Bike Forums

Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Advocacy & Safety (http://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/)
-   -   The helmet thread (http://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/771371-helmet-thread.html)

hagen2456 06-02-12 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianstew (Post 14305041)
No, its perfectly normal for a proud American.

But it does sound like you may need a visit to the doctor, it seems as though your cranium is fully inserted into your rectum......

Wow... snappiest reply ever.

sudo bike 06-02-12 06:06 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by ianstew (Post 14302402)
You people are too funny. Yes, i would like my internet win cookie.

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=253870

Quote:

When I am mowing, and trimming the lawn, I wear safety glasses and hearing protection.
Oh. Ok, nevermind, makes sense now.

Quote:

When i work on aerial equipment, i wear my safety harness and hard hat. When i ride my bike, i wear a helmet, and a reflective vest. Its safety first for me, whatever I am doing
You should really get some riding armor. Safety first, you know.

Quote:

You can argue all you want, and tell me all you wish that cycle helmets don't work, but I know for a fact that in my younger days, I have sustained several injuries that would have been avoided had I been smart enough to wear a helmet. Hell, I've been riding the trail and smacked my head on a branch, gashing it open. Fatal injuries are not the only injuries I am concerned about. Helmets can and do prevent many injuries. You guys seem stuck on the fact that a helmet won't save your life in a vehicle collision, or a serious accident. That isn't the only thing I am worried about.
Yes they do. They also may protect from minor injuries sustained while walking, mowing your lawn, etc. I don't care if you choose to wear one for that, it just seems oddly misplaced.

I also don't get how accident prone people seem to be. Y'all must fall an awful lot. I don't seem to have that problem, so I'm not concerned about an off-chance of minor injury. I'll take the convenience and deal with any cuts or bumps I get in the meantime. If you don't, that's OK, it just seems like a really silly thing to get all hung up over when someone else thinks is overkill, just like I'm sure you think body armor probably is. Unless, of course, you fall a lot for some reason, like riding in icy weather, pushing your limits a lot, etc. But hey, your choice, bud. I just don't think I need a helmet for riding a bike anymore than I need one for walking.

ianstew 06-02-12 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hagen2456 (Post 14305148)
Wow... snappiest reply ever.


hey you, get back in the tool box........

sudo bike 06-02-12 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rydabent (Post 14304227)
What is really a hoot tho, is the fact that all the anti helmet clik put on their helmets when they ride in an organized ride or rally like any good little fella. They actually own helmets even if they rant and rave against them.

Or maybe they are so pig headed and anti social they wont ride in such events.

Haha. So, we're either pushovers for wearing one at a required event, or we're anti-socialites for not attending. Bullet in every chamber there it seems.

I also own a suit to wear to black tie events... I don't wear it to the grocery store.

ianstew 06-02-12 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sudo bike (Post 14305149)
http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=253870


Oh. Ok, nevermind, makes sense now.


You should really get some riding armor. Safety first, you know.



Yes they do. They also may protect from minor injuries sustained while walking, mowing your lawn, etc. I don't care if you choose to wear one for that, it just seems oddly misplaced.

I also don't get how accident prone people seem to be. Y'all must fall an awful lot. I don't seem to have that problem, so I'm not concerned about an off-chance of minor injury. I'll take the convenience and deal with any cuts or bumps I get in the meantime. If you don't, that's OK, it just seems like a really silly thing to get all hung up over when someone else thinks is overkill, just like I'm sure you think body armor probably is. Unless, of course, you fall a lot for some reason, like riding in icy weather, pushing your limits a lot, etc. But hey, your choice, bud. I just don't think I need a helmet for riding a bike anymore than I need one for walking.


