N_C
:p :D ;)
Helmet policy for school kids.
Pages :
[1]
2
The BikeForums Team
-adv-
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
- http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in this thread)
- http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
- http://www.bikeforums.net
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
- http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in this thread)
- http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
- http://www.bikeforums.net
joejack951
I've read a very similar thread before so I'll give you my summary of the posts.
1. How many kids have actually been injured riding their bikes to school? With or without a helmet?
2. How many kids are injured being driven to school?
3. Do you think it's better to let the kids ride without helmets than to not ride at all and risk adding to the ever increasing number of overweight children due to lack of exercise?
4. Have the kids who ride to school been properly trained in safe riding?
My opinion: I'm happy to hear kids are riding to school. There's a lot worse things they could be doing.
1. How many kids have actually been injured riding their bikes to school? With or without a helmet?
2. How many kids are injured being driven to school?
3. Do you think it's better to let the kids ride without helmets than to not ride at all and risk adding to the ever increasing number of overweight children due to lack of exercise?
4. Have the kids who ride to school been properly trained in safe riding?
My opinion: I'm happy to hear kids are riding to school. There's a lot worse things they could be doing.
randya
Mandatory helmet use is a deterent. I rode until I was over 30 years old without a helmet, and never had a problem.
joeprim
Why don't you mind your business. Ok if they can't afford a helmet I'd buy it for them but forget damn rules!
Joe
Joe
cooker
The school board wouldn't be able to enforce that rule...they only have jurisdiction over school property.
John E
For more than a decade, California has mandated helmets for bicyclists under age 18. For those of us who believe strongly in helmets, the law has provided welcome reinforcement of our parental guidance. As a civil libertarian, I am equally pleased that California does not requires adult bicyclists to wear helmets.
___
"It's one thing for Dad not to wear a helmet because he's an idiot. It's quite another for Junior to be an idiot because he didn't wear a helmet."
___
"It's one thing for Dad not to wear a helmet because he's an idiot. It's quite another for Junior to be an idiot because he didn't wear a helmet."
unkchunk
I'm not going to fight it any more. Yes, you are right. Children (up to age 18) not wearing bicycle helmets is such a grievous saftey violation that any child riding with out a helmut is grounds for immediate cessation of parental rights. The child and any syblings should be placed in the foster care system, the parents imprisioned for not less than one year per violation. All assets and/or property should be siezed as a fine and payment of all subsequent legal costs, as well as garnishment of all wages for the next five years. Furthermore, upon release the parents shall have to register as "dangerous parents" with the local police for the next ten years. Also under go periodic random drug tests for an equal amount of time. There, problem solved. I feel better about myself already.
Keith99
OK I will resist temptation and do this straight, rather than as above ^^
Many schools are cr@p these days. More time seems to be spent baby sitting than actually teaching anything. Let alone anything useful. It seems to me trying to enforce one more rule that has nothing to do with education is the last thing schools need.
Many schools are cr@p these days. More time seems to be spent baby sitting than actually teaching anything. Let alone anything useful. It seems to me trying to enforce one more rule that has nothing to do with education is the last thing schools need.
joejack951
1. Does it matter? I'm just trying to take a proactive approach to this based on what I have seen.
2. If you're comparing injuries while riding to school with injuries while being driven to school, isn't that like comparing apples to oranges?
3. If they do not ride they will still walk, so they are still getting exercise to either help the fat ones lose weight or prevent them from becoming obese.
4. The school district has a safety education class, bicycle safety is part of it, so yes.
Just so it's straight, those aren't necessarily my questions but questions I've seen posed before, and I think they are all valid. I'll try to answer your questions.
1 and 2. The point here is to focus on a problem. Kids riding to school is not a problem. If kids were falling off their bikes all over the place, then maybe you'd have a case for insisting on helmets. If kids were getting killed by aggressive drivers, then the drivers should be targetted. If kids are being injured in car accidents, shouldn't we be trying to get them out of cars and into a safer mode of transportation instead of the reverse?
3. As a kid, there's no way I'd have walked 3 miles to school. That distance would be nothing on a bike though. (I say this not knowing at all how far kids travel to get to this school.)
4. Good. I hope a large part of it deals with how to handle traffic and safe riding habits rather than focusing on wearing helmets and staying out of the way of traffic.
2. If you're comparing injuries while riding to school with injuries while being driven to school, isn't that like comparing apples to oranges?
3. If they do not ride they will still walk, so they are still getting exercise to either help the fat ones lose weight or prevent them from becoming obese.
4. The school district has a safety education class, bicycle safety is part of it, so yes.
Just so it's straight, those aren't necessarily my questions but questions I've seen posed before, and I think they are all valid. I'll try to answer your questions.
1 and 2. The point here is to focus on a problem. Kids riding to school is not a problem. If kids were falling off their bikes all over the place, then maybe you'd have a case for insisting on helmets. If kids were getting killed by aggressive drivers, then the drivers should be targetted. If kids are being injured in car accidents, shouldn't we be trying to get them out of cars and into a safer mode of transportation instead of the reverse?
3. As a kid, there's no way I'd have walked 3 miles to school. That distance would be nothing on a bike though. (I say this not knowing at all how far kids travel to get to this school.)
4. Good. I hope a large part of it deals with how to handle traffic and safe riding habits rather than focusing on wearing helmets and staying out of the way of traffic.
unkchunk
Okay, you do what you want N_C. But without strict proscribed punishments for the parents the mandatory helmet law becomes merely a symbolic gesture and too many children will fall between the cracks without a properly fitted and secured ANSI Snell helmet. Remember, a properly fitted and secured ANSI Snell helmet is a properly fitted and secured ANSI Snell helmet. Not wearing a helmet, violation. Chin strap not connected, violation. Helmet too loose, violation. Using a helmet that's been in previous accident, violation. Anything less would just be a hat that would not protect our children. Also best of luck with your local road maintanance department in cleaning up all those child carcasses on the road. It's not long till the summer semester and soon will be able to take care of that back log.
webist
We name 'em at birth, vaccinate 'em, give 'em their APGAR test, test thier hearing, blood type 'em and fairly often get 'em snipped or pierced, etc. Then is the ideal time for the maternity nurse to say, "We'll be taking the baby for its helmet gluing now."
