Originally Posted by
merlinextraligh
Actually, I thought the anti helmet guys in the WSJ article were pretty reasonable.
They didn't argue that helmets were not a good idea; rather that mandatory helmet laws are counterproductive.
The more strident anti helmet law posters in the A&S thread, are such zealots that they take what the majority of reasonable people would believe to be ridiculous positions.
So the article was at least better than the A&S thread.
As a non-helmet wearer and openly anti-helmet-law cyclist, I should have given that side more credit than my post did. The other side, on the other hand, doesn't deserve any extra ;-)