Can't you have a discussion without wishing harm upon someone?

I have offered the status quo in lieu of change mostly benefiting business profits. Not all change is progress and simply following advertising disguised as science is just naive. I am not playing the devil's advocate, I honestly don't believe helmets help much and really believe their enthusiasts could spend their energies more effectively arguing for real safety changes. Helmets are the last hope for injury mitigation and should be treated as such. Only ~700 people (BHSI) a year die on bikes, most are kids (<15yo), and most are male. It seems that education, maturity, and caution are much more effective tools to prevent injuries by preventing crashes that cause injuries in the first place. Head injuries are a small percentage of annual cycling injuries but those are the only injuries a helmet only safety advocate fights against. I am simply arguing for a more holistic approach to safety advocacy and for people to quit making bike safety about helmets.

Now, I certainly cannot vouch for BSHI's statistics, however, they are a helmet advocacy group (obviously) yet their statistics don't make a strong case and often beg several questions in omitting several key points. Nowhere does it state how many people die of head injuries while wearing helmets nor do they break down head injury types that helmets would reduce. Given that the vast majority of head injuries are minor or insignificant (as a statistic, not to the recipient), therefore their claim that helmets could reduce head injuries by up to 85% is meaningless. Simply put, they seam to be preaching to the choir rather than making a convincing argument.

Interestingly enough, according to the BSHI, 24% of cyclists killed in 2003 were legally drunk. South Dakota just made it legal to drink and bike (or ride a horse).

I am tired of dealing with baseless assertions and threats of violence. Enjoy your thread, claim victory if you wish but know that it is hollow.