Advocacy & Safety - Do You Favor Mandatory-Helmet Laws?

Let's try to keep this clean. I'm running this thread as a poll, and, considering the question, I believe most people can simply cast a vote, maybe saying a few words, here. Please, I might be asking for the moon, but, let's try to refrain from causing this thread to be locked...

I have plenty of reasons to wear a helmet, but don't think there needs to be a law.
Cue the pro/anti helmet zealots in 3...2...1.

Will an adult not wearing a helmet jeapordize others' safety in an accident?

Will an adult not wearing a helmet jeapordize others' safety in an accident?

No, but it will make a journalist have to think about the last line in their article about the accident

With the decline in cycling MHLs bring, no.

I voted NO.

I'm a Libertarian. No likey guberment regulations.

Good luck with this! You've hit the most sensitive nerve in cycling, motorized and non-motorized. As much as I'd like to say that it is a matter of individual choice, it's not. The increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets affects everybody who pays insurance premiums, whether auto or property owner's. It is not a question of anybody's choice of personal safety. That is my stance, I will make no other contribution to this thread.

Some states (mine, for one) mandate helmets for kids; I'm OK with that. But whether I choose to wear a helmet or not (I do), it's none of the gov't's f'n biz!

There is no option for those against personal helmet use, or helmet use as a personal choice. I am all for people wearing helmets if they want, but I don't want to. I am not pro helmet. And I am not anti helmet.

Good luck with this! You've hit the most sensitive nerve in cycling, motorized and non-motorized. As much as I'd like to say that it is a matter of individual choice, it's not. The increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets affects everybody who pays insurance premiums, whether auto or property owner's. It is not a question of anybody's choice of personal safety. That is my stance, I will make no other contribution to this thread.

This is possibly the most biased, uniformed statement I've ever witnessed. There's absolutely NO proof for the burden to society argument. Furthermore, bicycle helmets are ill-conceived devices for their intended purpose. It's undeniable that a true SAFETY helmet, such as a motorcycle helmet, offers useful protection. A bicycle helmet on the other hand is nothing more than a styrofoam fashion accessory.

Your poll sucks.

I don't 'favor helmets', nor am I 'against helmets'

I could care less about whether others wear helmets... it doesn't affect me in the slightest. On the other hand, I'm quite against mandatory helmet laws, and I don't wear one myself.

A helmet is just about the LEAST important thing I can do for my safety while I'm riding my bike...

Good luck with this! You've hit the most sensitive nerve in cycling, motorized and non-motorized. As much as I'd like to say that it is a matter of individual choice, it's not. The increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets affects everybody who pays insurance premiums, whether auto or property owner's. It is not a question of anybody's choice of personal safety. That is my stance, I will make no other contribution to this thread.

What about those that sit on their ass in front of their TV and get fat... diabetes, heart disease, etc. That doesn't affect insurance rates?

What a stupid argument. Pisses me the hell off every time I hear it. Last time I heard that argument, it was from a coworker who was in the process of smoking a cigarette. Gimme a friggin' break. :crash:

Good luck with this! You've hit the most sensitive nerve in cycling, motorized and non-motorized. As much as I'd like to say that it is a matter of individual choice, it's not. The increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets affects everybody who pays insurance premiums, whether auto or property owner's. It is not a question of anybody's choice of personal safety. That is my stance, I will make no other contribution to this thread.

I am calling this one out. I would like to see some stats that show an increase in insurance rates because of head injuries where the person is not dead and now requires constant care, thus raising insurance rates. I am not talking about stats of head injuries in general, I would like to see stats just showing head injuries because the person did not wear a bike helmet while riding and was in an collision or accident of some sort. Please before anyone makes a blanket statement like this show some stats to back it up.

For the record I wear a helmet. Why? Because I have had accidents and hit my head and the helmet protected me from serious injury. That is all the proof I need to convince me a helmet is a good idea. does it bother that others do not wear one? No, not at all.

