1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Cycling - wearing a helmet is now a legal requirement

Discussion in 'Helmet & Headphone Debates' started by Crankarm, 28 Oct 2012.

  1. Norm

    Norm Guest

    Yes, to a point, they may offer some protection above that speed but they may also just split and do nothing.

    And therein lies the core issue for many who have been labelled as anti-helmet, the things are just not a blanket protection from head injuries.
     

  2. And as Bromptonaut says, magistrates courts are not courts of record and do not set precedent.
     
  3. jonny jeez

    jonny jeez Veteran

    which is the very point @Adrian, @Red Light (and the like) make pretty clearly on these very pages. Don't wear one for the wrong reasons. Unfortunately, from what I now understand, most of us do.
     
  4. I've always been of the opinion that wearing a helmet is better than having no protection at all but by no means rely on my helmet for safety. Now I reckon the £4 I spent on new brake blocks was probably money better spent.
     
    Norm likes this.
  5. Mister Paul

    Mister Paul Honky

    Location:
    North Somerset
    No it's not. People often wrongly translate the impact speed at which helmets are tested, to the travelling speed immediately prior to a collision. "I was cycling along at around 18mph when..." very rarely means that your head will impact at 18mph. It may be lower, it may be higher, or there may be no head impact.
     
  6. jonny jeez

    jonny jeez Veteran

    I reached the opinion that I would continue to wear one. Not because I truly believe it will save my life but because of a whole bunch of emotional and anecdotal evidence (I know, I know @Adrian... if its anecdotal its not evidence...thing is, not all evidence is empirical) and a set of other reasons like, "It makes Mrs Jeez happy" and "I want to be in a good legal position if it all comes down one day" and lastly, I cant find any reliable evidence that it will harm me to wear one.

    But don't expect it to help if you have a collision at 27mph
     
    david k and Norm like this.
  7. Well after a couple thousand miles the brackets inside my helmet are coming away from their mounts, so I was pondering a replacement. I can see now I'd better go spent some time in the helmet debates thread to get genned up.
     
  8. Mister Paul

    Mister Paul Honky

    Location:
    North Somerset
    You really don't want to do that...
     
    david k, 400bhp, 4F and 1 other person like this.
  9. Davidc

    Davidc Veteran

    Location:
    Somerset UK
    I had that on mine. I stuck it up with No More Nails and it's held together ever since.

    The helmet debates forum is a scary place to go. Leave it until after Halloween!

    Back to the OP - that's a dreadful judgement, and imo grossly unfair.
     
  10. Similar reasons to why I wear a helmet currently.
     
    david k and Norm like this.
  11. Cunobelin

    Cunobelin Guru

    Location:
    Gosport

    This is using More Nails...


    [​IMG]
     
    4F likes this.
  12. Drago

    Drago Flaccid Member

    Most excellent, couldn't have worded that better myself.

    Just one teensy general observation - the helmet issue isn't such an automatic red herring. I'm not going to get embroiled in discussing this poor chaps particular case, but as a general point a cyclist with head injuries who was not wearing a helmet will quite often receive a reduced payment due to "contributory negligence". It's a load of balls of course, but it's pretty common.
     
  13. dellzeqq

    dellzeqq pre-talced and mighty

    Location:
    SW2
    I'm not sure about this. As far as I know the situation is as described by Paul Kitson
    http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5180
     

  14. As dellzeqq points out above, that simply isn't the case. There is no general principle of contributory negligence through non-use of a helmet that has been established in E&W law.

    Most reductions for contributory negligence are down to breaches of the law (e.g. failure to have proper lights).
     
  15. Bromptonaut

    Bromptonaut Rohan Man

    Location:
    Bugbrooke UK
    I had understood that, although there's no established decided case/precedent, deductions for helmet related CN are sometimes conceded where cases are bieng settled.