No, i get it man. I really do. Its your choice to not wear one, and that's kosher with me. I mostly got into this argument after I was blasted for choosing to wear one. Wearing a helmet when riding makes sense to me. It may not to you, and that is cool too. I haven't blasted anyone for choosing not to wear one, nor called anybody stupid for not doing so. Yet I have been called that essentially for my choice to wear one. But I am learning that here on BikeForums, some of the crowd is rather snooty, and awfully full of themselves. The "holier than thou" attitude is certainly very pervasive here.

sudo bike 06-02-12 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianstew (Post 14305219)
No, i get it man. I really do. Its your choice to not wear one, and that's kosher with me. I mostly got into this argument after I was blasted for choosing to wear one. Wearing a helmet when riding makes sense to me. It may not to you, and that is cool too. I haven't blasted anyone for choosing not to wear one, nor called anybody stupid for not doing so. Yet I have been called that essentially for my choice to wear one. But I am learning that here on BikeForums, some of the crowd is rather snooty, and awfully full of themselves. The "holier than thou" attitude is certainly very pervasive here.

Welcome to cycling.

In all seriousness, if that's all you're saying, I have little objection, and I'll even apologize for being a smart-ass if it wasn't necessary.

david58 06-02-12 06:51 PM

Cool. Never got to post on the 100th page of a thread before!

LesterOfPuppets 06-02-12 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brennan (Post 14304210)
^^Oh brother, here we go.

This quote is a classic:

"Not wearing a helmet is worse than not wearing a seatbelt. You're endangering...the lives of those in your community." - Council Member David Greenfield

Oh really? By not wearing a helmet, I'm endangering the lives of the people of my community, how exactly?

Here's another gem, from a WSJ article about this proposed helmet law:

"The best way to get killed if you're riding a bicycle is to not wear a helmet." - Council Member David Greenfield


I can't even chart the absurdity of these statements. How do people like this even get elected?


Oh wait, here's another one from this guy, reported by Capital New York. The hits just keep on coming:

"The reality is, a helmet is instant safety." - Council Member David Greenfield

That Greenfield is full of knee slappers.

LesterOfPuppets 06-02-12 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianstew (Post 14305219)
Yet I have been called that essentially for my choice to wear one.

Recently? That's amazing! I don't think I've been ribbed for wearing a helmet since 1988 or so.

ianstew 06-02-12 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LesterOfPuppets (Post 14305333)
Recently? That's amazing! I don't think I've been ribbed for wearing a helmet since 1988 or so.

right here in this very thread....

LesterOfPuppets 06-02-12 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianstew (Post 14305453)
right here in this very thread....

Oh, where Razrskutr (however he spells it) said you'll die from spinal injuries exacerbated by helmet use?

Meh.

I dunno why folks on either side of the debate like to go for the horror story approach so often.

Responding with ye olde dare scenario is a pretty worn out ploy also.

Helmet use for various activities is generally decided according to likelihood of head impact. Short track speedskating - helmets, long track speedskating - no helmets, leisurely paced bridal trail horseback riding - no helmets, many other horseback riding pursuits - helmets.

I wear helmets for some bike riding types, conditions or events. Most JRA type bike riding I'll go without. Head impact likelihood seems about on par with that of jogging, to me, and I've never seen any helmeted joggers, not even trailrunners - people who run over rocks and roots at high speed.

Six jours 06-03-12 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianstew (Post 14305041)
But it does sound like you may need a visit to the doctor, it seems as though your cranium is fully inserted into your rectum......

Wait, so the guy who can actually go for a bicycle ride sans helmet and not die is the one with his head up his ass? Hmm...

Six jours 06-03-12 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rydabent (Post 14304227)
What is really a hoot tho, is the fact that all the anti helmet clik put on their helmets when they ride in an organized ride or rally like any good little fella. They actually own helmets even if they rant and rave against them.

Or maybe they are so pig headed and anti social they wont ride in such events.

The word you're looking for is "clique".

ianstew 06-03-12 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Six jours (Post 14306204)
Wait, so the guy who can actually go for a bicycle ride sans helmet and not die is the one with his head up his ass? Hmm...

I have ridden umpteen times sans helmet, still alive.

This was in response to his jab at me being a proud American.....

ianstew 06-03-12 12:55 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Six jours (Post 14306206)
The word you're looking for is "clique".

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=253944

hagen2456 06-03-12 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianstew (Post 14305168)
hey you, get back in the tool box........

Heh. I will - if you promise to reflect a little on what pride may have to do with nationality.

mconlonx 06-03-12 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LesterOfPuppets (Post 14304016)
There's some new news on the legislation front. Looks like a New York City councilman is proposing a Mandatory Helmet Law there.