I have also had accidents where I did not hit my head at all. In fact I have had more accidents where I did not hit my head then ones where I have, yet I still wear a helmet.

I also think some people are confusing safe riding skills with helmet use. A helmet will not make you a safer rider or improve your skills. It is a piece of protective equipment, nothing more, nothing less. Only your skills as a cyclist will protect you from the known kinds of danger and hazards.

I wonder if there are stats that show bicycle collisions/accidents and gives a break down of the types of injuries. Say head injuries vs. non-head injuries. Anyone know of any such stats? Also if there are any how about a step further with stats that show with the head injuries, were there fatalities or what were the extent of the injuries? Serious enough to require constant care or did the person make a full recovery?

Good luck with this! You've hit the most sensitive nerve in cycling, motorized and non-motorized. As much as I'd like to say that it is a matter of individual choice, it's not. The increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets affects everybody who pays insurance premiums, whether auto or property owner's. It is not a question of anybody's choice of personal safety. That is my stance, I will make no other contribution to this thread.

I think yours is the first "anxious" post in this thread... I do hope things can stay civilized, though; I see no reason for which they can't — this is something to discuss, as is anything else.

I come down on the libertarian side of things, myself, here. One can always make extrapolations of how "personal decision" can affect others in society; to a point, it's reasonable to do so (e.g., your right to drink alcohol, then get behind the wheel of a car, immediately jeopardizes the safety of others, so you forfeit the choice to have several drinks then go cruising), and, to another, it isn't (e.g., your wearing certain clothing might serve to incite a riot [a swastika on your t-shirt, I suppose], in which people can be injured, but your action doesn't pose an imminent and direct danger to anyone, so you have the right to dress your body as you wish).

I feel, as well — though no one's yet made the point — it is fallacious to claim helmets offer a heightened sense of security, which encourages people to bike more carelessly, which places them in situations in which they are at increased risk for suffering serious injury. By this logic, we should make circumstances as terrifying and bleak as possible — not so much so people no longer get on bicycles, but enough so they are in constant tears as they pedal.

Last, whenever it comes to children, I believe we end up having to debate outside the box of "personal freedom," which isn't what I hope to get into, here. Thus, in my poll question, I've specified people respond to their feelings concerning mandatory-helmet laws for adults. Of course, if, in the thread, people wish to discuss laws concerning juveniles, so be it, but, again, I think that's its own can of worms.

Your poll sucks.

I don't 'favor helmets', nor am I 'against helmets'

I could care less about whether others wear helmets... it doesn't affect me in the slightest. On the other hand, I'm quite against mandatory helmet laws, and I don't wear one myself.

A helmet is just about the LEAST important thing I can do for my safety while I'm riding my bike...

How, then, does my "poll suck"? It asks whether or not you favor laws that require adults to wear helmets, and provides the options to say you you do or you don't, where, in the latter, you can specify whether you have sentiment against helmets. Would you have preferred just "Yes" and "No"? Sorry, but I think a poll should have enough flexibility not to feel limiting, but shouldn't have participants bewildered by myriad mildly-different options, either. You can elaborate on your thoughts in the thread.

I voted no also.. But, I favor helmets.. Never ride without one should the ride be more than just about town... Never the less, glad my bike club has a mandatory helmet rule.. I really don't want to see my cycling buds suffer a brain concussion while I am on watch.

I live in a country where helmets are mandatory. I'm fine with that.

I think government regulations can do a lot of good. I used to support helmet laws.
Now I live in a country where such a thing wouldn't be easily tolerated.
I'm now of the opinion that an enforced helmet law would begin to erode Dutch bike culture. This would be a bad thing.
So, no. Not here, anyways.

That's a stupid poll. I voted "No: I'm against the use of helmets." but I don't actually agree with that answer - I'm indifferent towards wearing or not wearing helmets.

I voted NO.

I'm a Libertarian. No likey guberment regulations.

