Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-26-09, 09:42 AM   #51
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,960
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 844 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnoTurtle View Post
I kinda have mixed feelings on this one, i think everybody should wear a helmet, but i think if it was a law that you must wear a helmet, less people would ride bikes. whats your thoughts on this?
No. I disagree with any mandatory law... from seatbelts to helmets. Not because such items don't save lives, but because I think we should not need silly nanny laws.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 10:17 AM   #52
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Bikes:
Posts: 9,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Is this a resurrection of a 10 year old thread?
closetbiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 10:27 AM   #53
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Bikes:
Posts: 9,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil Moss View Post
I would purposely break a mandatory helmet law.
After living and complying with a helmet law for 12 years, I'm now breaking it.

When the law was passed, it was said that lives would be saved and brain injury would be reduced. It hasn't worked. In fact despite early heavy enforcement that raised usage to almost 80%, deaths went up as ridership decreased by a third. Needles to say, those increased deaths were to cyclists who were wearing helmets.

I think the intention behind the law was genuine enough, people really did want to make things safer, but they just were hoodwinked by studies (in particular the TRT study from Seattle published in the NEJM) and lobbyists. What legislators didn't know at the time was cyclists are killed by cars and the participants in the study that showed reductions in head injuries were not involved in collisions with cars.

The last few years enforcement has ceased (except in our capital city) helmets are off, ridership is up and proportionatly deaths are down (same actual numbers but more than a third more riders).

Last edited by closetbiker; 01-26-09 at 11:37 AM.
closetbiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 11:35 AM   #54
SlimAgainSoon
Senior Member
 
SlimAgainSoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Down South
Bikes:
Posts: 1,261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
No.

I always wear mine, but no.
SlimAgainSoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 03:04 PM   #55
tandemania2
Tandemania
 
tandemania2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Houston, Texas
Bikes: Barcroft back to back tandem, Rans Seavo tandem, Easy Racer Tour Easy, Barcroft Oregon
Posts: 46
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
No
tandemania2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 03:32 PM   #56
degnaw
Senior Member
 
degnaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Bellevue, WA
Bikes:
Posts: 1,606
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by closetbiker View Post
Is this a resurrection of a 10 year old thread?
LOL 1999...was the internet really around back then?

I personally wear a helmet, but I say let whoever rides decide what they want to do.
degnaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 03:52 PM   #57
Juggler2
W A N T E D
 
Juggler2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 495
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Nothing but defiance for such a law here. I can understand mandatory use for children under 13, but that's as close to a general all encompassing law as I will go. Big brother already has his fingers into too much as it is.

Personal Choice.
Juggler2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 03:59 PM   #58
StrangeWill
Senior Member
 
StrangeWill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Fallbrook, CA.
Bikes:
Posts: 1,112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
No. I disagree with any mandatory law... from seatbelts to helmets. Not because such items don't save lives, but because I think we should not need silly nanny laws.
It's either nanny laws, or spending lots of money on medical costs when idiots injure themselves.

Suddenly you'll start supporting them when your taxes jump dramatically.
StrangeWill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 04:49 PM   #59
cudak888 
www.theheadbadge.com
 
cudak888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Southern Florida
Bikes: http://www.theheadbadge.com
Posts: 22,746
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by oh ha look View Post
100% Against Mandatory Helmet Law, freedumb of choice, comfort & enjoyment are big personal freedumb issues,
prefer nonintervention of government, but in attempt to permote bicycling as reliable safe transportation,
PLEASE see link http://home.earthlink.net/~ohallock/

For bicycle frame Safety Issues concerning C shaped forwardly open bicycle frame rear dropouts
& POSSIBILITIES OF REAR WHEEL BICYCLE FRAME SEPERATION during use,
it may be as important as helmets.

Dirt Road, no tricycle, no training wheels, lots a rocks....
Not YOU again, you little spamming troll...

-Kurt
__________________
cudak888 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 05:45 PM   #60
Alpha52
tilt head to right
 
Alpha52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: on your left
Bikes: Trek, Specialized, Atala, Kona
Posts: 145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayday328 View Post
I would never support a mandatory helmet law. As grown adults(most of us, at least)we have the right to choose whether to wear a helmet or not.
As a staunch Libertarian, I totally agree with you. Unfortunately, my current personal medical insurance policy states in the fine print, no helmet, no medical or liability coverage.
Alpha52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 07:02 PM   #61
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Bikes:
Posts: 9,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Up here, at the polices discretion, people risk not only fines, but also confiscation of their bikes if they ride without helmets.
closetbiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 07:06 PM   #62
rule
Senior Member
 
rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wylie, Texas
Bikes:
Posts: 1,922
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yep.
__________________
rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 08:23 PM   #63
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 24,094
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha52 View Post
As a staunch Libertarian, I totally agree with you. Unfortunately, my current personal medical insurance policy states in the fine print, no helmet, no medical or liability coverage.
What insurance company is that? Helmet required just for bicycling or 24/7 for any and all activities? And liability for what? Damage to people or property you strike with an unhelmeted head? Sounds bogus to me.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-09, 10:19 PM   #64
invisiblehand
Part-time epistemologist
 
invisiblehand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Bikes: Jamis Nova, Bike Friday NWT, STRIDA, Austro Daimler Vent Noir, Haluzak Horizon, Salsa La Raza, Hollands Tourer, Bike Friday tikit
Posts: 5,636
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha52 View Post
As a staunch Libertarian, I totally agree with you. Unfortunately, my current personal medical insurance policy states in the fine print, no helmet, no medical or liability coverage.
Really? I find that surprising since not wearing a helmet is legal. Perhaps the reference is to motorcycling.

Can a life insurance policy mandate no motorcycling, hand gliding, or sky diving?
__________________
A narrative on bicycle driving.
invisiblehand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-09, 04:12 AM   #65
Basil Moss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cambridge, UK
Bikes: Specialized Allez (2007)
Posts: 1,051
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrangeWill View Post
It's either nanny laws, or spending lots of money on medical costs when idiots injure themselves.

Suddenly you'll start supporting them when your taxes jump dramatically.
I see this argument proposed a lot. But, forgive me if I'm wrong, I'm assuming you live in the US, so surely you have no national health service?

This is of course ignoring all evidence of the efficacy of helmets in reducing injury...
Basil Moss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-09, 04:39 AM   #66
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 24,094
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil Moss View Post
I see this argument proposed a lot. But, forgive me if I'm wrong, I'm assuming you live in the US, so surely you have no national health service?

This is of course ignoring all evidence of the efficacy of helmets in reducing injury...
or ignoring the evidence of the LACK of efficacy of helmets in reducing injury... or ignoring the LACK of evidence of the efficacy of helmets in reducing injury...
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-09, 08:29 AM   #67
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Bikes:
Posts: 9,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
or ignoring the evidence that, even without a helmet, cycling improves health and prolongs life.
closetbiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-09, 12:20 PM   #68
StrangeWill
Senior Member
 
StrangeWill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Fallbrook, CA.
Bikes:
Posts: 1,112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by closetbiker View Post
or ignoring the evidence that, even without a helmet, cycling improves health and prolongs life.
Irrelevant, there are still medical bills if you get in an accident.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil Moss View Post
I see this argument proposed a lot. But, forgive me if I'm wrong, I'm assuming you live in the US, so surely you have no national health service?

This is of course ignoring all evidence of the efficacy of helmets in reducing injury...
Nope, but victims that can't pay or die usually get absorbed by taxes, after all someone has to pay for it to keep the hospital in business, the original helmet came from motorcycle helmet injuries, which motorcycle helmets are designed extremely well.

I however do agree that cycling helmet design should be looked at, however I also think if you don't even attempt safety measures, maybe you should be left there on the ground until you fork out your credit card, since we're playing the "WAHHHHH nanny state!" game.

I'll give you a hint, we have nanny states because most adults act like children.
StrangeWill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-09, 12:24 PM   #69
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Bikes:
Posts: 9,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrangeWill View Post
Irrelevant, there are still medical bills if you get in an accident...
Oh? And you're saying cyclists get into more accidents than motorists?

How can you dismiss the obvious health benefits of cycling over motoring?
closetbiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-09, 12:34 PM   #70
StrangeWill
Senior Member
 
StrangeWill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Fallbrook, CA.
Bikes:
Posts: 1,112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by closetbiker View Post
Oh? And you're saying cyclists get into more accidents than motorists?

How can you dismiss the obvious health benefits of cycling over motoring?
It's a cost regardless, if like saying I'm only going to take $20 out of your wallet instead of $40, would you smile and hand me $20? No, it's still a loss that can be avoided.

