No helmet

[piedwagtail91]

Sorry, I was being ironic. I'm pro-choice too.

For what it's worth, from what I have read, I do believe a helmet would protect from certain types of injuries. The types of injuries it was designed to protect against. However, I happen to think that that's such a small subset of the injuries I'm at risk from that it makes little difference. To be honest, I'd not even ride a bike if I was going to be that risk averse. I pretty much only wear a helmet on sportives where it's usually a requirement.

But I respect the right of others to choose to protect themselves as they see fit.

that went right over my head!!
may have to wear the helmet on the pc now

 

[col]

Some one who doesnt wear one,will be unlucky enough to get that knock on the head and be seriously injured that it was designed to help prevent,sods law isnt it.

 

[yello]

Yep, it's a risk you take.

 

[col]

Yep, it's a risk you take.

Agreed,and im a non helmet wearer,as i find them too hot to wear,but made the comment on another thread that it should be made law,then i wouldnt have the choice,but as it wouldnt stop me cycling i wouldnt have an issue with it being enforced,but i see that some may be put off cycling because of it,which would be a shame.So lets hope the designers come up withbetter options for helmets eh?For example,i dont see the need for alien shaped ones to help slipstreaming for the majority,as we dont go fast enough to get the benefit,so even the old type made of material tubes put together in such a way so as to help protect all areas of the head on impact could be an option?