Keith99
Okay, you do what you want N_C. But without strict proscribed punishments for the parents the mandatory helmet law becomes merely a symbolic gesture and too many children will fall between the cracks without a properly fitted and secured ANSI Snell helmet. Remember, a properly fitted and secured ANSI Snell helmet is a properly fitted and secured ANSI Snell helmet. Not wearing a helmet, violation. Chin strap not connected, violation. Helmet too loose, violation. Using a helmet that's been in previous accident, violation. Anything less would just be a hat that would not protect our children. Also best of luck with your local road maintanance department in cleaning up all those child carcasses on the road. It's not long till the summer semester and soon will be able to take care of that back log.
And of course all teachers will need to be trained to recognize possible violations.
Chalk up 2-3 more student free days each year. Which means 2-3 fewer days of instruction.
Oh and I've learned from elsewhere. With no such safety policy if a kid gets in a random accident without a helmet or an improper helmet the school has no problem. With a policy if the kid is in violation in any way the school can be found at fault.
And of course all teachers will need to be trained to recognize possible violations.
Chalk up 2-3 more student free days each year. Which means 2-3 fewer days of instruction.
Oh and I've learned from elsewhere. With no such safety policy if a kid gets in a random accident without a helmet or an improper helmet the school has no problem. With a policy if the kid is in violation in any way the school can be found at fault.
LCI_Brian
Of course I will need to check, but I believe the the school district is responsible for the kids during the school year monday through Friday between certain times of the day or until they arrive at their destination after school, whether it is home, child care or a job.
It is my understanding that the school district is responsible for the kids from the moment they leave the front door to the moment they return home from school.
Given that, it would seem that a school would like a mandatory helmet law. Parents could be responsible for making sure the child doesn't leave the house without wearing a helmet, and the teacher could make sure that the child is wearing a helmet before leaving the school grounds.
Only problem I see is that if you open the door with the helmet issue, maybe that could lead to a call for banning bike riding to school?
It is my understanding that the school district is responsible for the kids from the moment they leave the front door to the moment they return home from school.
Given that, it would seem that a school would like a mandatory helmet law. Parents could be responsible for making sure the child doesn't leave the house without wearing a helmet, and the teacher could make sure that the child is wearing a helmet before leaving the school grounds.
Only problem I see is that if you open the door with the helmet issue, maybe that could lead to a call for banning bike riding to school?
nova
Okay, you do what you want N_C. But without strict proscribed punishments for the parents the mandatory helmet law becomes merely a symbolic gesture and too many children will fall between the cracks without a properly fitted and secured ANSI Snell helmet. Remember, a properly fitted and secured ANSI Snell helmet is a properly fitted and secured ANSI Snell helmet. Not wearing a helmet, violation. Chin strap not connected, violation. Helmet too loose, violation. Using a helmet that's been in previous accident, violation. Anything less would just be a hat that would not protect our children. Also best of luck with your local road maintanance department in cleaning up all those child carcasses on the road. It's not long till the summer semester and soon will be able to take care of that back log.
I tend to agree. The kids will simply put helmet on ride out of site take it off aproach school put it on and bypass the rule. It could infact put them in more danger. As they owould be more likly to not watch the road in front and instead watch for some school offical thats going to bust them. Worse yet they do all the above see some one who can bust them who dosnt see them the spin around right in to the path of a car.
Better idea not a mandatory rule but maybe ticket prices for sporting events are reduced for those who ride to school on their bike and use a helmet. Maybe reduced lunch prices or tokens to use in exchange for money for the pop machine the school most probably has.
In other words instead of the punishment meathod of encouraging helmet use use the reward system.
The pop machine idea would realy work for the younger children as to them it would be free pop heheh
I tend to agree. The kids will simply put helmet on ride out of site take it off aproach school put it on and bypass the rule. It could infact put them in more danger. As they owould be more likly to not watch the road in front and instead watch for some school offical thats going to bust them. Worse yet they do all the above see some one who can bust them who dosnt see them the spin around right in to the path of a car.
Better idea not a mandatory rule but maybe ticket prices for sporting events are reduced for those who ride to school on their bike and use a helmet. Maybe reduced lunch prices or tokens to use in exchange for money for the pop machine the school most probably has.
In other words instead of the punishment meathod of encouraging helmet use use the reward system.
The pop machine idea would realy work for the younger children as to them it would be free pop heheh
Keith99
I wonder if those here opposed to this idea were raised with a pretty firm or strict hand by their parents. And because they hated what they considered to be bull**** rules they were raised with they refuse to raise thier children the same way. So thier children & others like them are allowed to do what they want. Which results in a lot of problems. One of which is the kids acting like hell raising hoodlums. I have seen it way to often. If I ever tried half the crap I see parents let their kids get away with today my ass would have been whooped for it. And I don't mean in the form of child abuse either. If I ever have kids They will be raised with a firm hand & show respect for others, unlike more then half of todays brats.
So you have no kids yourself. You just want to make rules for other peoples kids and for other people to have to enforce. And of course like to make ad hominem attacks on anyone who takes a position other than yours.
Nuf said.
So you have no kids yourself. You just want to make rules for other peoples kids and for other people to have to enforce. And of course like to make ad hominem attacks on anyone who takes a position other than yours.
Nuf said.
I-Like-To-Bike
So you have no kids yourself. You just want to make rules for other peoples kids and for other people to have to enforce. And of course like to make ad hominem attacks on anyone who takes a position other than yours.
Nuf said.
Keith, you have this busy body's number. He doesn't care what the facts are about the effectiveness of mandatory helmet laws or what anyone else's opinion is, he's going to make life miseable for somebody. It is the mission in life for a self appointed safety nanny to enforce rules; in this case N_C's fabricated rules.
To clarify there is no dang helmet law in Iowa for anyone, any age. Bicycle or motorcycle.
N_C: My advice is to mind your own danging beeswax! But obviously that is out of the question as you have made quite clear, you already know what is right for everyone else and will make 'em comply, like it or not.
Attached are thumbnails of the bike parking at the elementary school near me. We sure do not need a safety donkey harrassing the school officials, teachers, parents, and students with his half butt crackpot "good idea."
Nuf said.
Keith, you have this busy body's number. He doesn't care what the facts are about the effectiveness of mandatory helmet laws or what anyone else's opinion is, he's going to make life miseable for somebody. It is the mission in life for a self appointed safety nanny to enforce rules; in this case N_C's fabricated rules.
To clarify there is no dang helmet law in Iowa for anyone, any age. Bicycle or motorcycle.
