Mandatory helmet laws: Are they designed to limit transportation bicycling?
#1
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
Mandatory helmet laws: Are they designed to limit transportation bicycling?
I was surprised--shocked really--to discover on another thread that some members of this forum actually support mandatory helmet laws. IMO. these laws do nothing to protect bicyclists, but they do much to discourage cycling. They are almost always passed by pro-car, anti-bike politicians who want to end bike facilities, bike share programs, or bikes being used for transportation generally.
I hope we can have an interesting discussion about this topic. A couple guidelines for this thread:
I hope we can have an interesting discussion about this topic. A couple guidelines for this thread:
- Remember, this thread is about mandatory helmet laws and their effect on everyday cycling and bicycle programs.
- Please do not post about whether or not helmets "work". The forum has a sticky thread about this topic. It is discouraged to discuss the topic of helmet effectiveness outside of that sticky thread, as I understand it.
- Above all, be respectful toward others. It's OK to attack an opinion, but not OK to attack the person who has the opinion. Also, try to be a little open-minded if you can. This is a "hot" topic in bicycling circles--in more than one way. We can all stand to learn a little more about it.
__________________
"Think Outside the Cage"
Last edited by Roody; 06-10-15 at 06:50 AM.
#2
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
I was surprised--shocked really--to discover on another thread that some members of this forum actually support mandatory helmet laws. IMO. these laws do nothing to protect bicyclists, but they do much to discourage cycling. They are almost always passed by pro-car, anti-bike politicians who want to end bike facilities, bike share programs, or bikes being used for transportation generally.
In addition, the BF forum has more than it's share of safety nannys; read A&S or commuting for more than a stomach full of braying and nagging on allegedly required safety clothing/equipment needed to ride down the street without meeting disaster.
Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 06-10-15 at 09:03 AM.
#3
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
Why are you surprised that some cyclists support mandatory helmet laws? Try and find a bike club or group of organized cycling "enthusiasts" that doesn't insist on mandatory helmet wear to participate in any of their cycling activities. Helps to weed out the unworthy cyclists. Not much different in intent from anti-bike people who consider all cyclists as unworthy and wish to exclude them from their activities.
In addition, the BF forum has more than it's share of safety nannys; read A&S or commuting for more than a stomach full of braying and nagging on allegedly required safety clothing/equipment needed to ride down the street without meeting disaster.
In addition, the BF forum has more than it's share of safety nannys; read A&S or commuting for more than a stomach full of braying and nagging on allegedly required safety clothing/equipment needed to ride down the street without meeting disaster.
__________________
"Think Outside the Cage"
#4
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
How did you determine that any so-called transportation cyclists support helmet laws? Perhaps you should define "transportation cyclists" and why/how their cycling is any more, or less dangerous than any other cyclist.
#5
Senior Member
What thread are you talking about, Roody? I don't know why anybody supports mandatory helmet laws unless, as you said, it is to make bicycling even more inconvenient and annoying than it is already. I don't have a lot of empathy anyway, and I really can't get into the head of a person who wants to control other people for their own good.
I know you are trying to make this thread focus on the reasons behind the laws and not about the effectiveness of helmets, but I still think it will probably get lumped in with the helmet thread on A and S.
I know you are trying to make this thread focus on the reasons behind the laws and not about the effectiveness of helmets, but I still think it will probably get lumped in with the helmet thread on A and S.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,789
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 125 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4730 Post(s)
Liked 3,831 Times
in
2,491 Posts
I don't take sides on helmet laws, just always wear one. Same thing with seatbelts. I started wearing them (when provided) before the laws went into effect. But I do find it funny that cyclists are as adamant about not passing helmet laws as anything I ever heard re: seatbelts. Maybe even more so.
It does seem pretty obvious to me that mandatory helmets would keep a few "outlaw" types off bikes (because looking dorky is so uncool). Like the guys I have seen using cell phones riding no-hands on brakeless fixies in the city.
Ben
It does seem pretty obvious to me that mandatory helmets would keep a few "outlaw" types off bikes (because looking dorky is so uncool). Like the guys I have seen using cell phones riding no-hands on brakeless fixies in the city.
Ben
#7
multimodal commuter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NJ, NYC, LI
Posts: 19,852
Bikes: 1940s Fothergill, 1959 Allegro Special, 1963? Claud Butler Olympic Sprint, Lambert 'Clubman', 1974 Fuji "the Ace", 1976 Holdsworth 650b conversion rando bike, 1983 Trek 720 tourer, 1984 Counterpoint Opus II, 1993 Basso Gap, 2010 Downtube 8h, and...
