No helmet

[Jaded]

I concluded that I am not a special case and if I believe a helmet is a good idea for my head, then I must believe it is a good idea for everyone else's.

Breathtaking!

My view is that I WOULD support government action to make cycle helmets
compulsory. Thats not imposing anything on you. That is me supporting a possible future action.

You support government action to make helmets compulsory (from a starting point of having carried out no research into the matter) and you think that is not imposing on other cyclists? That's somewhat weaselly.

 

[davidwalton]

Have a think about the rider.

Human, so as fragile to the elements. One sitting there, another sitting and turning the legs.........so what?

A human on a Moped MUST wear a helmet. A cyclist need not.

 

[davidwalton]

Breathtaking!



You support government action to make helmets compulsory (from a starting point of having carried out no research into the matter) and you think that is not imposing on other cyclists? That's somewhat weaselly.

I'm gone. You have zero intent to do anything other than try and rubbish me and my views.

 

[Jaded]

Not once have I suggested I would be IMPOSING anything...Again and again I have made it clear that I would support government action to make helmets compulsory. That isn't me imposing, that would be me supporting my beliefs.

You are imposing upon me and my beliefs. HOW DARE YOU!!!

I understand your wish to wear a helmet. You have a right to do that and I would not wish to prevent you from doing that.

You, however, believe you know what is best for others ("I believe a helmet is a good idea for my head, then I must believe it is a good idea for everyone else's.") and you would like to see government imposing this belief on every other cyclist.

Can you see the difference?

 

[Jaded]

Human, so as fragile to the elements. One sitting there, another sitting and turning the legs.........so what?

A human on a Moped MUST wear a helmet. A cyclist need not.

The health of the rider. I covered it earlier. As did others.

 

[Jaded]

I'm gone. You have zero intent to do anything other than try and rubbish me and my views.

I'm not rubbishing your views on helmet wearing.

I'm rubbishing your wish to impose your views on everyone else without a shred of evidence.

Can you see the difference?

 

[dodgy]

It's like talking to a brick wall.

Dave.

 

[Brock]

That's the problem with trying to argue with beliefs based on faith.

 

[davidwalton]

I'm not rubbishing your views on helmet wearing.

I'm rubbishing your wish to impose your views on everyone else without a shred of evidence.

Can you see the difference?

Not IMPOSING anything. I do have a right to the view that ALL should wear a helmet, and I have the right to support any government action that makes it compulsory.

If you want evidence, there is bucket loads on the Internet, but who cares. You would rather tell me I have no right to support possible government action. I therefore have nothing to say to you. My rights mean nothing to you, so why should I bother listening to you trying to tell me why I have no right to come to a conclusion, voice my opinion, or state I would support government action.

 

[Smokin Joe]

Question for David Walton.

Professional cyclists crash far more often than any other class of rider, mostly at far higher speeds. Can you tell us how many died from or suffered serious injuries to the head in the 100 plus years before helmets were in use?

The number would not even make a statistic. You are typical of someone who has been doing something for five minutes and thinks he is an expert.

 

[davidwalton]

It's like talking to a brick wall.

Dave.

Yes, but no more. I will just go and support what I think is right after doing the reading I did.

You all failed because you chose to try a defeat me.

 

[Jaded]

Not IMPOSING anything. I do have a right to the view that ALL should wear a helmet, and I have the right to support any government action that makes it compulsory.

If you want evidence, there is bucket loads on the Internet, but who cares. You would rather tell me I have no right to support possible government action. I therefore have nothing to say to you. My rights mean nothing to you, so why should I bother listening to you trying to tell me why I have no right to come to a conclusion, voice my opinion, or state I would support government action.

It would be good if you went and read it then, before wishing to impose your views on everyone else and deciding that what is good for you (in your personal opinion) is good for everyone else.

 

[Chris James]

Yes, but no more. I will just go and support what I think is right after doing the reading I did.

You all failed because you chose to try a defeat me.

Bizarre. I have no wish to 'defeat' you.

I don't want to change your mind about the effectiveness of cycle helmets either.

I just want others to be able to make their own mind up and be legally forced into wearing helmets.

 

[davidwalton]

Question for David Walton.

Professional cyclists crash far more often than any other class of rider, mostly at far higher speeds. Can you tell us how many died from or suffered serious injuries to the head in the 100 plus years before helmets were in use?

The number would not even make a statistic. You are typical of someone who has been doing something for five minutes and thinks he is an expert.

Perhaps you can tell me how many professional races are carried out in traffic? How many head injuries does it take?

and at what point did I ever claim I was an expert?

By the people here, I must go out and collect my own figures and statistics, wait 10 or so years, and only then do have a right.

Go away you nasty nasty people.

 

[dodgy]

Go away you nasty nasty people.