N_C: My advice is to mind your own danging beeswax! But obviously that is out of the question as you have made quite clear, you already know what is right for everyone else and will make 'em comply, like it or not.
Attached are thumbnails of the bike parking at the elementary school near me. We sure do not need a safety donkey harrassing the school officials, teachers, parents, and students with his half butt crackpot "good idea."
I-Like-To-Bike
If I ever tried half the crap I see parents let their kids get away with today my ass would have been whooped for it. And I don't mean in the form of child abuse either. If I ever have kids They will be raised with a firm hand & show respect for others, unlike more then half of todays brats.
Yea I bet. I don't doubtfor a minute that you will enforce your rules and demands for respect; especially the firm hand ass whipping part.
Yea I bet. I don't doubtfor a minute that you will enforce your rules and demands for respect; especially the firm hand ass whipping part.
CB HI
N_C, why do you even ask for opinions when all you are really looking for is a pat you on the back. If you don’t want opinions then don’t post this stuff. You should have learned from previous post you have made. Then and know, it is clear that you had already made up your mind on what you were going to do before you ever posted.
John E
Responsible parents set a proper example by wearing helmets when cycling, and they encourage/require their offspring to do the same, irrespective of local laws or school policies. I had a problem with a local elementary school forbidding the younger kids from biking to school, regardless of whether they had proper safety training.
I-Like-To-Bike
Responsible parents set a proper example by wearing helmets when cycling, and they encourage/require their offspring to do the same, irrespective of local laws or school policies. I had a problem with a local elementary school forbidding the younger kids from biking to school, regardless of whether they had proper safety training.
What was your problem? Did the administrator of the local school have an opinion about what responsible administrators must do to "set a proper example" and then did just that. Maybe your opinion of the definition of "proper" doesn't match his. I know neither of your opinions of what is "proper" doesn't match mine.
What was your problem? Did the administrator of the local school have an opinion about what responsible administrators must do to "set a proper example" and then did just that. Maybe your opinion of the definition of "proper" doesn't match his. I know neither of your opinions of what is "proper" doesn't match mine.
chephy
The more I hear about all the helmet-related issues, the more amazed I am at how some really smart and sensible people suddenly lose the ability to think clearly when the issue of helmet use comes up. They'd suddenly be foaming at the mouth, shouting: "HELMETS SAVE LIVES! EVERYONE MUST WEAR A HELMET! O THE HOLY HELMET, THOU ART MADE IN HEAVEN!" Yet there isn't a single valid piece of evidence that helmets are at all effective in preventing brain injury. But that doesn't matter since SAFETY is concerned. Suggesting that a piece of SAFETY equipment might be essentially useless is a blasphemy.
I wonder how those people would feel if a mandatory rabbit foot law for cyclists were introduced. Those refusing to comply and denying the effectiveness of the measure will be fined, stripped of bicycles and generally ridiculed by the cycling community...
I wonder how those people would feel if a mandatory rabbit foot law for cyclists were introduced. Those refusing to comply and denying the effectiveness of the measure will be fined, stripped of bicycles and generally ridiculed by the cycling community...
AndrewP
Cycling to school presents no more risk of head injury than many things children do as part of a normal days activities, such as playing on a climber. Required participation in cycling safety class, with fun activites like bike rodeo, how to bunny hop, would be more useful. Rewards for helmet use would also be effective but may be too expensive.
markw
Not correct. Des Moines has a bicycle helmet law for kids 13 & under. How enforced it is I do not know, I just know there is one on the books. And I do believe there are a few towns & cities that have motorcycle helmet laws.
Ha, no motorcycle helmet law, but a bicycle helmet law? When did they put that in place? I've got 3 kids and they all wear helmets. Not because some stupid law said so. In California, there's a 14 and under wear helmets, but it's rarely enforced. My kids loose the bike for a couple of days if they don't have a helmet on. I'm firmly against helmet laws, although I wear a helmet myself and have broken a couple motorcycle helmets, one offroad, and one on road. I also believe that it's not the governments place to tell you how to dress when your on your bicycle or motorcycle. Making laws to save stupid people from themselves is a waste of time, and just aggravates everyone else. Another thing that irritates me is people who don't have kids trying to tell other people how to raise their kids. :( So, no to helmet laws. Even though the recent motorcycle crashes in and around Des Moines the last couple of days may get one on the books, I still don't think it's needed.
Ha, no motorcycle helmet law, but a bicycle helmet law? When did they put that in place? I've got 3 kids and they all wear helmets. Not because some stupid law said so. In California, there's a 14 and under wear helmets, but it's rarely enforced. My kids loose the bike for a couple of days if they don't have a helmet on. I'm firmly against helmet laws, although I wear a helmet myself and have broken a couple motorcycle helmets, one offroad, and one on road. I also believe that it's not the governments place to tell you how to dress when your on your bicycle or motorcycle. Making laws to save stupid people from themselves is a waste of time, and just aggravates everyone else. Another thing that irritates me is people who don't have kids trying to tell other people how to raise their kids. :( So, no to helmet laws. Even though the recent motorcycle crashes in and around Des Moines the last couple of days may get one on the books, I still don't think it's needed.
Carusoswi
"I wonder if those here opposed to this idea were raised with a pretty firm or strict hand by their parents. And because they hated what they considered to be bull**** rules they were raised with they refuse to raise thier children the same way. So thier children & others like them are allowed to do what they want. Which results in a lot of problems. One of which is the kids acting like hell raising hoodlums. I have seen it way to often. If I ever tried half the crap I see parents let their kids get away with today my ass would have been whooped for it. And I don't mean in the form of child abuse either. If I ever have kids They will be raised with a firm hand & show respect for others, unlike more then half of todays brats."
First of all, let me say that I am opposed to your idea, and I was raised with a very strict "hand." My parents were so concerned for my safety (and so determined to keep an eye on my whereabouts) that they forbade me to ride on the road unless they rode with me, period. No riding to school or to friends houses, period.
I didn't like their policy then, but didn't consider it BS, either. I respected and loved them - still do, firm hand notwithstanding.
I spent a lot of time riding with my own kids on and off the roads. I didn't allow them to ride to school or anywhere else until they were in junior high. By that time, I pretty much allowed them to ride anywhere as long as I knew where they were going and when they would be coming back - and I verified this with phone calls to parents at their stated destination.
