metro article on helmets

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

lukesdad

Guest
More effective helmets>greater protection>increased support to make helmet compulsion law, in the same way M/C helmets became law.
 
What is a helmet though?

Headway have been quoting a paper from the British Dental Association. The paper suggests that helmets should have greater facial protection.

The Rounder Smoother Safer Campaign wants to see the reduction of vents and "Snag points"

The manufacturers are producing helmets that are lighter and less protective

EN1078 is so appallingly weak that it is not recognised for sporting activities in the US
 

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
I ll assume for one moment we are using your definition of effective,what would that be, a motorcycle or fomula one style helmet something of that standard ? Compulsion presumably wouldn't be such an issue for you then ? Or do you avocate rescinding the helmet law for motorcyclists as well ?

Whats your view norm seeing as you support bens position ?
Helmets are simply unnecessary for cyclists (and pedestrians) because the risk of head injury is already very low.
I would never be in favour of compulsion, because the evidence shows that compulsion puts people off cycling, and the health benefits of cycling outweigh it.
 

lukesdad

Guest
Helmets are simply unnecessary for cyclists (and pedestrians) because the risk of head injury is already very low.
I would never be in favour of compulsion, because the evidence shows that compulsion puts people off cycling, and the health benefits of cycling outweigh it.

Hmm I remember similar arguments when the M/C helmet laws were brought in, and its true numbers did drop for a few years, but you'll never guess what, they came back stronger than ever.

... and there could be benefits you have considered with the introduction of compulsion, for instance amongst the BSO Rljing Ninja fraternity. Its looking more attractive the more I look at it.
 

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
Hmm I remember similar arguments when the M/C helmet laws were brought in, and its true numbers did drop for a few years, but you'll never guess what, they came back stronger than ever.

... and there could be benefits you have considered with the introduction of compulsion, for instance amongst the BSO Rljing Ninja fraternity. Its looking more attractive the more I look at it.

There's quite a fundamental difference, in that motorcyclists are at significant risk of a head injury, which motorcycle helmets are effective (ish) at reducing.

But I don't want to see any measure introduced that will reduce cycling, even if temprarily, especially when the measure will not have a significant benefit.

This is a fundamental point: even if cycle helmets were very effective, compulsions would be a terrible idea, because it would reduce the number of people cycling. And the health benefits of cycling are greater than the potential benefit of these hypothetical magic effective helmets.
 
I was thinking much more hard line on the spot fines, think of the revenue !

You mean like the revenue they collect for driving while on the phone or not wearing a seatbelt, stopping in an ASL....... Still never mind. The Government might at least make a few pennies from collecting the VAT on helmet sales
 

lukesdad

Guest
Nah! law breaking cyclists are a much easier target it 'll be a sinch. :thumbsup:
 

lukesdad

Guest
[QUOTE 1812024, member: 45"]Nice idea, but how do you make someone you identify and who doesn't care pay a fine?[/quote]
Thats an easy one Confiscate the bike, its getting better and better ! Then there ll be a ready supply of legal cheap second hand bikes, that might encourage a few more to take up cycling.
 
[QUOTE 1811924, member: 45"]You're adding into your googled evidence a one-sided appraisal of views on a situation. It doesn't help.

I find it better approaching an issue with an open mind rather than deciding how I would like it to be and looking for justification.[/quote]

Its a pity you don't practice what you preach. If you did you would realise that "One of the reasons" ≠ "The reason" rather than trying to interpret it according to your prejudices.
 

lukesdad

Guest
1812050 said:
OK, so back to reality on this one.

Now you had to go and spoil it didn't you? I'm sorry the thread has snowballed out of the usual suspects usual control, but i think their true colours are beginning to shine through.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom