Just based on observations in these forums.
I think all cyclists should wear helmets and I support critical mass
I think that each cyclist should decide for themselves regarding helmets and I support critical mass
I think all cyclists should wear hlemets and I don't support critical mass
I think each cylclist should decide for themselves regarding helmets and I don't support critical mass
Just based on observations in these forums.
I picked #1, surprisingly enough. I don't agree 100% with Critical Mass, however, seeing what's going on in NYC's City Council right now, I'd have to say that it looks like the local government has it in for those guys.
That alone changed my mind.
As for helmets, I think it's a no-brainer. Everyone should wear one.
2005 Raleigh C30
Wouldn't surprise me if what NYC is doing is, in fact, retribution for CM rides.
You don't pick a fight with a 500 pound gorilla when you weigh 50 pounds. I don't mean cars, I mean city government. Anyone familiar with what cities actually do would tell you CM is going to be counterproductive. After you're done pissing someone off, you think they are going to go out of their way to be nice to you? Or the opposite? Kindergarten kids can give you the answer if it's too compicated.
I think all cyclist should wear helmets but each cylclist should decide for themselves. But I voted the fourth option, CM hurts cycling at this point.
I was not surprised to see my vote category, #4, winning. I think most serious bicyclists are pro-helmet and anti-helmet law. I concur with the objectives, but not the approach, of Critical Mass.
"Early to bed, early to rise. Work like hell, and advertise." -- George Stahlman
Capo [dschaw'-poe]: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger, S/N 42624
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1981 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
Ditto!Originally Posted by John E
"My two favourite things in life are libraries and bicycles. They both move people forward without wasting anything" -Peter Golkin
There's a permutation missing. Pro-choice for helmets and haven't paid much attention to CM.
Wouldn't that be selection 4... as in "I don't support CM."Originally Posted by boyze
If you are not supporting it or in your case even aware of it, then obviously you must not be supporting it.
I support CM (I guess it's the years of punk-rock in me). I think people should decide for themselves if they wear a helmet or not because they can't hurt anyone but themselves. I wear one any time I ride because it is stupid not to, but I'm not going to force my opinions on someone else if it doesn't affect my life. It's your life live it how you want to.
"You must be the change you want to see in the world."
I've never chimed in about Critical Mass, as I live in an area where cycling is tolerated as cheap transportation, and there aren't enough cyclists who care enough to have a CM event.
I frimly believe in thinking of the next person while cycling. Some less then intellegent motorist may get held up by a CM event, making that person late or miss something. That motorist will then take it out on the next cyclist he/she sees.
Bikes use brakes to stop.
If your bike has breaks, don't ride it.
If I may suggest, polls that are done here would be based entirely on cyclists here and not necessarily true of cyclists everywhere else or on other forums.Just based on observations in these forums.
Folks, wear your helmets. Please.
So whats your theory?
I agree. The poll's choices don't make sense, so I won't vote. I think cyclists should decide for themselves about helmets (although I'm still open to a good helmet law argument), but I also think that cyclists should wear helmets.Originally Posted by ehenz
As to CM, it's mixed. The main problem is CM's refusal to define itself. What are CM's goals? Many CM'ers say it's whatever individual riders want. A movement that stands for everything stands for nothing, except being annoying.
I have no doubt that some CM'ers in some cities have done some good some place. My comments are about the movement as a whole.
Mars, You have a good question. There is no doubt IMHO that a helmet can only help a cyclist. It does not interfere with your ability to hear what's going on around you and can only benefit you (albite minimaly) in a crash. Anything that gives me a better chance of having another good day on the bike...I'm for it.
Re: Critical Mass. VERY IMPORTANT! most roadies do not understand that while we have every legal right to the road, most citizens of the US of A do not see us as a road friendly component. It is encumbent upon every roady to a) be courteous b) be visible and c) fight for you rights the correct way (It all comes down to Honey vs. Vinegar).
Just my 10 cents.
sorry but whats critical mass?
Everyone SHOULD wear a helmet imho, however free choice reigns (similar to other 'moral' debates taking place in this country).
My support for Critical Mass is simple. Living in the bay area, I commute from the East Bay, through San Francisco, and into the North Bay. All three areas have similar road facilities for bicyclists (some bike lanes, decent shoulders, etc.) but San Francisco (with the most active CM movement) stands head and shoulders above the other two for drivers AWARENESS of my presence on a bike. This doesn't mean they like me any more, no less honks, but they SEE me and respond to my presence, which seems to be a primary reason why many choose to Critical Mass.
Iím a believer in Darwinís evolution theoryÖ therefore those to stupid to wear a helmet neednít be around to reproduce. In this circumstance we donít need a law interfering with evolution.Originally Posted by BeTheChange
Donít think for a moment that someone else not wearing a helmet doesnít affect you. If you pay health insurance or pay taxes, youíre being affected.
I am not following CM and have no opinion on that issue.
I think most roadies do understand. What CM doesn't seem to get is you do not make progress on getting respect or your rights on the road by pissing off those who's support you need to acomplish those goals. Just my $.02 worthOriginally Posted by open air
No! Don't. We need your organs!Originally Posted by gcasillo
I picked option one. I don't like where CM is going lately though, and I think they need to keep the mass down in size a bit, but at the heart of it, it was a good idea.Originally Posted by Mars
As far as helmets, key word is should....everyone should wear helmets....however the decision is up to them...I am against a mandatory "helmet or ticket" style law, since that won't really fix anything. Either they will eventually go to a helmet, or they wont....if they dont wear a helmet, I am still thinking in my head "dude....why aren't you wearing a helmet...BAD BAD BAD!!!!"
wow... so it is safe to say most people on board do not support cm. cool!
I support wearing of helmets, but I think it should be a personal decision.
I also support critical mass's freedom to ride, but I think participants should exercise good judgement and self-control, since they represent the image of cyclists in general.
The more people exercise good judgement in their personal decisions, the less they incur the interference of government. Isn't less interference what most people want in their lives?
Of course, we can't always blame people's "bad decisions" for the unwarranted interference of government. Sometimes, government simply has no place in our personal choices.
(This was an essay question, right? )
Last edited by LittleBigMan; 11-18-04 at 06:33 PM.