Your statement above seems contradictory to me. On one hand, you suggest that those who oppose your idea may be reacting in backlash to the "firm hand" with which they are raised, but, on the other hand, you vow to create yet another generation of back lashing parents by raising your own kids (if you ever have any) in a similarly firm way.
Your statement doesn't really make sense to me. Your idea for mandatory helmet use by kids doesn't make sense to me, either.
And to whomever suggested that schools are responsible for students from the time they walk out of their front doors until the time they return - that simply is not the case if they are not using school provided transportation to and from school.
As for mandatory helmet use - I think it a bad idea for just about anyone. I can live with mandatory helmet laws for kids, since I always made my kids wear helmets. But, philosophically, I have a problem with government mandated personal safety laws, period.
In the grand scheme of things, there are plenty of more pressing problems involving our kids that should take priority over whether or not they wear helmets when riding their bikes to and from school.
“And I don't mean in the form of child abuse either” (don’t EVEN get me started on that issue!)
Caruso
First of all, let me say that I am opposed to your idea, and I was raised with a very strict "hand." My parents were so concerned for my safety (and so determined to keep an eye on my whereabouts) that they forbade me to ride on the road unless they rode with me, period. No riding to school or to friends houses, period.
I didn't like their policy then, but didn't consider it BS, either. I respected and loved them - still do, firm hand notwithstanding.
I spent a lot of time riding with my own kids on and off the roads. I didn't allow them to ride to school or anywhere else until they were in junior high. By that time, I pretty much allowed them to ride anywhere as long as I knew where they were going and when they would be coming back - and I verified this with phone calls to parents at their stated destination.
Your statement above seems contradictory to me. On one hand, you suggest that those who oppose your idea may be reacting in backlash to the "firm hand" with which they are raised, but, on the other hand, you vow to create yet another generation of back lashing parents by raising your own kids (if you ever have any) in a similarly firm way.
Your statement doesn't really make sense to me. Your idea for mandatory helmet use by kids doesn't make sense to me, either.
And to whomever suggested that schools are responsible for students from the time they walk out of their front doors until the time they return - that simply is not the case if they are not using school provided transportation to and from school.
As for mandatory helmet use - I think it a bad idea for just about anyone. I can live with mandatory helmet laws for kids, since I always made my kids wear helmets. But, philosophically, I have a problem with government mandated personal safety laws, period.
In the grand scheme of things, there are plenty of more pressing problems involving our kids that should take priority over whether or not they wear helmets when riding their bikes to and from school.
“And I don't mean in the form of child abuse either” (don’t EVEN get me started on that issue!)
Caruso
chipcom
The whole idea sounds like a bunch of totalitarian bull twinkle to me, more busy-bodies wanting to inflict their will on the rest of the world. NC, with all due respect, take care of your own family and quit sticking your nose into the business of everyone else's.
MarkS
I've taken flack for my pro-helmet opinions in these forums. I've fallen off a bike once or twice, and was pretty sure that the helmet prevented a minor incident from becoming a major one. And I've seen a motorcycle helmet almost certainly save a life. I definitely make sure my daughter is wearing a helmet as we pedal off to school.
But I don't think schools should be in the business of enforcing helmets for kids anymore than they should be in the business of enforcing seat belt or child booster seat laws for kids being dropped off. Schools have their own charter -- education -- which is what they should be zeroing in on. Schools don't have the authority, manpower, or fiscal resources to be enforcing a private policy. What is most likely to happen is that the school officials will decide its easier just to discourage biking.
If your area already has a child helmet law, then it should be up to law enforcement to enforce those laws as they see fit. If your area doesn't have a child helmet law, then maybe you should dedicate your energies to getting one passed. But leave the hapless schools alone.
But I don't think schools should be in the business of enforcing helmets for kids anymore than they should be in the business of enforcing seat belt or child booster seat laws for kids being dropped off. Schools have their own charter -- education -- which is what they should be zeroing in on. Schools don't have the authority, manpower, or fiscal resources to be enforcing a private policy. What is most likely to happen is that the school officials will decide its easier just to discourage biking.
If your area already has a child helmet law, then it should be up to law enforcement to enforce those laws as they see fit. If your area doesn't have a child helmet law, then maybe you should dedicate your energies to getting one passed. But leave the hapless schools alone.
markw
Alright, so what does everyone think about a mandatory helmet wearing policy on an organized bike ride? Provided it is because of the insurance policy. Which means it can be enforced by the organizers of the ride & whom ever those people are can prevent a person from participating in the ride if a person does not wear a helmet. The same goes for signing the waiver.
See my thread about an interesting response from a potential participant.
Completely different subject. Organized events usually have some stipulations to participation. If you don't want to wear your safety gear that the organizers require, then fine, you're not a participant. Pretty cut and dry there. Car racing comes to mind, your car must meet certain safety requirements before they allow it on track. If you don't meet those requirements, then you don't play.
I'm still waiting for them to start politicizing the recent crashes in DSM to push for helmet laws.
Oh, FWIW, I rode a bike in Des Moines until I was 19 and only wore a helmet on the track. I always wore one on the motorcycle.
See my thread about an interesting response from a potential participant.
Completely different subject. Organized events usually have some stipulations to participation. If you don't want to wear your safety gear that the organizers require, then fine, you're not a participant. Pretty cut and dry there. Car racing comes to mind, your car must meet certain safety requirements before they allow it on track. If you don't meet those requirements, then you don't play.
I'm still waiting for them to start politicizing the recent crashes in DSM to push for helmet laws.
Oh, FWIW, I rode a bike in Des Moines until I was 19 and only wore a helmet on the track. I always wore one on the motorcycle.
randya
So do you wear one now or did you have an accident, suffered a head injury which prevents you from riding? Or did you have an accident, suffer a head injury which convinced you to wear a helmet? If you do not wear a helmet now & you do have an accident & suffer a head injury that you somehow survive, will that prompt & encourage you to wear a helmet?
