Old 03-01-14, 02:44 PM
  #23  
B. Carfree
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posts: 7,048
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 509 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by bragi
It's helmets. Once helmets are introduced into any bicycling environment, ridership drops off. Regardless of their effectiveness or lack thereof (which should NOT be discussed here), it's plain that people are turned off by them. Let Australia be a warning to everyone.
That may well have been a part of the fall off in cycling that started in the mid-late-'80s. During the years when ridership was significantly higher than driving, there were not only very few helmets in use (other than on training rides), there were no helmet laws. However, it wasn't until 1994 that CA expanded its helmet law to minors over the age of five. By then, we had long since entered the bicycling dark ages in Davis. That doesn't mean that there was no impact from the initial helmet law for children age five and under which was passed in 1986. It could well be that the mere existence of such a law created the impression that cycling is too dangerous for children and that such a perception was sufficient to negatively impact the number of people willing to ride.
B. Carfree is offline