Originally Posted by
rekmeyata
The problem with your statement in regards to helmes that we were disagreeing with isn't about whether or not the law is on your side or whether or not you have the right, or whether or not we care if you wear a helmet, there is no argument about that, the argument was about your statement where you said this:
On my ride today in midtown Manhattan, I saw quite a few cyclists wearing helmets, all were wearing gray, black, or mud-colored shirts that were similar to the asphalt color (even the helmets were similar colors). I was wearing a very high-viz jacket without helmet, no one around could have failed seeing me. Who's better off?
Great now I can't get if off the italics mode, anywho, you make the claim that you are better off wearing hi vis clothing and no helmet than the other riders who were wearing non hi vis clothing with a helmet...that statement is entirely wrong, it was a statement simply made so you could preach your own theology that helmets are useless, which isn't true by the way and we have posted reams of legit proof that in any court of a law would have completely overwhelmed the weak evidence that helmets don't work.
I repeat: wearing hi vi clothing makes one easier to be seen, which helps reduce accidents. Preventing accidents is more important than preventing head injury (and not limb injury) after an accident has already occurred.
You were the one that brought into the account of a driver hitting a yellow school bus, making the point that even if you are hi vi you may still not be seen and still be hit. Now let me get back at you in a similar argument: Even if you are wearing a helmet you can still get your head crashed and die in an accident.
Now back to my last statement in my previous post
#6227 .