mconlonx

So I guess you kind of get where those who choose not to wear a helmet and get chastised publicly for it are coming from...?

350htrr

Oh, I get it. It's like when a helmetless person doesn't wear a helmet and thinks he's safer, or a helmeteer saying the helmet saved my life... Maybe, maybe not, both are/could be BS to both statements... JMO If someone chastises me I say it's my choice to wear one or not, that is not the problem here in this helmet thread, it's people saying that there's proof that helmets don't work and you are safer without it, that is the problem I am having in this thread...

FBinNY 

The problem on this forum is folks, including you, would rather argue and fight than engage in rational discussion. You even argue withn folks who agree with you.

What ever gave you the impression that I support seat belt laws, or ANY so-called nanny state regulations? Certainly you didn't read it anywhere in my posts. I opposed auto seat belt regulations long before they were a national mandate, back when NY first proposed a bill.

And I'm sorry you consider "libertarian" fighting words. In the context of current American politics, where both major parties support nanny state legislation, opposition could fairly be considered a libertarian opinion, whether or not you are a member of the so-named party.

So, who's inconsistent here?

BTW- you folks can rant among yourselves to your heart's content. I'm out. I'll stay on the mechanics forum, where we actually try to help people, and treat each other, even people we disagree with with a reasonable level of courtesy and respect.

rekmeyata

Your the one making no sense!!! I, and others here, have given volumes of information to support the claims that helmets are effective, you're the one that fails to comprehend any of that information because inside your skull you call a brain you refuse to believe it no matter how much material we present.

Nanny state? LOL! You are libertarian aren't you? So where did I ever say I disagreed with Libertarians? or where did I fight against them? I could care less if someone is a libertarian, republican, or a democrat as long as that person is doing an honest job and not trying to steal money from all of us taxpayers for huge and useless programs.

If you disagree with seat belt laws for non minors then good for you, so do I, (so I apologize for thinking that, I thought I had read a post where you thought it was a great idea my bad but I'm also not going to spend hours looking back on 241 pages of pure crud to find out), just as I disagree about laws wearing helmets for non minors as you do to, but as I said before that's not the point of this discussion which you seem to want to keep attacking, the point was what I had mentioned in an earlier post so I'll post it again because you just don't seem to get it: as a free adult I chose to wear my seatbelt when driving and wear my helmet when riding...and I don't care if you chose not to. What I do care about is someone using a few weak and unsubstantiated claims that something is unsafe or useless when years of substantiated studies from huge number of resources prove otherwise. That is what pisses me off.

FBinNY 

So I think I understand. It's OK for me to do whatever I want, just not for me to express an opinion about the issue.

BTW- you must have me confused with someone else. I don't have that many posts on this thread, I never said helmets are ineffective, and I don't remember posting any links to studies.

My point has always been very simple, It isn't about whether helmets work, or how they work, but whether the risk is high enough to warrant their use in the first place. This is an arena where statistics tell only part of the story because accidents aren't evenly distributed.

But going back to your point. Since my opinion is banned by the cognoscenti on this forum, I won't waste any more time posting. I leave you helmet proponents to argue among yourselves, which is something you're very good at and don't need me.

curbtender

Ha, if you come in here you should wear a helmet...if you don't have padded walls.

mconlonx

...and they have the same kind of issues with you saying helmets do work and the studies you cite.

This argument has descended into politics -- no one is right, but everyone thinks they are.

350htrr

Yes, but lately there have been helmetless that actually said that helmets are of some use and not necessarily useless, just like some helmeteers like me that have said that helmets aren't necessarily as good as most people think they are, so, it that progress?

mconlonx

Sure...

350htrr

Oh my, That's one sad forlorn little word... I'm suspecting I shouldn't take it at face value, it may actually means fat-chance or not really or maybe simply that I'm out to lunch...

sudo bike

If you want to look at it that way. Many of us have said that from the jump; helmets aren't useless, just very unnecessary for the kinds of riding most of us do. For various reasons.

