No helmet

[davidwalton]

Are helmets now designed to be brick proof then ?

Try it

 

[davidwalton]

On the basis that more pedestrians suffer head injurys whould this be rolled out to include them as well ?

I would suggest the smokers and drinkers are more of a drain on the NHS than cyclists not wearing a helmet so where are you going to draw the line on who pays for the treatment they are perceived to have caused to themselves ?

as before, lets take the argument that because there are other things requiring attention, nothing should be done with Cycle helmets. Lets tackle all the problems, rather than complain because there are other things wrong so why pick on me attitude?

 

[4F]

Try it

Ok try the same experiment wearing a saucepan or a watermelon on your head and tell me what the difference is ?

 

[davidwalton]

Ok try the same experiment wearing a saucepan or a watermelon on your head and tell me what the difference is ?

I wasn't the one suggesting that Cycle helmets were basically provide next to no protection.

 

[4F]

as before, lets take the argument that because there are other things requiring attention, nothing should be done with Cycle helmets. Lets tackle all the problems, rather than complain because there are other things wrong so why pick on me attitude?

But the point that the vast amount of cycle helmets are made to a very poor standard is still valid. If it is so dangerous to ride without one why do the countries with larger bicycle use such as Denmark, China, Holland etc not rolled out compulsary use ?

 

[Smokin Joe]

Whether or not to wear a helmet should be entirely down to one's own choice. The trouble with them is they are manna from heaven for the ever increasing number of bossy control freaks who are terrified of living in a society where people are free to do what they want.

 

[4F]

Whether or not to wear a helmet should be entirely down to one's own choice. The trouble with them is they are manna from heaven for the ever increasing number of bossy control freaks who are terrified of living in a society where people are free to do what they want.

Absolutely

 

[davidwalton]

But the point that the vast amount of cycle helmets are made to a very poor standard is still valid. If it is so dangerous to ride without one why do the countries with larger bicycle use such as Denmark, China, Holland etc not rolled out compulsary use ?

You mean in the countries where cyclists are seen to have a place on the roads?

My definition of poor is that it provides zero protection in this case. That is not the case. Not saying there isn't room for improvement, and lots, but some protection is always better than none.

 

[Chris James]

To anyone choosing not to wear a helmet where it known they COULD prevent injury, you are also then expecting everyone to pay the medical costs of your decision. That to me is the wrong bit, and the reason why I believe all SHOULD wear helmets.

Those decisions you make which have zero impact on others, I believe you have the right to decide.

Indeed! I presume you are also in favour of legally forcing people to eat five veg a day and banning all smoking and drinking?

I like rock climbing and mountaineering. Should I be banned from that?

What else do you think the government should dictate to us?

 

[Dave Davenport]

'I don't wear one, and I'm not looking forward to being obliged to (technically) in Spain'

I shouldn't worry, mine spent the whole time bungied to the top of my rack when we toured there last year, didn't seem to be a problem.

 

[davidwalton]

Whether or not to wear a helmet should be entirely down to one's own choice. The trouble with them is they are manna from heaven for the ever increasing number of bossy control freaks who are terrified of living in a society where people are free to do what they want.

and then there are those who don't care that their decisions also impact on others.

With freedom comes responsibility. I fail to see how anyone can say they are being responsible about not wearing a helmet when it CAN protect against injury.

As far as I am concerned, you can choose to do whatever you want, as long as it has zero impact on me or others. This I said before, but obviously you chose to ignore that. How convenient

 

[PrettyboyTim]

They didn't used to.

If I hit your head with a brick, I am sure that will hurt. If you wear a helmet and I hit that with a brick, I am sure it will hurt less......

Or, bend over so your head is 3 foot from the ground and allow yourself to fall on to your head. A helmet DOES provide protection!!!

I'm sure it does provide some limited protection, but at the same time it only protects a small amount of my body. Perhaps I should be compelled to wear body armour as well, as I'm much more likely to hurt some other part of my body than I am my head in the case of an accident.

I guess my point is that if a helmet only improves ones chances of surviving an accident by a few percentage points, there's probably other, better things that people should be concentrating on, like rider training, defensive riding and the like.

 

[PrettyboyTim]

As far as I am concerned, you can choose to do whatever you want, as long as it has zero impact on me or others. This I said before, but obviously you chose to ignore that. How convenient

David, do you wear body armour on your bike? If not, I'm shocked! If you have and accident that could have been prevented by body armour, you're costing the rest of us money! So selfish!

And while I'm at it, why aren't you wearing one of those built-in-airbag jackets that you can get for motorcyclists?

 

[davidwalton]

Indeed! I presume you are also in favour of legally forcing people to eat five veg a day and banning all smoking and drinking?

I like rock climbing and mountaineering. Should I be banned from that?

What else do you think the government should dictate to us?

This is part of the same argument that says go away until I want your money because I made a mistake.

 

[davidwalton]

David, do you wear body armour on your bike? If not, I'm shocked! If you have and accident that could have been prevented by body armour, you're costing the rest of us money! So selfish!

And while I'm at it, why aren't you wearing one of those built-in-airbag jackets that you can get for motorcyclists?

The argument is already silly enough.

There is always other things that must be more important to be done, so why pick on helmets.......Seen all the arguments and none of them are about helmets. They are all about people not wanting to wear something that COULD save their life one day.

That being the case, we are already at the point where Insurance companies may pay out less because not wearing a helmet was your choice, and not the responsibility of anyone else.