Mentioned: 584 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1907 Post(s)
Liked 572 Times
in
338 Posts
A mandatory helmet law just strikes me as the kind of thing laws shouldn't regulate. Whether or not to wear a helmet may be a question of personal responsibility, but it has no impact on other people.
As to the actual intent of these laws, I don't know.
As to the actual intent of these laws, I don't know.
__________________
www.rhmsaddles.com.
www.rhmsaddles.com.
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,789
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 125 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4730 Post(s)
Liked 3,831 Times
in
2,491 Posts
I guess I should move to Michigan. That doesn't describe the places I have commuted: Bay area, Boston, Ann Arbor, Portland, and Seattle. I distinctly remember crashing three times in one block on an icy morning in Ann Arbor. Wait! Isn't Ann Arbor in Michigan?
Ben
#9
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
What thread are you talking about, Roody? I don't know why anybody supports mandatory helmet laws unless, as you said, it is to make bicycling even more inconvenient and annoying than it is already. I don't have a lot of empathy anyway, and I really can't get into the head of a person who wants to control other people for their own good.
I know you are trying to make this thread focus on the reasons behind the laws and not about the effectiveness of helmets, but I still think it will probably get lumped in with the helmet thread on A and S.
I know you are trying to make this thread focus on the reasons behind the laws and not about the effectiveness of helmets, but I still think it will probably get lumped in with the helmet thread on A and S.
__________________
"Think Outside the Cage"
#10
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
Transportation cyclists are often engaging with rush hour traffic. Crossing intersections. Dealing with pedestrians, sewer grates, wet leaves, oily roads, poor light conditions, etc. "(N)ot trying to do anything dangerous"? Huh?
I guess I should move to Michigan. That doesn't describe the places I have commuted: Bay area, Boston, Ann Arbor, Portland, and Seattle. I distinctly remember crashing three times in one block on an icy morning in Ann Arbor. Wait! Isn't Ann Arbor in Michigan?
Ben
I guess I should move to Michigan. That doesn't describe the places I have commuted: Bay area, Boston, Ann Arbor, Portland, and Seattle. I distinctly remember crashing three times in one block on an icy morning in Ann Arbor. Wait! Isn't Ann Arbor in Michigan?
Ben
Are you really that scared when you ride your bike?
__________________
"Think Outside the Cage"
#11
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
I notified the mods as soon as I opened the thread, so they can do what they feel is best. We really need some new topics on this LCF subforum, and I just want to provide that. Plus, I really don't think that all cyclists who support helmt laws are aware of the implications, and some probably don't know that these laws are usually introduced not by bicycling advocates, but by motoring advocates who want to make it harder for people to ride bikes on the public streets.
#12
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Middelbury, Vermont
Posts: 1,105
Bikes: Giant Escape 1
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
2 Posts
A few thoughts:
1. One commenter made the point that virtually all bike club or bike events require helmets. Why do they do that? The commentator suggests helmet rules are a way of weeding out "unworthy" riders. I assumed that it was a way of enforcing and promoting bike safety. The club and/or event knows its image is on public display.
2. Most states have laws requiring helmets for motorcycles (which I support) and probably all have laws requiring seat belt use (which I also support). Why do they do that? I assumed that when it comes to public highways and roads, everybody's safety is everybody's responsibility.
3. It's my opinion that many cyclists would support a mandatory helmet law. To me it's a tangible symbol that I take my safety (and the safety of others) seriously.
4. A common complaint I hear from non-bikers is that people who ride bikes act as if they don't have to obey laws. They see bikers fly through stop signs, not signal turns, etc. At the same time they hear bike advocates ask that everyone share the road. To them, this sounds like hypocrisy. It sounds like people who ride bikes want special privileges. I don't want any biker earning this stigma because I have to wear it too.
So because of those reasons, I would support mandatory bike helmet laws. I want anyone who rides a bike on a public road to always ride with safety (for themselves and others) as their primary concern. That helmet is a sign of that commitment. I have no problem at all if someone doesn't want to wear a helmet while riding wooded trails or mountain biking.