:rolleyes:
I have never had a head injury riding without a helmet and a helmet has never prevented me from having a head injury. I started using one when they became more commonly available, that is all. I still don't use a helmet all the time, I use one only if I feel I am exposing myself to greater risks, such as riding on busy arterial streets or ZooBombing. Riding in the neighborhood, I often do not use one; and this is what most schoolchildren are doing - riding in the neighborhood. I took helmets for my wife and I when we went to Europe last summer, and ended up hardly using them at all, my wife doesn't like wearing hers and I didn't want to look like an American tourist; wearing a bike helmet makes you stand out in Europe worse than a pair of loud Bermuda shorts and a stupid slogan T-shirt. ;)
:rolleyes:
I have never had a head injury riding without a helmet and a helmet has never prevented me from having a head injury. I started using one when they became more commonly available, that is all. I still don't use a helmet all the time, I use one only if I feel I am exposing myself to greater risks, such as riding on busy arterial streets or ZooBombing. Riding in the neighborhood, I often do not use one; and this is what most schoolchildren are doing - riding in the neighborhood. I took helmets for my wife and I when we went to Europe last summer, and ended up hardly using them at all, my wife doesn't like wearing hers and I didn't want to look like an American tourist; wearing a bike helmet makes you stand out in Europe worse than a pair of loud Bermuda shorts and a stupid slogan T-shirt. ;)
randya
Alright, so what does everyone think about a mandatory helmet wearing policy on an organized bike ride? Provided it is because of the insurance policy. Which means it can be enforced by the organizers of the ride & whom ever those people are can prevent a person from participating in the ride if a person does not wear a helmet. The same goes for signing the waiver.
This is crap, too. I've been on commercial organized bicycle tours through Paris and Barcelona city traffic. No helmet was provided or required, and no signed waiver was required, either. I know it's different in the US, and that's why I don't participate in organized rides here.
This is crap, too. I've been on commercial organized bicycle tours through Paris and Barcelona city traffic. No helmet was provided or required, and no signed waiver was required, either. I know it's different in the US, and that's why I don't participate in organized rides here.
Daily Commute
I hate to admit it, but I agree with chipcom. I think you should raise your own kid and let other parents raise theirs. Some parents may have decided that maing their kids wear helmets would stop the kids from riding. Other parents may have just chosen to pick other battles.
And what would the penalty be? Removal of bike riding privileges? That's counter-productive.
Now, if you want to talk about a parental educational campaign, a helmet giveaway, or organizing a way for parents to buy inexpensive helmets, I'm with you.
As for the organized rides, sometimes you have to do something silly to keep insurance. If mandatory helmet use is one of those, so be it. If the school's insurance company or lawyer forced the helmet policy on the kids, it would be a different story. But I'd insist on seeing the policy or the legal opinion.
"Liability" and "insurance" are two reasons people often make up so that they have an excuse to say "no" when they don't to take responsibility for their own decisions.
And what would the penalty be? Removal of bike riding privileges? That's counter-productive.
Now, if you want to talk about a parental educational campaign, a helmet giveaway, or organizing a way for parents to buy inexpensive helmets, I'm with you.
As for the organized rides, sometimes you have to do something silly to keep insurance. If mandatory helmet use is one of those, so be it. If the school's insurance company or lawyer forced the helmet policy on the kids, it would be a different story. But I'd insist on seeing the policy or the legal opinion.
"Liability" and "insurance" are two reasons people often make up so that they have an excuse to say "no" when they don't to take responsibility for their own decisions.
Carusoswi
Re: group rides - those, generally are private affairs, organized by a private individual or group, privately funded, etc. If I ever organized a private ride, I'd probably be open to all sorts of litigation because I do things so spontaneously, that it probably would never dawn on me to insure the activity. But, for those who do choose (and probably wisely so, these days) insulate themselves against the prospect of litigation; I would probably support most any rule they put in place within reason.
It is for all those reasons that I have chosen not to participate in group rides. One of the aspects I most enjoy about my riding is its unstructured nature. The machine is very simple, requires relatively little maintenance or upkeep. I ride when I want, where I choose, at the pace I set. When finished, I place my bike back on its rack until next time.
We all have our own reasons for riding - and for those who are into group rides (and helmets) - it's all well and good to me. Let them have at it.
I would also say (and some may challenge me on this) that one might be more prone in a group to get tangled up. Certainly one would need to be vigilant about not bumping the rider in front or surprising the rider in back causing him/her to bump - so maybe there is a stronger case for helmets in a group. I don't really know because I haven't done any group rides.
As for having kids, if you really want them, have them. My guess is that you would find that the experience of being a parent to be quite different than observation of other parents, and like most parents, when it's your turn to suffer that privilege, you will improvise to do just as most other parents, the best you can.
Caruso
It is for all those reasons that I have chosen not to participate in group rides. One of the aspects I most enjoy about my riding is its unstructured nature. The machine is very simple, requires relatively little maintenance or upkeep. I ride when I want, where I choose, at the pace I set. When finished, I place my bike back on its rack until next time.
We all have our own reasons for riding - and for those who are into group rides (and helmets) - it's all well and good to me. Let them have at it.
I would also say (and some may challenge me on this) that one might be more prone in a group to get tangled up. Certainly one would need to be vigilant about not bumping the rider in front or surprising the rider in back causing him/her to bump - so maybe there is a stronger case for helmets in a group. I don't really know because I haven't done any group rides.
As for having kids, if you really want them, have them. My guess is that you would find that the experience of being a parent to be quite different than observation of other parents, and like most parents, when it's your turn to suffer that privilege, you will improvise to do just as most other parents, the best you can.
Caruso
randya
Mandatory helmet requirements are a curiously American phenomenon (well, Aussie too, I guess). I think they are pushed primarily by motorists who don't want to take personal responsibility for the safety of those they might endanger with their vehicles and driving habits. See the helmet sticky, there's plenty of info to substantiate that a helmet does nothing to protect you in a high-speed crash. If you're a klutz who falls off your bike a lot at slow speeds, they might be more effective at injury prevention. If you ride downhill single track, you probably want one, plus some additional body armor. But the risks and incidents of head injury are remarkably low, and as many have pointed out, we don't require helmets for motorists or pedestrians, where the risks of head injury are comparable or higher than for bicycling. Personal protective gear should be selected by the user to be commensurate with the actual risk of injury, based on the activity, and not mandated. As I stated previously, there are times I use a helmet and times I don't, primarily based on risk.
Daily Commute
. . .I can show you statistic after statistic that back this up. Again you & very, very few others seem to be an exception to this. Maybe you can explain why.
Then please do so in the helmet sticky. From what I can see, mandatory helmet law advocates have yet to show that helmets or helmet laws actually make cyclists safer. I'm willing to follow the evidence, and so far, the evidence I've seen has been against your position.
Because I have seen no evidence that helmet use makes cyclists safer, I fall down squarely on the side of allowing other parents to parent their children as they see fit.
