Safe Speed Forums

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cycling/comment/0,10479,1519401,00.html?gusrc=rss




Interesting.......It is not as if they are as bulky as motorcycle helmets.

Personaly I am not in favour of compulsion but I think this argument is going to rage on, especialy after the latest increase in cycle deaths (regardless of the cause).

I would like the compulsion element to be take from motorcycle helmet wearing as well but not much chance of that....




Exactly the same arguments were use for motorcycle helmets at the time

another take on the story...http://www.bikebiz.co.uk/daily-news/article.php?id=5732

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Would the increase in cycle deaths have anything to do with mobile phones? The proper bike riders that have expensive bikes and race seem to be pretty good, but a big portion of the rest of them are little more than organ donors.

Last weekend I was on my low performance motorcycle chuffing along a road that can be driven briskley, shall we say , when I happened across some kids of about 15ish. one of them was on the white line with her phone in her hand apparently texting. On me bike I obviously slowed alittle and went round the dumb wench, but I'm not sure I would want to wear out valuable brake lining on my car for such an indiviual that needs removing from the gene pool. This isn't an isolated case either and nor is it exclusive to young people.

If Windermere is typical of any town, village or city, but on a smaller scale, then what hope is there?
I see cyclists with no helmets, no lights, no road sense and worst of all, no COMMON SENSE!
However they are not alone, we have pedestrians using children in pushchairs as a means to force a passage across a road, pedestrians who walk in the road without considering the threat to THEIR safety, or that of drivers coming the other way confronted by cars passing them.
And we have youths skateboarding in the road, sometimes in the dark, or weaving in and out of parked cars, or hopping on and off of pavements.

ALL road users should take responsibility for theirs and other road users safety, but only the car driver and motorcyclist have compulsory insurance, tax discs, MOT's and a test, and yet who shoulders the most blame if they have an accident with the uninsured, untested users???

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

IIRC from his site Guy Chapman is dead set against compulsory cycle hats. I don't pretend to know why or understand the issues, but it's giving me a warm fuzzy to think that he's about to get stuck with a policy he thinks is stupid that was dreamt up by people who probably don't cycle much if at all. Join the club Guy, what's good for the goose...

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

I think they are some interesting issues involved as refered to the news items. Partly contradictory.

1) Helmets will cause less people to want to ride

2) Helmets cause people to ride in a more dangerous way

3) They reduce injuries BUT because they cause less people to ride the number of fatalities through lack of exercise more than offset the gains in head injury accidents.

How the hell you quantify any of this is anyones guess but no one seems to be saying that the do not reduce the severity of accidents. There is some realy odd logic at twork here. Maybe we can learn something.

It will be interesting to see how this develops.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

It is interesting that many of the arguments that are used to oppose compulsory cycle helmets are very similar to those that we use against cameras and brain-dead speed enforcement - if only Guy could see it. It's about individual trust and responsibility against ever-tighter rules and regulations.

I don't think "we" should be supporting compulsory cycle helmets in a kind of dog-in-the-manger spirit - perhaps it will help to get some of the lycra brigade to appreciate our point of view.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

He posts as "Just zis Guy, you know?" on uk.rec.cycling - and is pretty vocal in his objections to compulsory cycle helmets. However, he's also a very strong proponent for scameras and seems hell bent in discrediting Paul. Hi Guy, what goes around, comes around. Welcome to the club

_________________
Will

Oh so that's who it is. I remember him from his 'contributions' to uk.rec.driving. A rather tiresome cove I always thought.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Excellent summary, my feelings exactly.


Agree, nanny-state mentality is unnatural, disrespectful and ultimately counter-productive.
Unfortunately, the policies resulting from this approach are usually simple enough to appeal to the naive, and are often oozing political correctness.

Fair point, though I wasn't suggesting we should support compulsory cycling helmets (far from it - absolutely agree with your point about individual responsibility). I just find it ironic that the issue puts Guy Chapman in a similar position to where we are on speeding enforcement.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

I couldn't care less about drivers who put their own lives at greater risk by zooming through my village - I'm motivated more by self interests - I don't want them to run into me. If they end up in A&E, that's tough. But as long as I don't end up in A&E, it isn’t that tough!

Cyclists, on the other hand, would have to be riding pretty furiously to put me in A&E, and in any case, if they wear a helmet, it doesn't do me any good if they crash! So what the heck - let them ride with no helmet if they like, it's their own skin, for God’s sake! This nanny state is getting on my wick!

_________________
I stole this .sig

Something we can all agree on.......

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

well as a(nother) cyclist i'm not quite sure what to think on this one.

i've always worn a helmet so don't really buy the heat & comfort arguments for not doing so.
some would argue there arent really any great safety benefits in wearing one, several of my friends would disagree having seen the state of theirs after various incidents (including the guy who wrote off a new mini).

i'm a fairly solitary cyclist for most of my training but when i do ride i na group i dislike it if there are people not wearing them. obviously if they come off / are knocked off we're going to stop and scrape them up but i object to them potentially putting me in the position of having to deal with a more serious level of injury that could have been avoided.

in line with the first aid thread i hope that extends to cyclists, i.e. that you would stop and help if you could, and on the same basis as above i'd rather they were wearing one to reduce the chance of having to deal with serious injuries.

same argument with bikers and many road regs really i suppose... i dont mind other people doing themselves in so long as i dont have to deal with the aftermath... and in the event that i do i'd rather they'd taken action to reduce it!