Yeah. Got the clue on that from your videos. :twitchy:

No. Wearing a helmet should be a decision left up to the individual.

I feel, as well — though no one's yet made the point — it is fallacious to claim helmets offer a heightened sense of security, which encourages people to bike more carelessly, which places them in situations in which they are at increased risk for suffering serious injury.

Proven fact: People tend to be more careful when their safety net is taken away.

Proven fact: People tend to be more careful when their safety net is taken away.

I :love: proven facts.

I live in a country where helmets are mandatory. I'm fine with that.

Actually I voted no. But, not sure I meant it.. I tend to respect the wishes of those who don't want to wear helmets.. But, deep down do I.?..
I once recall the comments of some police testifying about the needs for a motorcycle helmet law.. Their argument.. I am the one who has to pick up body parts on the road. And to have one's head intact makes clean up easier.. I can see his point. !.
While I have some Libertarian values, I'd be squeamish to ride with cycle friends on a regular basis if they consistently did not wear a helmet. It might be my job to move their broken body parts off of the road.. Besides, I think helmets are cool.

What a freaking rigged poll. A simple 'NO' choice would have been nice.

Actually I voted no. But, not sure I meant it.. I tend to respect the wishes of those who don't want to wear helmets.. But, deep down do I.?..
I once recall the comments of some police testifying about the needs for a motorcycle helmet law.. Their argument.. I am the one who has to pick up body parts on the road. And to have one's head intact makes clean up easier.. I can see his point. !.
While I have some Libertarian values, I'd be squeamish to ride with cycle friends on a regular basis if they consistently did not wear a helmet. It might be my job to move their broken body parts off of the road.. Besides, I think helmets are cool.

Motorcycles are a hell of a lot faster and more dangerous (to both the rider and others) than bicycles.

I had a freak fall once.. Hit my head on a concrete curb. A direct hit right on my left temple.. It ached a bit, sans helmet- I bet it might have taken me to ER.. We all tend to make our own decisions based on our own experiences..

Good luck with this! You've hit the most sensitive nerve in cycling, motorized and non-motorized. As much as I'd like to say that it is a matter of individual choice, it's not. The increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets affects everybody who pays insurance premiums, whether auto or property owner's. It is not a question of anybody's choice of personal safety. That is my stance, I will make no other contribution to this thread.

What a bunch of utter BS. You should have included a warning with your response:

WARNING, HORSEPUCKY ZONE, GOT HIP BOOTS?

Btw. while I sure most/all people in this thread and in general in these forums talking about the pros and cons of wearing helmets while cycling are well-meaning, I am convinced that mandatory helmet laws often have the intent of getting cyclists off the road and of punishing cyclists for bothering car-drivers.

What a freaking rigged poll. A simple 'NO' choice would have been nice.
That's what I was thinking.

Good luck with this! You've hit the most sensitive nerve in cycling, motorized and non-motorized. As much as I'd like to say that it is a matter of individual choice, it's not. The increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets affects everybody who pays insurance premiums, whether auto or property owner's. It is not a question of anybody's choice of personal safety. That is my stance, I will make no other contribution to this thread.

Runners/Joggers who are hit by autos die at higher ratios than do cyclists. I don't have the stats at my findertips but would you also suggest the weekend joggers wear helmets too? that our collective health care burden be lowered? And where does this kind of thinking stop? If you really want to get behind some good "save the children" legislation, why not require four-point race car type belts in cars along with full-face racing helmets too. Now that would make one hell of a dent in car accident health care expenses.Ya, I I'm all for that!

The only mandatory use law I'm in favor of involves the mandatory use of gags and sadistic torture devices on zealots who presume to tell other people how to live their own lives.

I really don't give a rip about laws either way. I wear a helmet, and laws have 0 to do with my decision.

Good luck with this! You've hit the most sensitive nerve in cycling, motorized and non-motorized. As much as I'd like to say that it is a matter of individual choice, it's not. The increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets affects everybody who pays insurance premiums, whether auto or property owner's. It is not a question of anybody's choice of personal safety. That is my stance, I will make no other contribution to this thread.

