metro article on helmets

[Boris Bajic]

Yes I know that the definition of the word includes "unintentionally", I'd hope that we all do. There is a bigger picture though, is there not?

Yes, there is a bigger picture, but the Mona Lisa is not it.

I was in the Louvre a year or so back and happened to see fifteen rugby scrums trying to look at it... it is just TINY. Even up close.

Sorry, that might have been OT.

 

[Norm]

Yes I know that the definition of the word includes "unintentionally", I'd hope that we all do. There is a bigger picture though, is there not?

Possibly... probably, even, but some seem to get hung up when the word "accident" appears as if the word "unintentionally" doesn't feature.

I was hoping that pointing out that accident includes unintended would allow the bigger picture to stay in focus.

 

[theclaud]

Possibly... probably, even, but some seem to get hung up when the word "accident" appears as if the word "unintentionally" doesn't feature.

I was hoping that pointing out that accident includes unintended would allow the bigger picture to stay in focus.

I think the point is that the consequences might be unintended, but the act that produces them is usually deliberate. As in drivers intending to pass, intending to pull out, intending to enter the roundabout...

 

[ufkacbln]

This was discussed in it's own thread......

However where do you draw the line. A drunk driver with bald tyres on an icy road has no intention to kill or injure, however they have taken decisions that mean the likelihood is increased to the extent that any thing that occurs is no longer an accident

 

[StuartG]

Accident in the vernacular suggests an unfortunate but unforeseeable event and that, perhaps, no one is to blame. Whereas most crashes are not by chance but directly attributable to preventable failures by one or more participants. Hence the shift by the Met by labelling crashes as Road Traffic Incidents on their yellow witness request boards - a more neutral term than Road Traffic Accident (RTA). A more accurate term as until you know the cause(s) of the crash can you decide that it was indeed an accident and not a psychotic drunk road rager looking for the spliff he just dropped into his crutch as he crossed the gyratory ...

 

[Norm]

Blimey... and I got asked whether there was a bigger picture.

 

[tt123]

One of my mother-in-law's neighbours was a keen cyclist until he fell off his bike 20 years ago. Due to the head injury he received (no helmet), he hasn't been able to walk or talk since.

A helmet may or may not be enough to protect you from serious injury, but the possibility of it helping is enough of a reason for me to wear one, and to insist that my children do too.

 

[tt123]

I'm guessing that you are new here.

I am indeed. Despite me having jumped in at the deep end of an internet argument, I'm not really taking sides for or against, I'm just stating what I do, and my reasons for doing so.

Other cyclists can wear helmets, cowboy hats, bearskins, pickelhaube, feather bonnets, deerstalkers, any other type of headgear, or go bareheaded if they so desire. It's their own choice, and as such none of my business.

 

[caimg]

One of my mother-in-law's neighbours was a keen cyclist until he fell off his bike 20 years ago. Due to the head injury he received (no helmet), he hasn't been able to walk or talk since.

A helmet may or may not be enough to protect you from serious injury, but the possibility of it helping is enough of a reason for me to wear one, and to insist that my children do too.

Exactly my sentiment!

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

One of my mother-in-law's neighbours was a keen cyclist until he fell off his bike 20 years ago. Due to the head injury he received (no helmet), he hasn't been able to walk or talk since.

A helmet may or may not be enough to protect you from serious injury, but the possibility of it helping is enough of a reason for me to wear one, and to insist that my children do too.

And so the cycle starts again! :-(

The Hydra is nothing compared with those with religion!

 

[Boris Bajic]

And so the cycle starts again! :-(

The Hydra is nothing compared with those with religion!

But isn't that the fun of these threads? Few are convinced by the full-throttle rantings of the convert, which only makes the zealots of both sides even more rabid in their posting of well-constructed reasoning.

Most people sit in the unsqueezed middle on this topic and are happy to do their own thing.

My wife and middle child think I'm potty to ride helmetless. My youngest and eldest sit with me in the 'rarely helmetted' camp.

We're all (more or less) keen cyclists with no axe to grind.

That doesn't mean we don't like to giggle from afar at the axe grinders. These threads are much more :-) than they are :-(

 

[ufkacbln]

One of my mother-in-law's neighbours was a keen cyclist until he fell off his bike 20 years ago. Due to the head injury he received (no helmet), he hasn't been able to walk or talk since.

A helmet may or may not be enough to protect you from serious injury, but the possibility of it helping is enough of a reason for me to wear one, and to insist that my children do too.

Which brings us right back to the start and shows exactly the reason why pedestrians should also wear them.

 

[Boris Bajic]

The detached amusement bit doesn't really work if you have to tell people that you are doing it.

I am giggling from Herefordshire. In that sense I am giggling from afar.

This county is near absolutely nowhere and even the places it is near (Wales and similar) are nowhere near anywhere and do not count.

But on a more serious note, my need constantly to remind readers that I don't take these threads seriously is more a comment on my own acute insecurity than on the inflexible warblings of the zealot.

 

[gavroche]

This was discussed in it's own thread......
A drunk driver with bald tyres on an icy road

bold tyres or legal tyres would make no difference on ice. Same result.

 

[caimg]

Oh I don't know. People often get over confident with bold tyres.

Adrian 1-0 gavroche