I wear a helmet when I ride the bike. All our officers are required to wear a ccyling helmet when pounding the beat on bicycle.

Difficult one..lot of conflicting evidence - but the evidence seems to slant more towards helmet wearing as a safer option and most of the cyclist deaths attended here ... no helmet worn. One guy hit his head on the bus when he fell and another- fell against the keb awkwardly. We just do not know if the helmet would have lessened the head injury and it does depend on quality of the head gear as well.

I tend to wear a good quality helmet based on what I have seen for myself on the joh - but then I also wear a full range of clothing with would make me visible in various weather conditions too. Case of choice, common sense and awareness.

But as for cause of cyclist deaths... lots of different reasons and sometimes the cyclist was to blame, sometimes the driver and sometimes both parties appeared to play an equal role in the sequence of the events. Not all died from head injuries - glancing blow in the torso can kill - perhaps it might be more useful to make padded and protective clothing compulsory instead... Just a thought based on the injuries I've seen at first hand..


But accident avoidance and awareness....

................
.
Back to continuous training and education for all road users ...

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

I'm surprised nobody has made what seems to me the obvious point - surely the choice of whether or not to wear a helmet should be informed, at least to some degree, by the type of cycling expected to be undertaken.

If cycling at high speed on or off road or in heavy traffic, the risks are somewhat greater compared to a gentle spin along a towpath or a lightly used country road.

Observer is actually right here - A one size fits all compulsion with regard to helmets would become IMHO unenforceable... I'm sure the BiB would love trying to round up 40 or so 11 to 15 year olds.

I dunno, p'raps we cud ta'oo 'em across the forehead with their NI number so they'd get the NIP within a fortnight, etc, etc.

Until May 2004 I didn't wear a helmet, then I fell off at about 25 mph. Plenty of road rash (did you see David Zabriskie in the Team Time Trial in the Tour de France yesterday? I know how it feels! )
I banged my bonce and only got a big lump, luckily. My wife insisted I wear a helmet from then onwards, so I bought a Giro Pneumo for £70, good fitting, plenty of vents. No problems with sweating even with a cloth cap underneath to keep the sun out of my eyes - even at 30 degrees C. I don't really notice its presence to be honest so I can't understand what all the fuss is about and why I didn't want one before.
If other cyclists are aware of the possible injuries and choose not to wear one then perhaps that should be their choice?
I can't however believe that a motorcyclist would want to risk riding without a helmet and visor, come to that. The whacks from insects et al at only 20-30 mph can hurt a bit!

11-15 year olds - we'd pass that onto PCSOs and no doubt litter wardens and the like would get an upgrade in powers to deal with the masses of kids.

Of course, it's like speeding - empty road - no obvious danger. For cyclists though - pot hole on a rural road or towpath can cause a wobble or fall - and it depends on how the person falls as to level of injury. Fortunately most such crunches are slight grazes and bruises and nothing more - but everyone is different and nobody knows how thick their skull bone or strength of blood vessels inside head until something hard meets with it. I have alwasy been careful with my head and been vigilant with my own kids regarding head injuries - one was severely concussed when he climbed a tree and fell aged about 9 at the time. He's fine now and at Uni Was a bit worried at the time though...

Perhaps any compulsion should be introduced in stages ... if you intend to commute in peak hours or in congested areas or route takes you on urban dual carriageway - then helmet must be worn at all times. A bit like wearing protective clothing on factory floors.

Cyclist - I wear a Giro Pneumo brand helmet as well. and you are so right about those insects. At least I no longer have to comb dead insects out of my hair (I still have a full head of it... job has only managed to cause a few grey bits...)

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

I like the American motorcycle helmet rules that are applied in some states.

Under 18 (or 21 depending where you are) it is mandatory. Over that age it is down to personal choice. Some states require additional insurance though.

The same thing could be applied here to cycling helmets if we have to go down this road. Under 16s or so mandatory, everyone else its down to choice.

Sounds like a reasonable compromise...

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

When i rode a bike i found that other parts of my anatomy needed protection.
In my younger years i needed to prevent my knees /legs etc getting large amounts of gravel impacted in them.Elbows and arms were also in this category.
As i got older my thoughts of protection focussed more on the damage the crossbar and handlebars could do to my manhood.
I never once found that my head impacted with anything.

The thing i did not want and avoided at all costs was to meet a HGV

So as i see the lycra brigade festooned with garish plastic hats , i wonder how much protection they have against a 44 tonner.

PC newby to sargeant - "It's ok Sarge, the helmet protected his brain, pity it couldn't save his spine, he'll live to propell a wheelchair"

Forget the idea of stopping injury with helmets/ kneepads/elbowpads - if we want to be serious , lets seperate road users - give cyclists their own paths.The best way of stopping injury damage is to remove the vulnerable from the equation.