1. One commenter made the point that virtually all bike club or bike events require helmets. Why do they do that? The commentator suggests helmet rules are a way of weeding out "unworthy" riders. I assumed that it was a way of enforcing and promoting bike safety. The club and/or event knows its image is on public display.
2. Most states have laws requiring helmets for motorcycles (which I support) and probably all have laws requiring seat belt use (which I also support). Why do they do that? I assumed that when it comes to public highways and roads, everybody's safety is everybody's responsibility.
3. It's my opinion that many cyclists would support a mandatory helmet law. To me it's a tangible symbol that I take my safety (and the safety of others) seriously.
4. A common complaint I hear from non-bikers is that people who ride bikes act as if they don't have to obey laws. They see bikers fly through stop signs, not signal turns, etc. At the same time they hear bike advocates ask that everyone share the road. To them, this sounds like hypocrisy. It sounds like people who ride bikes want special privileges. I don't want any biker earning this stigma because I have to wear it too.
So because of those reasons, I would support mandatory bike helmet laws. I want anyone who rides a bike on a public road to always ride with safety (for themselves and others) as their primary concern. That helmet is a sign of that commitment. I have no problem at all if someone doesn't want to wear a helmet while riding wooded trails or mountain biking.
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Middelbury, Vermont
Posts: 1,105
Bikes: Giant Escape 1
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
2 Posts
But they ARE required to wear safety belts (not bus riders). And if they ride a motorcycle, they're probably also required to wear a helmet.
#16
Sunshine
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,506
Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo
Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10873 Post(s)
Liked 7,354 Times
in
4,125 Posts
I was surprised--shocked really--to discover on another thread that some members of this forum actually support mandatory helmet laws. IMO. these laws do nothing to protect bicyclists, but they do much to discourage cycling. They are almost always passed by pro-car, anti-bike politicians who want to end bike facilities, bike share programs, or bikes being used for transportation generally.
They are almost always passed by pro-car and anti-bike politicians? What study would back that claim up?
#17
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
No study. Things like that are not "studied." They fall under current events. I have followed the issue for several years on the internet and in my own community.
__________________
"Think Outside the Cage"
#18
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
A few thoughts:
1. One commenter made the point that virtually all bike club or bike events require helmets. Why do they do that? The commentator suggests helmet rules are a way of weeding out "unworthy" riders. I assumed that it was a way of enforcing and promoting bike safety. The club and/or event knows its image is on public display.
2. Most states have laws requiring helmets for motorcycles (which I support) and probably all have laws requiring seat belt use (which I also support). Why do they do that? I assumed that when it comes to public highways and roads, everybody's safety is everybody's responsibility.
3. It's my opinion that many cyclists would support a mandatory helmet law. To me it's a tangible symbol that I take my safety (and the safety of others) seriously.
4. A common complaint I hear from non-bikers is that people who ride bikes act as if they don't have to obey laws. They see bikers fly through stop signs, not signal turns, etc. At the same time they hear bike advocates ask that everyone share the road. To them, this sounds like hypocrisy. It sounds like people who ride bikes want special privileges. I don't want any biker earning this stigma because I have to wear it too.
So because of those reasons, I would support mandatory bike helmet laws. I want anyone who rides a bike on a public road to always ride with safety (for themselves and others) as their primary concern. That helmet is a sign of that commitment. I have no problem at all if someone doesn't want to wear a helmet while riding wooded trails or mountain biking.
1. One commenter made the point that virtually all bike club or bike events require helmets. Why do they do that? The commentator suggests helmet rules are a way of weeding out "unworthy" riders. I assumed that it was a way of enforcing and promoting bike safety. The club and/or event knows its image is on public display.
2. Most states have laws requiring helmets for motorcycles (which I support) and probably all have laws requiring seat belt use (which I also support). Why do they do that? I assumed that when it comes to public highways and roads, everybody's safety is everybody's responsibility.
3. It's my opinion that many cyclists would support a mandatory helmet law. To me it's a tangible symbol that I take my safety (and the safety of others) seriously.
4. A common complaint I hear from non-bikers is that people who ride bikes act as if they don't have to obey laws. They see bikers fly through stop signs, not signal turns, etc. At the same time they hear bike advocates ask that everyone share the road. To them, this sounds like hypocrisy. It sounds like people who ride bikes want special privileges. I don't want any biker earning this stigma because I have to wear it too.