It might be pointed out in this case that, according to NYC DOT, cyclist safety has increased with increasing bicycle use, without the nuclear option of a MHL, that helmet use is an outlier regarding this particular statistic, and that a MHL is unlikely to change this trend significantly.

All kinds of appropriate responses in this case:

- Suggest at public hearing and in editorials that the law be expanded to include motor vehicle operators and passengers, since they are, by far, the leading group of head injury recipients, and thus a drag on the public coffers.

- Suggest that the proposed law be amended to include 4 hrs of mandatory bike safety instruction in schools and driving classes, which is shown to have a greater effect regarding bike rider safety than mere use of a helmet.

- Ask the councilman point blank why he is proposing this law in stark contrast to published studies regarding overall cycling safety, and who/what prompted him to introduce such legislation.

- Ask the councilman in a public meeting why he wants to decrease cycling in the City, since that's what MHL's have been proven to do, with resultant decrease in cyclist safety and increase in constituent mortality rates.

But while these suggestions would be more than appropriate and very effective in killing this proposed law, I'm sure the screeching bare-head brigade will offer up at least a bushel's worth of impotent outrage and useless posturing -- supported by scientific studies -- instead of effective politicking.

rydabent 06-03-12 08:18 AM

lester and six

This is the internet. People use short hand-----BTW more young people these days will understand the word clik than clique anyway. But thanks anyway for being a grammer and spelling hall moniter.

Rx Rider 06-03-12 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rydabent (Post 14306956)
This is the internet. People use short hand-----BTW more young people these days will understand the word clik than clique anyway. But thanks anyway for being a grammer and spelling hall moniter.

why cater to "young people" anyway? why change the standard of spelling because a youth may find it a challenge? isn't that devolution?






helmets

Six jours 06-03-12 10:27 AM

Ryda's just pretending that "he meant to do that". I was kind of hoping that ianstew would defend it as "patriotically refusing to write in French", but his little "grammar police" pic (in response to a spelling correction) was almost as much fun.

Not as much fun as Ryda positing that "grammer" is shorthand, though.

On the whole, I find it absolutely delightful that the folks nattering away about how stupid it is to ride a bike without a helmet are also the people who struggle pitifully to even put together third grade level sentences.

ZmanKC 06-03-12 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rydabent (Post 14306956)
lester and six

This is the internet. People use short hand-----BTW more young people these days will understand the word clik than clique anyway. But thanks anyway for being a grammer and spelling hall moniter.

Sorry Rydabent, but it's "monitor". :)

RazrSkutr 06-03-12 11:12 AM

Road.cc reports that:

Quote:

Originally Posted by road.cc

Spokes, Scotland’s leading cycle campaign group which covers Edinburgh and the wider Lothian area, has announced that it is to stop publicising events that require participants to wear a helmet in the face of what it describes as “the creeping growth of semi-compulsion.” The group’s stance regarding making helmets mandatory is in line with that of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RosPA), which says it is impractical to make use of helmets compulsory.


I-Like-To-Bike 06-03-12 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rydabent (Post 14306956)
lester and six

This is the internet. People use short hand-----BTW more young people these days will understand the word clik than clique anyway. But thanks anyway for being a grammer and spelling hall moniter.

I'm sure this scholar knows as much about "young people" as he does about using spell check or the risk reduction value of bicycle helmets.

Grammer, Moniter, and Spelling Hall (?); "Internet Shorthand," what a guy.

ianstew 06-03-12 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hagen2456 (Post 14306530)
Heh. I will - if you promise to reflect a little on what pride may have to do with nationality.

Hey you, there is no talking in the tool box. .........

ianstew 06-03-12 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Six jours (Post 14307334)
Ryda's just pretending that "he meant to do that". I was kind of hoping that ianstew would defend it as "patriotically refusing to write in French", but his little "grammar police" pic (in response to a spelling correction) was almost as much fun.

Not as much fun as Ryda positing that "grammer" is shorthand, though.

On the whole, I find it absolutely delightful that the folks nattering away about how stupid it is to ride a bike without a helmet are also the people who struggle pitifully to even put together third grade level sentences.

I lulz at your attempts at humor......


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:25 PM.