if helmets became compulsory...

[david k]

You seem to have strong feelings about car drivers wearing helmets, may I suggest you start an alternative thread on an appropriate forum rather then take these threads off topic?

 

[2Loose]

The arguments for cyclists wearing helmets are equally applicable to other vehicle users - also pedestrians, so why single out one group and not the others?

It appears totally biased, unfair and does not make any fair sense. Especially so since head injuries are far more common in other types of road user.

 

[ufkacbln]

You seem to have strong feelings about car drivers wearing helmets, may I suggest you start an alternative thread on an appropriate forum rather then take these threads off topic?

... or ask why you feel the valid comparisons are so uncomfortable?

No-one is taking anything off topic, simply dismantling another unfounded justification for compulsion.

The avoidance the question before as to why we should listen to the UCI as an "expert body" but not give the same weight to the RAC/ ACU is in itself evidence of how feeble this argument for helmet use is.

Now we have the same question again.... don't avoid it by dismissal and claiming it is off topic - try answering the question?
.

 

[ufkacbln]

...or make it simpler?

If an organisation such as RoSPA or the College of Emergency Medicine supported helmet use would you suggest that we should unequivocally take their advice and wear a helmet?

 

[david k]

Answered the point on numerous occasions. simply asking question again repeatably is easier than considering the reponseTake your crusade for wearing helmets in a car to smewhere more apopiate. This is suppose to be a sensible debate about cycling protection

 

[ufkacbln]

Answered the point on numerous occasions. simply asking question again repeatably is easier than considering the reponseTake your crusade for wearing helmets in a car to smewhere more apopiate. This is suppose to be a sensible debate about cycling protection

Stop avoiding and answer?

If an organisation such as RoSPA or the College of Emergency Medicine supported helmet use would you suggest that we should unequivocally take their advice and wear a helmet?

 

[2Loose]

Answered the point on numerous occasions.

Can't see it in this thread.

 

[asterix]

The arguments for cyclists wearing helmets are equally applicable to other vehicle users - also pedestrians, so why single out one group and not the others?

It appears totally biased, unfair and does not make any fair sense. Especially so since head injuries are far more common in other types of road user.

Agreed. And certainly car drivers should wear helmets.

There should also be a massive increase in effort to make cars more friendly to the environment in which they're used.

This doesn't just mean emissions, what it does include is cars that are designed to be driven at lower speeds in urban environments and make them less likely to kill when they strike pedestrians. Also disable the gadgets that distract drivers, e.g. mobile phones and ICE.

Helmets simply move the road safety burden onto the victim rather than the menace. We are brainwashed(!) to accept that.

 

[david k]

not sure the RoSPA, as they consider the prevention of accidents. Wearing a helmet will not prevent an accident. Steel toe capped boots dont stop things falling on your foot

 

[ufkacbln]

not sure the RoSPA, as they consider the prevention of accidents. Wearing a helmet will not prevent an accident. Steel toe capped boots dont stop things falling on your foot

So we can ignore the medical advice then?

 

[david k]

if they are professionals which i presume they are it wouldnt be wise to ignore their advice. it would however be wise to consider it along with other advice to form a judgement

 

[Mark_Robson]

The comparison between racing bikes and racing cars doesn't work. If you riding a racing bike on the TDF or on a Sunday run it is essentially the same bike being used for the same purpose.

There is a massive difference between a racing car and the family saloon. Racing drivers wear helmets because they are pushing their reflexes and the car to it's limits and there is a fair chance that they may loose control and crash. Also the safety features in racing cars are limited. My car has 6 airbags, 4 in the front and two in the rear. They are there to protect the vehicles occupants in the event of an impact.

It is far better to incorporate safety features into a vehicle rather than expect the driver to wear PPE, hence all the safety features built into modern cars. But you are limited in what you can do to make a bike any safer without radically changing it's design, hence the value of helmets, mitts and other items of cycling PPE.

 

[Norm]

Also, racing cars / motorbikes are pushing against the limits of the adhesion between the tyres and the surfaces, whereas racing cyclists are pushing against the limits of human fitness and endurance. That's kinda generalising and I know it's not as black and white as that, as cyclists take corners and drivers work hard.

Conversely, on the road, cyclists are still pushing against their own limits whereas vehicles are well within their operating capabilities.

I can't figure out whether or not it is relevant to the racing cars vs racing cyclists comparison, but then I can't really see how the differences between racing and road cars is relevant to anything anyway.

 

[david k]

I made the point Mark Robson that it wasnt comparing like for like some time ago. (possibly on a similar thread) Yet the question keeps coming up? I have therefore drawn a conclusion that I am banging my head against a brick wall.................................... with my helmet on obviously

 

[ufkacbln]

if they are professionals which i presume they are it wouldnt be wise to ignore their advice. it would however be wise to consider it along with other advice to form a judgement

Well done!