Bull****.

If you wanted to fix the economic impact of such ill advised activity, you would do so by supporting legislation that requires insurers to write exceptions and modifications into the health insurance policies, and by legally requiring insurers to offer policies priced both with and without the restrictions, with both option being ACTUARIALLY PRICED (as opposed to punitatively pricing).

But that's not what you REALLY want. What you really want is to be able to tell other people what risks YOU find to acceptable in THEIR lives. And to that I say.... bleep bleep bleep yourself you bleep bleep bleep bleep because I don't intend to live MY live in the cocoon of YOUR choice.

..... As much as I'd like to say that it is a matter of individual choice, it's not. The increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets affects everybody who pays insurance premiums, whether auto or property owner's. .......

True, but those extra costs from non-helmet wearers could be passed in the form of higher premiums or lower payouts (or both) to folks who don't have a helmet on in an accident. Its no different than giving a discount on homeowners for those who install smoke detectors, motion detectors, etc.

I would never support a 'mandatory law' on anything which is as individualized as the helmet issue.

roughstuff

I voted "no". I think it should be left up to the individual.

This is the price to pay for public health services; if the community foots the bill they should have a say in preventing unnecessary accidents.

..... As much as I'd like to say that it is a matter of individual choice, it's not. The increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets affects everybody who pays insurance premiums, whether auto or property owner's. .......

True, but those extra costs from non-helmet wearers

What makes you think there is any truth in Irwin's specious claim about the extra costs of bicyclists' "increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets"?

I voted no, but won't ride without one.

I feel mandatory helmet laws like seat belt laws weaken the gene pool.

I wonder how those of you who feel this passionate at being against helmet laws feel about seat belt laws. Do you feel the same? Regardless of how you feel about seat belt laws and especially those of you who do not wear helemts for the reasons mentioned, do you wear one when in a car? Why? Because of the law and the fine you'd receive, or because they do save lives and protect you if in a collision, roll over, etc?

Before you ask what I do, I'll tell you. I have always worn one, long before it was law so it is not because of the law. I am old enough to remember when it was made a mandatory law in my state. I remember all the *****ing and moaning people did, some of them sounded like a lot of you in regards to helmet laws. They went off on a tangent that it is a restriction on their freedoms, freedom of choice, etc, despite proven fact that they do save lives.

To this day I know of people who will not wear a seat belt because of the law. They have received multiple citations because of this. Some of these people I have had to tell you either wear one in my car or you do not ride with me. Needless to say some of them got out of my car and did not ride with me, no skin off my nose, my car, my rules.

So I ask again, how do you people feel about seat belt laws? Do you wear one when in a car? Why?

What makes you think there is any truth in Irwin's specious claim about the extra costs of bicyclists' "increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets"?

There might not be any truth to it. That is the subject of other forums. To me it is plain common sense, which is probably why anti-helmet zealots (much like anticar zealots and criticak mazzholes) have so much trouble accepting it.

In any case, If there is no differential, then the premiums charged to helmet wearers and non wearers would be the same. Irwin's claim may be specious; as a statistician, I have alot of respect for the statistical prowess of the insurance industry. They have every incentive to navigate those tough social science waters that ya are referring to.

roughstuff

In any case, If there is no differential, then the premiums charged to helmet wearers and non wearers would be the same.

As indeed they are.

......, do you wear one when in a car? Why? Because of the law and the fine you'd receive, or because they do save lives and protect you if in a collision, roll over, etc?

....

Both. That is, they save lives and because its the law. There may be laws i disagree with and therefore decide to flout (such as against certain types of hanky panky.....) but seat belt wearing is not one of them.

I wear my helmet in my car, too! :)

roughstuff

As indeed they are.