And yes, I wear a helmet. It saves cyclists from pain, and that's good enough reason for me to wear one.
Then please do so in the helmet sticky. From what I can see, mandatory helmet law advocates have yet to show that helmets or helmet laws actually make cyclists safer. I'm willing to follow the evidence, and so far, the evidence I've seen has been against your position.
Because I have seen no evidence that helmet use makes cyclists safer, I fall down squarely on the side of allowing other parents to parent their children as they see fit.
And yes, I wear a helmet. It saves cyclists from pain, and that's good enough reason for me to wear one.
Daily Commute
I know wearing a helmet does NOT make a cyclist a safer rider, only good riding skills does that. All it does is prevents or limit the amount of injury that occurs when the persons head strikes something in a accident. But depsite good riding skills accidents still happen. 9 times out of 10 due to other influences in which the cyclist has no control over.
I understand that, and I'm not trying to be critical or to make a point with the question. I just wanted to know if there were any studies that showed that bicycle helmets really were effective in decreasing injuries.
I understand that, and I'm not trying to be critical or to make a point with the question. I just wanted to know if there were any studies that showed that bicycle helmets really were effective in decreasing injuries.
ZachS
the op still hasn't answered the question about how many sioux city students have died or injured their heads while riding to school. wouldn't 'natural selection' have been working this whole time?
ZachS
That is because I do not know yet. I will find out though & be sure to post it here when I present this idea to the school district. How's that sound?
That sounds like a great plan. Will you also find out how many have been injured/killed in automobile collisions, and while walking to school?
That sounds like a great plan. Will you also find out how many have been injured/killed in automobile collisions, and while walking to school?
ZachS
my goodness, it really is people like you who cause most of the problems in the world. you make me ashamed to be an American and a human being.
chipcom
Now, if you want to talk about a parental educational campaign, a helmet giveaway, or organizing a way for parents to buy inexpensive helmets, I'm with you.
I give away helmets to folks that need em all the time. Just cuz I don't wear one myself very much don't mean that I don't buy and check them out, in case I like something better than my old Bell Citi. Instead of letting them collect dust, I give them to folks that are just getting into riding and express a wish to wear one - kids in the neighborhood who ride with our 15yr old mostly.
I give away helmets to folks that need em all the time. Just cuz I don't wear one myself very much don't mean that I don't buy and check them out, in case I like something better than my old Bell Citi. Instead of letting them collect dust, I give them to folks that are just getting into riding and express a wish to wear one - kids in the neighborhood who ride with our 15yr old mostly.
chipcom
Another way to look at this is to not do anything at all, continue to let the children not wear helmets & not require that they do. But not because as those have said, I should not stick my nose in other peoples business. But because I should look at this as a method to thin the herd.
This is typical horsepucky from elitists who don't get their way. I gotta a hint for you pal, I been riding on the roadways for over 40 years, and guess what - this bull is still running at the HEAD of the herd. The way I figure it, your obsession for mandatory helmets is an attempt to compensate for your own lack of ability to lead the herd, so you want to slow them all down to your pace. Pitiful, really.
Bottom line, nobody is calling you a snivelling wimp for wearing a helmet, so quit trying to somehow demean those who choose not to wear a helmet and stick your laws, rules and regulations where the sun don't shine.
Sometimes I think we need mandatory muzzle laws for them busy-bodies who constantly attempt to lecture folks about what is 'best for them'.
This is typical horsepucky from elitists who don't get their way. I gotta a hint for you pal, I been riding on the roadways for over 40 years, and guess what - this bull is still running at the HEAD of the herd. The way I figure it, your obsession for mandatory helmets is an attempt to compensate for your own lack of ability to lead the herd, so you want to slow them all down to your pace. Pitiful, really.
Bottom line, nobody is calling you a snivelling wimp for wearing a helmet, so quit trying to somehow demean those who choose not to wear a helmet and stick your laws, rules and regulations where the sun don't shine.
Sometimes I think we need mandatory muzzle laws for them busy-bodies who constantly attempt to lecture folks about what is 'best for them'.
_dhan_
Recently there's been talk (again) about implementing a helmet law here in Austin. There are other people who've thought the topic through in much greater depth than I have, so I'm going to "borrow" some of their talking points for now as I educate myself on the topic (the following points have been paraphrased from rudeboy on the forum@bicycleaustin.info).
1. Helmet laws are a diversion from the bicycle safety issues that are truly important, like enforcement (both cars and cyclists), and bicycle facility design.
2. Helmet laws drive an unresolvable wedge issue firmly into the heart of the cycling community. (see this venom spewed in this thread as an example)
3. Helmet laws are viewed by people who know next to nothing about cycling as an easy solution and then they think they've done something useful to improve safety when, in fact, they have not. BECAUSE most bike riders are already wearing helmets voluntariarly. (kids tend to do what their parents do. if their parents wear helmets, they are likely to wear helmets)
4. Helmet laws discourage bike riding when we should be encouraging bike use. What is the proposed punishement for not wearing a helmet to school? Loss of cycling priviledges? Harrasment by authorities? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=8870773&dopt=Citation The results from this study show that "a helmet law, whose most notable effect was to reduce cycling, may have generated a net loss of health benefits to the nation." I suggest reading the whole abstract. There are a bunch of relevant points made.
5. If they're so great, why not require helmets in the home, for pedestrians, and in automobiles too? Studies have shown that the risk of head injuries in car accidents and bicycle accidents is equivalent. This is also addressed in the abstract above (man... I really want to get the full paper to read...).
Ok, so studies have shown that if you are in a crash and hit your head, then helmets provide some protection. If you get hit by a car, you're going to be pretty messed up anyways, so more importantly is how should be prevent crashes? The issue isn't whether kids who bike should or should not wear helmets. The problem with helmet laws is that they present a barrier to entry into the wonderful world of cycling. The issue is how to encourage kids to bike while increasing safety at the same time. +1 kid cycling = -1 car picking up a kid. I'm all for programs that would help provide helmets to kids who want them.
oh, and I think the seatbelt remarks are a red herring. whether or not seatbelts work, it is questionable whether the government should be the one mandating it. Enforcing traffic laws is a matter of public safety. Seatbelts (and similarly helmets) are a matter of personal safety. In practice, the seatbelt laws are more of a public service announcement/education type of thing. I don't know how it works up in Iowa, but I'm pretty sure you can't be pulled over for failure to wear a seatbelt. If you do get pulled over for something else, it's an extra charge they can tack onto the citation.