Basically it's horrible financial planning, the exact kind of financial planning that runs up budgets and gets people in debt of comparing "deals", it is still a cost, even if it's a "deal".
StrangeWill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-09, 01:08 PM   #71
RobertHurst
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Denver
Bikes:
Posts: 1,621
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrangeWill View Post
It's a cost regardless, if like saying I'm only going to take $20 out of your wallet instead of $40, would you smile and hand me $20? No, it's still a loss that can be avoided.

Basically it's horrible financial planning, the exact kind of financial planning that runs up budgets and gets people in debt of comparing "deals", it is still a cost, even if it's a "deal".
You seem to be assuming that, all other factors being equal, a society with a mandatory helmet law would have lower health care costs than a society without. There is plenty of evidence pointing the other direction. That is, mandatory helmet laws may cost society more money than they save because they keep people off bikes. Some places with MHLs even saw increases in head injury rates after enactment of the law for some reason or other.

This is all crusty old news.

Last edited by RobertHurst; 01-27-09 at 01:14 PM.
RobertHurst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-09, 01:19 PM   #72
StrangeWill
Senior Member
 
StrangeWill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Fallbrook, CA.
Bikes:
Posts: 1,112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertHurst View Post
You seem to be assuming that, all other factors being equal, a society with a mandatory helmet law would have lower health care costs than a society without. There is plenty of evidence pointing the other direction. That is, mandatory helmet laws may cost society more money than they save because they keep people off bikes. Some places with MHLs even saw increases in head injury rates after enactment of the law for some reason or other.

This is all crusty old news.
Care to post the data? I'm not saying current helmets are up to par, but using more current helmet technology into cycling helmets (aka: not $4 helmets), will greatly reduce head injuries, if they can do it at 60mph, they can do it at 30. I do acknowledge that my current helmet is just going to prevent road rash and falling velocity at high speeds, and that if I come in contact with anything stationary I'm ****ed. I support a somewhat hybrid between motorcycle and current cycling technology to come up with a lightweight high-speed applicable solution. (TBH though, most commuters do not hit 30mph... ever.)

My agenda is saving money, so obviously I'm out for facts on which WILL save money, you're agenda is not having to wear a helmet, you're heavily biased.

Last edited by StrangeWill; 01-27-09 at 01:24 PM.
StrangeWill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-09, 01:28 PM   #73
cudak888 
www.theheadbadge.com
 
cudak888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Southern Florida
Bikes: http://www.theheadbadge.com
Posts: 22,746
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Only in A&S can a spam troll bring up a discussion from 1999 and re-ignite the same argument that was discussed before he brought it up - without the slightest hint of a forum backlash directed towards the spammer for cluttering the forum.

-Kurt
__________________
cudak888 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-09, 01:30 PM   #74
invisiblehand
Part-time epistemologist
 
invisiblehand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Bikes: Jamis Nova, Bike Friday NWT, STRIDA, Austro Daimler Vent Noir, Haluzak Horizon, Salsa La Raza, Hollands Tourer, Bike Friday tikit
Posts: 5,636
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrangeWill View Post
It's a cost regardless, if like saying I'm only going to take $20 out of your wallet instead of $40, would you smile and hand me $20? No, it's still a loss that can be avoided.

Basically it's horrible financial planning, the exact kind of financial planning that runs up budgets and gets people in debt of comparing "deals", it is still a cost, even if it's a "deal".
Still not correct. You have to compare the expected values.

$X = cost of helmet
H = 1 if wearing a helmet

First you have to ask yourself is

P(collision|H=1)*f(severity|H=1) - $X

greater than, equal to, less than

P(collision|H=0)*f(severity|H=0)

I don't think that you can demonstrate that red is less than blue. You certainly can't do it without rigorous empirical measurements. If you then let cycling vary with mandatory helmet laws, then you just increase the ambiguity.
__________________
A narrative on bicycle driving.
invisiblehand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-09, 01:31 PM   #75
invisiblehand
Part-time epistemologist
 
invisiblehand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Bikes: Jamis Nova, Bike Friday NWT, STRIDA, Austro Daimler Vent Noir, Haluzak Horizon, Salsa La Raza, Hollands Tourer, Bike Friday tikit
Posts: 5,636
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cudak888 View Post
Only in A&S can a spam troll bring up a discussion from 1999 and re-ignite the same argument that was discussed before he brought it up - without the slightest hint of a forum backlash directed towards the spammer for cluttering the forum.

-Kurt
True ... but everyone has been itching to argue the point all over again anyway.
__________________
A narrative on bicycle driving.
invisiblehand is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:23 PM.