Tempted to say then, point, set, match. (is that the order? I forget how tennis works). My health insurance policy is a miasma and incomprehensible, but i saw nothing in there about a 'helmet discount' or 'non-helmet premium. I'll be quiet before I give 'em any ideas! :)

roughstuff

Good luck with this! You've hit the most sensitive nerve in cycling, motorized and non-motorized. As much as I'd like to say that it is a matter of individual choice, it's not. The increased injury, morbidity and mortality rates which result from not wearing helmets affects everybody who pays insurance premiums, whether auto or property owner's. It is not a question of anybody's choice of personal safety. That is my stance, I will make no other contribution to this thread.

I dislike that line of thinking. I've heard it many times, but never hear a good definition of where to stop. Realistically my lawn mower affects your air quality. Should it be illegal? My paint choice affects my neighbors home values (even on the inside): Should it be illegal? Selling stock drops the value of other owners of that stock. Should that be illegal?

What about health insurance. Candy, smoking, sedentary behavior, not enough sex; should these things be regulated because they raise rates?

It's easy to see regulating direct damage to others, but indirect damage caused through a market mechanism? I just don't agree.

Either way, you could simply have an option on your hypothetical bicycle insurance about whether you wear a helmet or not. You'd pay more if you don't (like owning a sports car) and that should make up for your difference in behavior.

I wonder how those of you who feel this passionate at being against helmet laws feel about seat belt laws. Do you feel the same? Regardless of how you feel about seat belt laws and especially those of you who do not wear helemts for the reasons mentioned, do you wear one when in a car? Why? Because of the law and the fine you'd receive, or because they do save lives and protect you if in a collision, roll over, etc?

Before you ask what I do, I'll tell you. I have always worn one, long before it was law so it is not because of the law. I am old enough to remember when it was made a mandatory law in my state. I remember all the *****ing and moaning people did, some of them sounded like a lot of you in regards to helmet laws. They went off on a tangent that it is a restriction on their freedoms, freedom of choice, etc, despite proven fact that they do save lives.

To this day I know of people who will not wear a seat belt because of the law. They have received multiple citations because of this. Some of these people I have had to tell you either wear one in my car or you do not ride with me. Needless to say some of them got out of my car and did not ride with me, no skin off my nose, my car, my rules.

So I ask again, how do you people feel about seat belt laws? Do you wear one when in a car? Why?

I'm for laws requiring seat belt installation. I'm against laws requiring you to wear them. I used to be on the other side of that fence, but I've come to the conclusion that the law isn't what was needed but just the marketing campaign that came with the law.

The increased health care expense issue is something no helmet-wearer actually believes or thinks about. I really want to know why you care about a strangers health? A family member I can understand, advocate they wear helmets, but a stranger's? I don't care about your health and welfare and don't want to influence it in any way, leave mine alone too. (Not to be offensive - just the truth.)

riding a bike is not so inherently dangerous as to require special armor or a helmet. the most important thing you can do for your own safety is ride well, ride carefully, and pay attention to what's around you. Helmets should be left up to the individual rider's choice.

I'm for laws requiring seat belt installation. I'm against laws requiring you to wear them. I used to be on the other side of that fence, but I've come to the conclusion that the law isn't what was needed but just the marketing campaign that came with the law.

Ok. But do you wear one? Why?

Let's look at this another way. What about parents who ride bike with their kids, the parents do not have a helmet on, but make the kids wear one? How many of you that are parents of young kids do this? Why?

If you do not wear a helmet, but make your kids do so, is that not teaching you child the wrong thing? Are you not being a hyppocrite? Is this how parents want to appear in the eyes of their kids? Or is your justification or your philosophy of this the "do as say, not as I do" attitude?

Or do those of you who are parents do this because there is a law in your community, for those that have such laws, requiring youngsters to wear a helmet up to a certain age? And with out the law you would not have your kids wear a helmet?

Before you say anything I am not a parent and am not offering advice on parenting or stating how you raise your child is right or wrong. I am asking questions.