So because of those reasons, I would support mandatory bike helmet laws. I want anyone who rides a bike on a public road to always ride with safety (for themselves and others) as their primary concern. That helmet is a sign of that commitment. I have no problem at all if someone doesn't want to wear a helmet while riding wooded trails or mountain biking.
B. Helmet use might be a wise idea for individuals to consider, especially if they are prone to falling off their bike. But singling out bicycling as the only activity (along with motorcycling) that is so awfully dangerous that everybody must wear a helmet very much gives the message that it should be avoided by sane people. There are no figures to back up claims that bicycling is more dangerous than being a car passenger or a pedestrian.
__________________
"Think Outside the Cage"
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Chicago Western 'burbs
Posts: 1,065
Bikes: 1993 NOS Mt Shasta Tempest, Motobecane Fantom Cross CX, Dahon Speed D7, Dahon Vector P8, Bullitt Superfly
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
So these "outlaw" types would stop riding altogether because they are so law-abiding? Just because a law is passed doesn't mean anything. A helmet law would be so poorly enforced that it's not credible it would change much behavior.
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Middelbury, Vermont
Posts: 1,105
Bikes: Giant Escape 1
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
2 Posts
You said in your original post:
But then you responded to my comment by changing the subject to whether or not helmets "work."
I understand your position. I also understand that your position is widely held in Europe. I can be very sympathetic to it. But I think the biking culture here is different and a mandatory helmet law would improve the cycling culture. I think non-cyclists respect cyclists with helmets more than cyclists without helmets. I don't have any data at all to support this belief, it's just based on how I think others perceive cyclists. I could be wrong but I believe I'm right. And I think you believe I'm right too, because you "blame" helmets on "anti-bike" politicians. Maybe that's true, but if a helmet law will get me better bike lanes, I'll sign the petition now.
- Remember, this thread is about mandatory helmet laws and their effect on everyday cycling and bicycle programs.
- Please do not post about whether or not helmets "work".
But then you responded to my comment by changing the subject to whether or not helmets "work."
I understand your position. I also understand that your position is widely held in Europe. I can be very sympathetic to it. But I think the biking culture here is different and a mandatory helmet law would improve the cycling culture. I think non-cyclists respect cyclists with helmets more than cyclists without helmets. I don't have any data at all to support this belief, it's just based on how I think others perceive cyclists. I could be wrong but I believe I'm right. And I think you believe I'm right too, because you "blame" helmets on "anti-bike" politicians. Maybe that's true, but if a helmet law will get me better bike lanes, I'll sign the petition now.
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Middle Earth (aka IA)
Posts: 20,505
Bikes: A bunch of old bikes and a few new ones
Mentioned: 178 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5876 Post(s)
Liked 3,445 Times
in
2,066 Posts
snip . . . Try and find a bike club or group of organized cycling "enthusiasts" that doesn't insist on mandatory helmet wear to participate in any of their cycling activities. Helps to weed out the unworthy cyclists. Not much different in intent from anti-bike people who consider all cyclists as unworthy and wish to exclude them from their activities.
. . . snip .
. . . snip .
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seville, Spain
Posts: 4,403
Bikes: Brompton M6R, mountain bikes, Circe Omnis+ tandem
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
The same politicians who back mandatory helmet laws here in Spain recently floated a new plan (which they've now given up on, fortunately) that would have required all cyclists to license and insure their bikes and wear reflective vests. They claim they're looking out for our safety and that of pedestrians, but it's quite obvious that their goal is more people driving and fewer people cycling.
#23
Prefers Cicero
Personally I doubt that helmet advocates or helmet law advocates have any devious agenda to exclude or limit or weed out anybody. They are just promoting what they believe to be good or necessary policy.
#24
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
So some might say, or some might falsely claim that "their insurance requires it"; nothing but unfounded baloney. If the clubs and organized events event leaders think helmet requirements will magically protect them from "litigation" they are living in a dream world. If their fear of litigation is that powerful the solution is to cancel the ride or event.
#25
"Florida Man"
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: East Florida
Posts: 1,673
Bikes: '16 Bob Jackson rando, '66 Raleigh Superbe, 80 Nishiki Maxima, 07 Gary Fisher Utopia, 09 Surly LHT
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1564 Post(s)
Liked 1,691 Times
in
847 Posts
I have mixed feelings about requiring a helmet, but I would not say the decision will not impact others.
Also, can we see a photo of the Fothergill?
__________________
Campione Del Mondo Immaginario
Campione Del Mondo Immaginario