Chris Boardman - Helmets not even top 10 things keep cycling safe

[Dogtrousers]

I normally avoid reading the bottom half of the internet, but sometimes it has its rewards. This comment under the referenced article made me smile:

"This is great... CB says "Stop talking about helmets, you idiots". Cue massive idiotic discussion of helmets."

 

[totallyfixed]

Hallelujah! Been saying this for years but I'm not Chris Boardman. Might buy another cycling cap to celebrate and start planning our next trip to the Netherlands, wonderful place.

 

[oldstrath]

Points 4 & 5 (bans) really needs thinking about. The judiciary and beyond are very reluctant to have these in guidance or even available. Their thinking is that they would tend to be applied to serial offenders. Serial offending suggests there is something obsessive about their driving. Denying them a licence does not deny them access to a car but it does deny them insurance and other safeguards. Life bans sound good but, like prohibition, does it make things better or worse?

The answer I suggest is not obvious and different drivers will react in different ways. I am always pleasantly surprised by the number of people who elect to go on speed awareness courses (as the easy option) but come back and say it made a difference, a surprising difference to them. We should be basing our control of bad driving on recidivist rates and not what makes us feel good.

Training and attitude are two strong weapons we could use to modify behaviour. Prison (and that's what you have to use on people who will not give up driving when banned) is horrendously expensive and only stores up more problems on release.

Must admit I find it difficult to imagine that speed awareness courses have any effect, but not being a driver I suppose I'll have to believe it. Actually I think that if we must keep cars the answers are ultimately a mixture of technology and social pressure. The point of the life bans is to remind people that driving is a privilege, not a right. Hopefully eventually the criminals woukd bevtreated as such by the rest of society.

 

[DooDah]

Well said Chris Boardman !

Here I am on yesterdays CC ride to Linlithgow, which I extended to 100km.

If helmets were mandatory I wouldn't have been there. I probably wouldn't even possess a bike. As it is, I have 6 of them and thoroughly enjoy each one.

Shame about the hat, is that a Finnish flag

 

[Domestique]

For 'Social Pressure' you could make anyone with points on the licence have to clearly display it in some way on the vehicle they where driving.

 

[Shut Up Legs]

I wish the Australian government would read articles like this one. I can't believe how stubborn they are about our mandatory helmet law . It's set back cycling here by decades, and it will probably never become popular like it is in other countries, thanks to decades of "cycling is dangerous" propaganda.

 

[DooDah]

Hallelujah! Been saying this for years but I'm not Chris Boardman. Might buy another cycling cap to celebrate and start planning our next trip to the Netherlands, wonderful place.

FFS

 

[winjim]

I went on a speed awareness course and I think it improved my driving. Mind you, I went in with an open mind and willing to learn from my mistakes.

Did learn a few interesting things though, such as the truth about cycle lanes. (Hint, they ain't there for the cyclists' convenience)

 

[oldstrath]

I went on a speed awareness course and I think it improved my driving. Mind you, I went in with an open mind and willing to learn from my mistakes.

Did learn a few interesting things though, such as the truth about cycle lanes. (Hint, they ain't there for the cyclists' convenience)

Presumably we all know they are purely there to get us out of the way of the important people and allow them to speed (not too excessively) on their way.

 

[ufkacbln]

Shame about the hat, is that a Finnish flag

WOT!!!!!!

The clue is that Linlithgow is in Scotland......

The flag is a Saltire:

This is a Finnish flag

... and this is a Finish flag

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Can't say Faeroe than that...

 

[winjim]

Presumably we all know they are purely there to get us out of the way of the important people and allow them to speed (not too excessively) on their way.

To contain cyclists in a defined part and stop riding two abreast.

You are looking at the situation from a rather Velocentric position. What makes you think they have anything to do with bikes?

They are used as a traffic calming measure*. People tend to drive faster down wider roads. A cheap and easy way of narrowing the carriageway? Paint a cycle lane down the side of it. So nothing to do with bikes at all really.


*I am of course aware that this is not the case for all cycle lanes.

 

[I like Skol]

I once sat at a table next to CB outside the VeloPark Café at the M/cr British Cycling HQ! That's irrelevant but I do agree with his stance on helmet wearing.

I too believe it should be a free choice. IMO most of the injuries people expect a helmet to protect them from are far outside its design brief. IMO many of the injuries a helmet is likely to work well for are more likely to be inflicted in non-cycling situations, things like the time I slipped on ice as a teenager and knocked myself out, or the time I ran through a low doorway but failed to duck sufficiently giving myself a large lump, a nasty headache and a stiff neck. I don't wear a helmet when out and about on foot so why would I wear one for a lower risk activity like riding my bike?

 

[Dan B]

I'm all for segregation if it means we get to keep the existing roads and the motorists can have their own set of 'separate but equal' routes

 

[Danny Tuff]

I don't trust those around me, therefore I wear a helmet to protect myself.

Simple.