The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[mjr]

And you don't think kids crash

Where did I think that?

 

[mjr]

Ah, restrict my choice to maintain your choice. Nope.

Restrict your choice to maintain everyone's choice. We do that in many other ways. The freedom to swing my arm usually ends before someone else's nose.

 

[Markymark]

Restrict your choice to maintain everyone's choice. We do that in many other ways. The freedom to swing my arm usually ends before someone else's nose.

Restrict the choice of all those who wear helmets to maintain the choice of those that don;t. No data, but I would suggest more do than don't.

 

[mjr]

Restrict the choice of all those who wear helmets to maintain the choice of those that don;t. No data, but I would suggest more do than don't.

According to page 42 of http://etsc.eu/wp-content/uploads/etsc_pin_flash_29_walking_cycling_safer.pdf, more don't than do. Even Ireland fell back into minority in 2014.

 

[Markymark]

According to page 42 of http://etsc.eu/wp-content/uploads/etsc_pin_flash_29_walking_cycling_safer.pdf, more don't than do. Even Ireland fell back into minority in 2014.

Then if more don't than do, it should be nothing to worry about for you then.

 

[Tin Pot]

insistence or demands for members to provide evidence or proof - personal experiences and annecdotal evidence is fine in the context of this forum discussion. We're not looking to forumlate laws or prove anything scientifically. Insistence will lead to you being excluded for 30 days.

Can I be the first to point out that although anecdote is of interest psychologically it can't tell you anything about either component of the helmet debate as @Shaun has outlined them? For that you do need evidence, collected reasonably systematically and examined dispassionately.

I too, ask for clarification on this rule.

It completely undermines objective analysis of any situation if you cannot educate people on the nature of reality.

People think that their personal experience, or hearsay, is significant - it's not.

Until people understand that, they cannot have a rational view on anything.

People with irrational views are The Problem.

 

[mjr]

It completely undermines objective analysis of any situation if you cannot educate people on the nature of reality.

I hope the moderators are trying to avoid the tedious games of ping-pong "what's your evidence?" "not telling until you post yours" "no you first" that these threads sometimes descend into. So don't repeatedly ask for it: ask once, then just note its continued absence and move on.

BTW I particularly like the phrase "forumlate laws"

Then if more don't than do, it should be nothing to worry about for you then.

I'm not overly worried yet, but I do feel that bulwark against compulsion can be eroded by sneaky I-believe-in-freedom-but-I-wear-one-and-you-should-too crash helmet promotion, including the various myths like most riders wearing them already and the near-blanket media portrayal of cyclists as wearing crash helmets. The price of freedom (of choice) is eternal vigilance.

 

[JMAG]

I have no issue with other people wearing helmets or not. I wear a helmet because in my opinion, it offers protection outweighed by the unquantified risk of rotational injury or elevated risk taking attributed to wearing one.

I think the attribution of risk taking is very hard to quantify as some people just happen to be risk takers. I don't think they are representative of a typical rider whether they wear a helmet or not.

So I make my choice based on my beliefs rather than someone else's beliefs. Whatever bearing this might have on the compulsion argument is secondary; that doesn't mean I'm not pro choice. For example, I don't have to bat for the other side to support gay rights. If compulsion came to a vote I would happily vote against

 

[jonny jeez]

This'll be interesting.

So no requirement to provide empirical evidence.
Intuitive learning is allowed
No nit picking
No personal insults

I shall have to add this to my follow list!

 

[Pat "5mph"]

I suggest that you shouldn't wear one, because I want to maintain free choice (as well as me believing it would be better for you on balance in the long term) - which is different from suggesting that maintaining free choice is directly a reason for you not to wear one.

The price of freedom (of choice) is eternal vigilance.

Imo this above is wrong.
Firstly one should not push others out of their comfort zone, cycling related zone I mean; if a cyclist feels safer with the helmet on leave them be, never mind the proven or not effective protection of said helmet.
Second, we are a society ruled by laws that are formed by the majority's view on certain matters. If, as it is now, even non cyclists feel strongly about cyclists wearing helmets, a law may or may not come in force, "vigilance" or not.
My experience: when I started the small commute to work mainly on paths, I thought I did not need one. An experienced cyclists told me I needed one, so I got one. As I got more experienced, used roads more, also got some cycle training, started to ride in groups, the helmet stayed, seemed a good idea, hazards aplenty, keeps rain off the hair too
Fell off a few times, never hit my head though.
Slowly, I got more confident, helmet for a 5 mile commute on paths in summer seemed silly ... helmet gets left at home more often than not, now even when I know I'll be riding in traffic ... they are out to get me whatever my attire
I've got a meeting scheduled with my line manager for the family rides I lead sometimes, dunno what to say if wobbly kids (and me!) don't want to wear a helmet for a ride in the park. I think they should, but I shouldn't this is wrong, so I think I will wear one ... but what if they see me when I'm alone and not wearing it? Or going for a sportive and wearing it? Double
Let's just enjoy our rides, if a law comes in force, let's obey it ... or pay the fine

 

[Tin Pot]

Personal safety laws.

Would be interesting what their effect is - I understand car seat belts, air bags, etc had the unintended consequence of increasing reckless driving.

Where else do we insist on personal safety? - not work, or the safety of others.

 

[Profpointy]

Imo this above is wrong.
Firstly one should not push others out of their comfort zone, cycling related zone I mean; if a cyclist feels safer with the helmet on leave them be, never mind the proven or not effective protection of said helmet.
Second, we are a society ruled by laws that are formed by the majority's view on certain matters. If, as it is now, even non cyclists feel strongly about cyclists wearing helmets, a law may or may not come in force, "vigilance" or not.
My experience: when I started the small commute to work mainly on paths, I thought I did not need one. An experienced cyclists told me I needed one, so I got one. As I got more experienced, used roads more, also got some cycle training, started to ride in groups, the helmet stayed, seemed a good idea, hazards aplenty, keeps rain off the hair too
Fell off a few times, never hit my head though.
Slowly, I got more confident, helmet for a 5 mile commute on paths in summer seemed silly ... helmet gets left at home more often than not, now even when I know I'll be riding in traffic ... they are out to get me whatever my attire
I've got a meeting scheduled with my line manager for the family rides I lead sometimes, dunno what to say if wobbly kids (and me!) don't want to wear a helmet for a ride in the park. I think they should, but I shouldn't this is wrong, so I think I will wear one ... but what if they see me when I'm alone and not wearing it? Or going for a sportive and wearing it? Double
Let's just enjoy our rides, if a law comes in force, let's obey it ... or pay the fine

whilst that's well stated and reasonable - not to say I agree, but could I test the last bit with a thought experiment. Let's say the democratic majority decided to make pedestrian helmets compulsory, for which a comparibly good (or weak) case can be made - would you still be happy to obey and / or pay the fine?

Or is it just you're happy to wear one and not the other and thus so compulsion is fine if and only if you already do it?

 

[Profpointy]

[QUOTE 3893429, member: 259"]Are we allowed to do grammer Nazi's stuff yet?[/QUOTE]

ahem "grammar Nazi's" - they'd have their jackboots stomping that apostrophe and no mistake

 

[winjim]

*grammar




(Do I get threadbanned for that?)

 

[ufkacbln]

Wearing is a poor indicator

New riders wear one because shops sell them bicycles hav stickers telling you t wear them and they are bullied by stories in the press

Clubs and groups also have a higher rate because they make it compulsory?