The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[potsy]

Better than a glasgow kiss haha

Is that another reason you wear a helmet?

 

[Spinney]

Mod note:

Feel free to ban me if I can't use the term twat. - MODS Be my guest.

Oh, by all means.
CycleChat is supposed to be a family-friendly forum. You can think about people however you wish - however calling people derogatory names just because they happen to disagree with you is not on, as quite a few people have said above.

And Kevin Alexander isn't the only one getting stroppy - please can the rest of you cool it a bit as well?
Ta!

(And if anyone noticed the thread was locked for a short while - it was only so I could get this typed without too many new posts appearing while I did so!).

 

[Mugshot]

So when I wear mine I'm ok, and when I choose not to I'm a twat?

Well, from what I've heard.....well I wouldn't presume to make the distinction

 

[martint235]

Gosh I turn my back to do some other stuff and you lot have loads of fun without me

 

[Brandane]

Quite happily would if I spoke to them.

Why you one of them? You going to come up to Scotland with Accy to twat me

I'm already there. Feel free to call me a twat to my face for not wearing a helmet if you like. You might not like my response though.
Your opinion of people who don't wear helmets is nothing more than a result of your ignorance.

 

[simongt]

On a slightly obtuse angle on the helmet issue, it always amuses me the number of women I see who wear their helmet pushed onto the back of their head. This isn't a recent phenomenon, if you look at wartime photos of women in military service during WW2, it is quite common to see most of them with their Brodie helmets pushed onto the back of their heads.
It must be a girlie / hairdo thing through history.

 

[ianrauk]

On a slightly obtuse angle on the helmet issue, it always amuses me the number of women I see who wear their helmet pushed onto the back of their head. This isn't a recent phenomenon, if you look at wartime photos of women in military service during WW2, it is quite common to see most of them with their Brodie helmets pushed onto the back of their heads.
It must be a girlie / hairdo thing through history.

Unfortunately, young children also. You see very few children wearing helmets that are correctly fitted. You only have to see some of the pics in the 'Your Kids On Bikes' thread.

 

[MontyVeda]

I see loads of kids on bikes with helmets on, but hardly any on scooters... odd how one is perceived as more 'dangerous' than the other.

 

[ufkacbln]

That is your opinion that the marketing industry is fleecing people for these useless plastic hats.

My opinion is that people who don't wear a £50 helmet which MAY reduce the risk of head trauma are twats.

End of.

Would those "people" be pedestrians as well, or are we back in the magic land where pedestrian head injuries are somehow less traumatic, the deaths somewhat less fatal.......

 

[ufkacbln]

Ok here is my 2p worth on why you should wear a helmet

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...ause-he-did-not-want-to-mess-up-his-hair.html

Read that, look at the picture and then decide if you want to RISK your life by not wearing one.

Even cycling around your garden could result in you falling and hitting your head and not knowing how to do the basics in life or worse. It doesn't have to be a bad crash to impact your life or end it.

Common sense would make helmet wearing the law,

What if I raised you a fatality where a pedestrian didn't wear one?

Would it be common sense for the law to make pedestrian helmets compulsory?

 

[mjr]

Unfortunately, young children also. You see very few children wearing helmets that are correctly fitted. You only have to see some of the pics in the 'Your Kids On Bikes' thread.

Pro cyclists too, mostly with the chin strap dangling uselessly somewhere near their collarbone. You only have to watch the Tour de France on TV. Or riding without a helmet for a bit, in the case of Contador a couple of times.

 

[mjr]

That's a too small population (at least at top level, only about 600 riders a year) with too few incidents to infer much and completely atypical of everyday cycling. Even then, the pro helmet compulsion had to be pushed through on the back of a tragedy by emotional argument and not data.

But in response to a taunting private message: if you want to look at a summary of that small population anyway http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1213.html - not numbers helmet fanatics will want to put on any posters.

Edit: and I think if you extend 2010-11 to 2010-16 using the wiki page then there have been 10 deaths already and we've still three and a bit years to go.

 

[mjr]

They don't wear them out of choice.

Like most children.

 

[srw]

Ok here is my 2p worth on why you should wear a helmet

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...ause-he-did-not-want-to-mess-up-his-hair.html

Read that, look at the picture and then decide if you want to RISK your life by not wearing one.

Even cycling around your garden could result in you falling and hitting your head and not knowing how to do the basics in life or worse. It doesn't have to be a bad crash to impact your life or end it.

Common sense would make helmet wearing the law,

That's a shitty little bit of emotional blackmail, unevidenced claim and thoughtless misinformation. All in one article.

But it's no less than I'd expect from the rag that is the Telegraph these days (or even in 2013, when that bit of fiddle was published).

 

[srw]

If I'm on the bike then yes I do.

As others will have pointed out - that wasn't the question.

Why do you believe that cycling is so uniquely dangerous that it deserves a bit of magic protection - when compared with other things you might do, such as walking upstairs?