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. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. Mister Paul

    Mister Paul Honky

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

    Davidc Veteran

    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.
  5. Similar reasons to why I wear a helmet currently.
    david k and Norm like this.
  6. Cunobelin

    Cunobelin Guru


    This is using More Nails...

    4F likes this.
  7. 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.
  8. dellzeqq

    dellzeqq pre-talced and mighty

    I'm not sure about this. As far as I know the situation is as described by Paul Kitson

  9. 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).
  10. Bromptonaut

    Bromptonaut Rohan Man

    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.