<- Obviously, there are situations where I think helmet use is warranted.

rekmeyata

Aside from all the evidence already posted a thousand times by a slew of posters that say otherwise lets play an assuming game. Assuming you were right, if helmets were 50% less effective than originally thought does that make them useless and designated for the dumpster? No, because the statistics have shown lives have been saved wearing helmets...A LOT OF LIVES, regardless of the suppose or not supposed effectiveness of helmets. Thus the 50% less effectiveness means nothing because a lot of people are survived because of helmets.

mconlonx

By their heirs...?

sudo bike

Nope.

Nope.

Nope.

Recap: Helmets useless? No.
Helmets have the ability to save lives under normal conditions? Debatable.
Helmets save lives? Debatable.
Helmets save LOTS OF LIVES? Almost certainly no. See the chart showing minimal change to decreasing death trend among cyclists upon exponential adoption of helmet use.

rekmeyata

No, by hares...hares saved their lives.

rekmeyata

More yups then your nopes, and this has been very well documented within these hallow pages, just go back and read. This crap just keeps going around and around and around, but your type just don't want to believe the solid and extensive and historical data that proves it whereas the data you guys come up with is weak and done by a very few and very little historical data. Again go back and read.

sudo bike

this has been very well documented within these hallow pages, just go back and read. This crap just keeps going around and around and around, but your type just don't want to believe the solid and extensive and historical data that proves it whereas the data you guys come up with is weak and done by a very few and very little historical data. Again go back and read.

rydabent

The fact remains, will a helmet help you if you are hit by a car doing 65------------no. But is a lower speed accident or fall a helmet probably will prevent some injury. ANY INJURY PREVENTED is a good thing. Sadly the anti helmet crowd wont admit this.

FBinNY 

You seem to resent the idea that some of us don't believe helmets are necessary. There s no anti-helmet crowd, just folks who don't believe they are necessary, or don't believe that their use is justified.

Why do you resent the very idea that some don't buy into helmet use the way you do? It's not like you run into 2-3 people daily who ask you why you're wearing a helmet.

So chill, believe what you do about helmets, wear the one of your choice, but tone down the rhetoric and attitude.

Yes, helmets do save lives. But so do many things that we don't do for a variety of reasons.

mconlonx

Psst, FB. If you look back through this thread, you'll see that the rydabot trolls once a week, every week...

rydabent

mconlonx

However I notice that you troll almost every day!!!

rydabent

fbinny

I do not "resent" the fact that some here dont wear helmets. However I do not understand why they dont. As I say if a helmet will prevent ANY injury it is a good thing. Besides that, as I have posted, wearing a helmet is NOT a burden. Once you have placed in on your head and buckled the strap, it is out of your mind until you unbuckle it again.

rydabent

To explode one of the arguments of the anti helmet crowd, they claim that the use of a helmet is not necessary because there are few cases where the head hits the ground. Then they argue that you might get neck strain because the helmet sticks to the ground. So------------take the number of cases where the helmet does hit the ground, and divide that by the number of times a helmet sticks, and you have a really small number. Compound that with the fact a strained neck is far better than road rash on the head or a concussion.

Null66

As a kid I rode both bicycles and dirt bikes w/o helmets.
I can say for a fact that a non-helmeted head is MUCH more "sticky" to the pavement, whether dirt, chip seal or nice smooth asphalt. The surfaces dig into your hair/skin and flesh and that resists sliding.

As an adult who's put down a motorcycle (a few times) and a bicycle wearing helmets. The out shell of both slides on those surfaces. Chip seal is still the grabbiest. I have been surprised by how well the shells hold up to sliding across the pavement.

However, there was a study in Britain about car driver behavior which showed that drivers drove closer to adult males and particularly when wearing a helmet. Oddly they yielded more room to both adult females and children when wearing helmets...

Reports of injuries come out in favor of wearing a helmet, but they don't include exposure... Non-helmeted riders make up a larger percentage of injured people with more substantial injuries. But they don't account for either percentage of riders w/o helmet, mileage or rider characteristics. So who the heck really knows.

Me, I do too many dumb things that have "tested" my helmets. So I wear them...

sudo bike

You don't understand because you don't want to understand. You want to be right.