1. Helmet laws are a diversion from the bicycle safety issues that are truly important, like enforcement (both cars and cyclists), and bicycle facility design.
2. Helmet laws drive an unresolvable wedge issue firmly into the heart of the cycling community. (see this venom spewed in this thread as an example)
3. Helmet laws are viewed by people who know next to nothing about cycling as an easy solution and then they think they've done something useful to improve safety when, in fact, they have not. BECAUSE most bike riders are already wearing helmets voluntariarly. (kids tend to do what their parents do. if their parents wear helmets, they are likely to wear helmets)
4. Helmet laws discourage bike riding when we should be encouraging bike use. What is the proposed punishement for not wearing a helmet to school? Loss of cycling priviledges? Harrasment by authorities? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=8870773&dopt=Citation The results from this study show that "a helmet law, whose most notable effect was to reduce cycling, may have generated a net loss of health benefits to the nation." I suggest reading the whole abstract. There are a bunch of relevant points made.
5. If they're so great, why not require helmets in the home, for pedestrians, and in automobiles too? Studies have shown that the risk of head injuries in car accidents and bicycle accidents is equivalent. This is also addressed in the abstract above (man... I really want to get the full paper to read...).
Ok, so studies have shown that if you are in a crash and hit your head, then helmets provide some protection. If you get hit by a car, you're going to be pretty messed up anyways, so more importantly is how should be prevent crashes? The issue isn't whether kids who bike should or should not wear helmets. The problem with helmet laws is that they present a barrier to entry into the wonderful world of cycling. The issue is how to encourage kids to bike while increasing safety at the same time. +1 kid cycling = -1 car picking up a kid. I'm all for programs that would help provide helmets to kids who want them.
oh, and I think the seatbelt remarks are a red herring. whether or not seatbelts work, it is questionable whether the government should be the one mandating it. Enforcing traffic laws is a matter of public safety. Seatbelts (and similarly helmets) are a matter of personal safety. In practice, the seatbelt laws are more of a public service announcement/education type of thing. I don't know how it works up in Iowa, but I'm pretty sure you can't be pulled over for failure to wear a seatbelt. If you do get pulled over for something else, it's an extra charge they can tack onto the citation.
Daily Commute
. . .You are assuming it won't work, when there are no facts from this community to back it up. You know what the word assume stands for don't you? If not ask & I'll fill you in.
I am not assuming anything. I just simply don't know if it will work or not, but I am not going into this with any kind of assumptions. I hope it works. . . .
You're the one trying to put a government restriction on how other parents parent their kids, so I think you're the one who should come up with facts to support your position. And yes, it hasn't been tried at your kid's school, but why would you think the results at your kid's school would be different than any other school? My position on the helmet law debate could change if someone could show that helmet laws made kids safer. But it sounds like you are just so offended that some parents let their kids enjoy cycling without a helmet that you are going to push for this rule without any evidence that it would be helpful.
Do you people honestly think because of your strong opposition to this I am not going to move forward with this idea? Think again.
I know the comment you were responded to was a little too pointed, but he has a point. You don't have any evidence that helmet laws work anywhere.
What is really ironic about this is you folks post here in the A&S forum. Isn't that a bit hippocritical?
What's ironic is that someone comes to A&S with a "safety" plan that doesn't actually improve safety, and they think it's somehow ironic that people point out that the "safety" plan might not actually make cycling safer.
As far as I can tell, helmet laws have two main effects: 1) They make the people who back them feel better about themselves. 2) They decrease cycling. If you have evidence to the contrary, by all means share it.
I was a fence sitter on helmet issues. But time and time again, helmet advocates make empty claims that helmets make cycling safer without any evidence to back up those assertions. It makes intuitive sense that helmets would make cycling safer, and helmets clearly make cyclists feel safer, but I have yet to see evidence that shows that helmets decrease brain injuries. If you have any such evidence, here's you chance to change someone's mind.
I am not assuming anything. I just simply don't know if it will work or not, but I am not going into this with any kind of assumptions. I hope it works. . . .
You're the one trying to put a government restriction on how other parents parent their kids, so I think you're the one who should come up with facts to support your position. And yes, it hasn't been tried at your kid's school, but why would you think the results at your kid's school would be different than any other school? My position on the helmet law debate could change if someone could show that helmet laws made kids safer. But it sounds like you are just so offended that some parents let their kids enjoy cycling without a helmet that you are going to push for this rule without any evidence that it would be helpful.
Do you people honestly think because of your strong opposition to this I am not going to move forward with this idea? Think again.
I know the comment you were responded to was a little too pointed, but he has a point. You don't have any evidence that helmet laws work anywhere.
What is really ironic about this is you folks post here in the A&S forum. Isn't that a bit hippocritical?
What's ironic is that someone comes to A&S with a "safety" plan that doesn't actually improve safety, and they think it's somehow ironic that people point out that the "safety" plan might not actually make cycling safer.
As far as I can tell, helmet laws have two main effects: 1) They make the people who back them feel better about themselves. 2) They decrease cycling. If you have evidence to the contrary, by all means share it.
I was a fence sitter on helmet issues. But time and time again, helmet advocates make empty claims that helmets make cycling safer without any evidence to back up those assertions. It makes intuitive sense that helmets would make cycling safer, and helmets clearly make cyclists feel safer, but I have yet to see evidence that shows that helmets decrease brain injuries. If you have any such evidence, here's you chance to change someone's mind.
chipcom
For the record I am walking proof that seat belts work, my life was saved by one.
So much for thinning the herd. I'm thinking we should make it illegal for all busy-bodies to use safety equipment and thin the herd where it will do the most good for the rest of us.
So much for thinning the herd. I'm thinking we should make it illegal for all busy-bodies to use safety equipment and thin the herd where it will do the most good for the rest of us.
ignominious
N_C
Given the recent evidence on the head injuries sustained by pedestrians and the fact that the risk per person per mile travelled is higher then for a cyclist, will you also be pushing for the school board to mandate walking helmets for school children as well? Or do you not care if this herd gets thinned.
Actually, if you think about it logically, not only should cycling helmets be mandatory, but so should cycling to school. And for their own protection, the kids would have to keep their helmets on all of the time.
