Originally Posted by
davei1980
1. We have a helmet law here in Spokane
2. The risk vs. reward is like wearing a seatbelt. It doesn't make you one of the cool-kids or edgy to not wear one.
Comparisons to Holland are inappropriate because the cycling culture there is so much different - there are more bikes than cars. Here we live in the land of SUVs and lifted pickups who aren't always used to driving around bikes.
You're correct that a helmet is not a substitute for safe riding habits but it is a VERY MINOR inconvenience compared to a (no exaggeration) potentially life threatening head injury caused by a collision totally outside of the rider's control (eg - you can be the best, safest, slowest rider in the world and still get messed up)
The point I was trying to make was that imo there's nothing wrong with teaching kids that sometimes they have to learn certain things and prove their competence before they get certain liberties. Breaking the law isn't necessarily one of them. .
I know it's very different in America and most of the world from Holland and the rest of the Netherlands. But showing your kids that cycling is safe enough to ride without a helmet in some circumstances, and should be safe enough in many more circumstances, is a good thing imo. Let them at least imagine a world where the need to wear a helmet doesn't come with just cycling around the neighbourhood. I understand why people feel the need to wear helmets and want their kids to wear them and I respect that, but I don't believe that the next generation should get the idea that there can't be any cycling without a helmet.