I can't forbid it.

I won't sleep a wink if any of them buys one; just as my father didn't sleep a wink when I bought one...

Like falling out of trees, jumping into the sea from silly heights and trying to make a bicycle fly, it's all part of growing up.

I don't for a moment think that cycling helmets will bevcome mandatory for any section of society - but there is a significant number of parents out there who are determined not to let little Johnny or Janine scratch even their tiniest little toe.

Do not even get me started on the bizarre way lots of people (although rarely doctors or nurses) obsess about wiping every little smear of the outside world with anti-bacterial wipes.... the same people whose children are often snuffling and are frequently off school with tummy upsets...

Ooops... I nearly ranted.

 

[MontyVeda]

This is one very odd aspect of the 'safety-first' argument.

I too did absurdly dangerous things as a child and am lucky not to have been seriously hurt.

I now stand by as my children do likewise... It is not easy, but they need to find their limits.

I am rare (alone) among my peers in not forbidding or strongly discouraging my children from buying motorcycles. None has yet bought one, but I can't forbid it.

I won't sleep a wink if any of them buys one; just as my father didn't sleep a wink when I bought one...

Like falling out of trees, jumping into the sea from silly heights and trying to make a bicycle fly, it's all part of growing up.

I don't for a moment think that cycling helmets will bevcome mandatory for any section of society - but there is a significant number of parents out there who are determined not to let little Johnny or Janine scratch even their tiniest little toe.

It's these parents who may push for it though, backed by some half thought out tabloid campaign.

Do not even get me started on the bizarre way lots of people (although rarely doctors or nurses) obsess about wiping every little smear of the outside world with anti-bacterial wipes.... the same people whose children are often snuffling and are frequently off school with tummy upsets...

Ooops... I nearly ranted.

Rant away!
...apparently the healthiest kids in the country are those who live on working farms, and we know what farms are like... poo everywhere.

Who was it on grumpy old men who said "Kids these days are falling over after eating a peanut because they never ate a slug as a toddler" or something along those lines.

anyway, that's a whole different rant.

 

[ufkacbln]

Regrettably not.... that's not how the law relating to standards works. EN standards take precedence.
The only way of overturning the woefully inadequate current EN standard may be by getting an ISO standard adopted, but that is highly unlikely to ever be agreed, because it needs agreement from a much larger group of nations - and the representatives appointed by each nation are "industry experts" - often from the manufacturers themselves !

The design and standards are one of the biggest hypocrisies of the pro-compulsion lobby.

The evidence that present helmets are inadequate is diverse and peer reviewed, yet unacceptable because it shows the present shortcomings.

If we are serious about preventing head injuries then we should seriuosly be looking at the faults in present design (snag points, ejection, rotational injuries, decreasing efficiency) and start with the basics.

We should if the US reseach is correct be looking at helmets that have round smooth surfaces (rounder, smoother, safer campaign). We should also be looking at the Headway approved British Dental Association statement that helmets should include facial protection.

Basically, in order to abide with present medical advice we should be looking at something along the line of full faced BMX helmets.

 

[Red Light]

If we are serious about preventing head injuries then we should seriuosly be looking at the faults in present design (snag points, ejection, rotational injuries, decreasing efficiency) and start with the basics.

If we are serious about preventing head injuries then we should be seriously looking first at the major causes of head injuries. Which would mean we would start with motor vehicle helmets, pedestrian helmets (for trips falls and assaults) and home helmets before we start thinking about cycling helmets; the three causes that collectively account for about 95% of all head injuries.

 

[Red Light]

I believe it won't.

I'm not sure I assume it won't, but that's partly because because I dislike the word.

I may be foolish; that's for others to judge.

The downside of my being wrong is nothing happens.

The downside of your being wrong is we all have to suffer a mandatory helmet law.

Given that there have been at least four attempts to introduce mandatory helmet laws in the UK in the last eight years, I prefer my precautionary approach.

 

[david k]

so you expect it to become compulsory?

 

[Bicycle]

so you expect it to become compulsory?

No.

I've yet to sit round a dinner table where the majority were in favour of mandatory helmet use.

Most people in the UK don't really have a view on this.

I think helmets make a lot of sense, but I don't think a majority of our 650-odd MPs will think it worth making their use mandatory.

As in all matters of opinion, I am quite right on this and will remain so until events prove me wrong.

 

[kedab]

i'd wear one - i do wear one.

i would be on the side of the 'pro choice' group where any compulsion was concerned though.

my personal reasons are this: i rode bmx for years in my yoot, often on halfpipes and for many years in 'Bowes Lyon' Stevenage which was a concrete skate park - without a helmet. I got away with it then but i don't bounce as well as i used to so i'd rather not take my chances in adulthood

 

[Cyclopathic]

I'd flout the law and campaign against compulsion.

 

[Dan B]

I've yet to sit round a dinner table where the majority were in favour of mandatory helmet use.

Really? I find it rarely comes up as dinner party conversation, so I'd be curious to know: majority of cyclists or majority of people in general? I think non-cyclists are in general far readier to say "yes, seems like common-sense, why not?" because they have an inflated idea of the intrinsic risks of cycling and an unwarranted belief in the effectiveness of this particular intervention - and the downsides are not downsides that they personally can relate to.

 

[threebikesmcginty]

Really? I find it rarely comes up as dinner party conversation, so I'd be curious to know...

The big question though is what did they have to eat?