Given the recent evidence on the head injuries sustained by pedestrians and the fact that the risk per person per mile travelled is higher then for a cyclist, will you also be pushing for the school board to mandate walking helmets for school children as well? Or do you not care if this herd gets thinned.
Actually, if you think about it logically, not only should cycling helmets be mandatory, but so should cycling to school. And for their own protection, the kids would have to keep their helmets on all of the time.
SirMike1983
I think the State Governments and the School Boards should concentrate their time and resources on educational policy and improving the schools' quality, rather than on making and enforcing a bicycle helmet law. Are you going to enforce this law using tax payers' money for law enforcement time and effort? The existing tax money should go to improving the schools, and I don't think this law would justify an increase in taxation of any sort. The big problems need be solved before the small ones.
markw
You know, for the most part the kids around my neighborhood wear helmets. My daughter has a nice scar on her forehead that she got when she was a kid for not having a helmet on and crashing. Not that she didn't have a helmet, but she hopped on her bike and rode it because she couldn't find it. Dad wasn't around to yell at her, and mom was busy. she was 4 or 5 at the time and was just riding in front of the house. She's probably the best of my 3 kids at wearing a helmet now, go figure. :) We have always had a standing rule, loose your helmet, loose your ride. Yes, there's a state law in CA that mandates helmets on 14 and younger, but there's only selective enforcement. The kids that are out riding on stuff with their bmx bike wear the helmets, as that's one less thing they can get a ticket for when they get caught. :)
If you want to get your message out about safety and helmets, it is better to just wear a helmet, and have your kids wear a helmet. If you push for new rules/laws your just going to piss people off. I ride bikes and motorcycles, I always wear a helmet. I've broken 2 helmets, one on a motorcycle and one on a bicycle, and where I live has a mandatory helmet law. (California). As a private citizen, doing a safety fair, or something like that at the schools would/could go quite a ways towards promoting helmet usage. We've got a helmet in our classroom that we teach the MSF course out of which has a nice dent and spidered crackes from the center of the top out. I was following the guy when the accident occured. He lived, and when students look at that helmet, they're like wow, that must've been some impact.
If you want to get your message out about safety and helmets, it is better to just wear a helmet, and have your kids wear a helmet. If you push for new rules/laws your just going to piss people off. I ride bikes and motorcycles, I always wear a helmet. I've broken 2 helmets, one on a motorcycle and one on a bicycle, and where I live has a mandatory helmet law. (California). As a private citizen, doing a safety fair, or something like that at the schools would/could go quite a ways towards promoting helmet usage. We've got a helmet in our classroom that we teach the MSF course out of which has a nice dent and spidered crackes from the center of the top out. I was following the guy when the accident occured. He lived, and when students look at that helmet, they're like wow, that must've been some impact.
ignominious
Don't forget to ask them about the walking hemets. Remember, they would save more lives than cycling helmets.
I-Like-To-Bike
Don't forget to ask them about the walking hemets. Remember, they would save more lives than cycling helmets.
Don't ask; tell them! All responsible adults assure that children wear helmets at all times; Safety First!:rolleyes:
Don't ask; tell them! All responsible adults assure that children wear helmets at all times; Safety First!:rolleyes:
chipcom
I participate in safety fairs & bicycle rodeos & help with bicycle safety education. But it still doesn't seem to be enough. No matter what I do or help do the message still does not seem to get through. It is one thing to teach kids the skills to ride safely & advise them to wear a helmet & even give them a free one of they don't have one.
I think if kids & parents know there are enforced laws, rules & or regulations in place to help back up what they have been tauigh about bicycle safety & that they can be "punished" for violations for such it might help motivate them to apply what they learned in bike safety education, etc. Granted it would not be nor should not be the ONLY motivating factor, but it might help.
Oh, that's lovely. You can't get them to obey your wishes, so let's pass some laws to MAKE them comply. Genius, herr Adolph, sheer genius.
I think if kids & parents know there are enforced laws, rules & or regulations in place to help back up what they have been tauigh about bicycle safety & that they can be "punished" for violations for such it might help motivate them to apply what they learned in bike safety education, etc. Granted it would not be nor should not be the ONLY motivating factor, but it might help.
Oh, that's lovely. You can't get them to obey your wishes, so let's pass some laws to MAKE them comply. Genius, herr Adolph, sheer genius.
supcom
This whole issue is little more than an attempt by an individual to create a local law without going through the normal process. If the OP wants kids to be required to wear helmets, then he should work with his local city council or petition the state government to enact a proper law to that effect that would cover the general case of kids riding bikes, not just kids riding bikes to/from school.
Instead, the OP is trying to circumvent the process by simply trying to convince the school board to make a rule to a similar effect, presumably because he thinks it will be easier to get his way than by going through the normal lawmaking process.
Whether or not this idea has merit, who is going to enforce it? Teachers and administrators at schools already have their hands full when kids are coming and going from school just trying to maintain order, control traffic, and make sure kids get on the right busses. The last thing these folks are going to want to do is make sure every kid has his helmet fastened correctly just because some childless busybody went to the school board to tell everyone how to take care of kids.
Instead, the OP is trying to circumvent the process by simply trying to convince the school board to make a rule to a similar effect, presumably because he thinks it will be easier to get his way than by going through the normal lawmaking process.
Whether or not this idea has merit, who is going to enforce it? Teachers and administrators at schools already have their hands full when kids are coming and going from school just trying to maintain order, control traffic, and make sure kids get on the right busses. The last thing these folks are going to want to do is make sure every kid has his helmet fastened correctly just because some childless busybody went to the school board to tell everyone how to take care of kids.
chipcom
Instead, the OP is trying to circumvent the process by simply trying to convince the school board to make a rule to a similar effect, presumably because he thinks it will be easier to get his way than by going through the normal lawmaking process.
Just like in the military or in the workplace, when you have a person you want to get rid of, yet they have not broken any rules or laws, you take 'administrative action', which is just another word for circumventing due process. It's chickensh_t and the method of choice of elitest busy-body do-gooders when they can't make the rest of us mere mortals see the light of their divine wisdom.
Just like in the military or in the workplace, when you have a person you want to get rid of, yet they have not broken any rules or laws, you take 'administrative action', which is just another word for circumventing due process. It's chickensh_t and the method of choice of elitest busy-body do-gooders when they can't make the rest of us mere mortals see the light of their divine wisdom.
Previous - Top - Next
Copyright 1999 - 2007 BikeForums.Net - All rights reserved.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.