Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Eliminate helmet requirement to increase ridership?

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Eliminate helmet requirement to increase ridership?

Old 03-16-18, 07:29 AM
  #26  
europa
Grumpy Old Bugga
 
europa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Adelaide, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 4,229

Bikes: Hillbrick, Malvern Star Oppy S2, Europa (R.I.P.)

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 370 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel4 View Post
So a mandatory law in your community gives a message that bad driving is acceptable.
It has been discussed here so often but never expressed so succinctly.
europa is offline  
Old 03-16-18, 07:29 AM
  #27  
mcours2006
Senior Member
 
mcours2006's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Toronto, CANADA
Posts: 6,058

Bikes: Giant Rapid, Bianchi Advantage, Specialized Roubaix, 1985 Gardin Quatro, Norco Threshold, Raleigh Serengheti MTB

Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1937 Post(s)
Liked 285 Times in 167 Posts
Originally Posted by europa View Post
I don't think that anyone who lives WITHOUT a mandatory helmet law can honestly comment. They all know that they can ride their bike at any time, dressed how they like, without legal intervention. It's a huge step from there to watching over your shoulder for a cop with a grudge or a quota to fill and unless you've lived it, you really don't know how restrictive that can be.
No, we don't live with mandatory helmet law, so take our comments with for what they are--just comments.
mcours2006 is offline  
Old 03-16-18, 07:32 AM
  #28  
mcours2006
Senior Member
 
mcours2006's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Toronto, CANADA
Posts: 6,058

Bikes: Giant Rapid, Bianchi Advantage, Specialized Roubaix, 1985 Gardin Quatro, Norco Threshold, Raleigh Serengheti MTB

Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1937 Post(s)
Liked 285 Times in 167 Posts
Perhaps riding without a helmet might make it easier for more people to get out and ride their bikes. More people on bikes means that cyclists are more visible and motorist are made more aware that there are more cyclists on the road. And in the end it makes it safer for all cyclists. That's the idea, at least.
mcours2006 is offline  
Old 03-16-18, 08:11 AM
  #29  
mtb_addict
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 262
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3304 Post(s)
Liked 73 Times in 64 Posts
Makes me glad we have so much freedom where I live.
mtb_addict is offline  
Old 03-16-18, 11:28 AM
  #30  
no motor?
Unlisted member
 
no motor?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 6,193

Bikes: Specialized Hardrock

Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1376 Post(s)
Liked 429 Times in 294 Posts
Originally Posted by CliffordK View Post
There used to be give-away programs for FREE kid's helmets.

I'd imagine purchased in bulk, plain ones are very cheap. I'm seeing prices on Alibaba as low as $1 to $2 each for kid's helmets. Perhaps one needs to verify that they actually conform to current standards.

It actually would probably be a good deal to simply give away free kid's helmets, hoping to get them hooked on helmets so one can later sell the adults $200 helmets
i organized one of these about 10 years ago, and I think we've given away about 1,000 helmets so far. My idea is to get kids used to protecting the most important part of the nervous system when they ride, and I've seen a number of kids wearing these helmets when they ride. I've had a couple of parents jokingly ask about getting one for them when they ride their motorcycle (Illinois doesn't not require helmet usage for motorcycles) and they always look at me funny when I tell them they should only do that if their head is worth protecting - they don't know what to say then.
no motor? is offline  
Old 03-16-18, 02:13 PM
  #31  
prathmann
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
I was able to take a daily informal measure of the unpopularity of helmet-wearing among young cyclists a few years ago. My daily bike-commute took me on a popular MUP that passed an elementary, middle, and high school. Essentially all the kids riding to school had helmets, but less than 10% were on top of their heads. The rest were strapped to handlebars, racks, or backpacks - presumably ready to be put back on once they reached the school grounds where the state helmet law was enforced.

Seems to me that you must really dislike wearing the helmet to go to the trouble of stopping, taking it off and attaching it to the bars, and then having to put it on again at the school. No wonder the bike racks at schools became emptier after the helmet law was passed.
prathmann is offline  
Old 03-16-18, 11:13 PM
  #32  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by rumrunn6 View Post
um, don't think so

FYI - this is about New Zealand

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-...ithout-helmets

here in MA, only kids are required to wear helmets
Good point, I did not know that MA and NZ had similar weather.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 03-17-18, 02:27 AM
  #33  
Stadjer
Senior Member
 
Stadjer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Groningen
Posts: 1,238

Bikes: Gazelle rod brakes, Batavus compact, Peugeot hybrid

Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3693 Post(s)
Liked 392 Times in 296 Posts
Originally Posted by CliffordK View Post
But, there are arguments against seatbelts too...

The seatbelt is helpful for high speed accidents, and roll-over accidents. Yet, it may actually cause whiplash and other soft tissue injuries in low speed accidents. Generally not life threatening, but worse injuries than if the seatbelt hadn't been worn.

And, of course, the fear of getting stuck in a seatbelt when one must rapidly get loose, whether real or imagined.

Arguments for or against helmets are likely similar. Good for protecting against some accidents. Insufficient in other accident types, and unnecessary in other accidents. I have also been riding in the heat and determined that overheating and the potential for heat related injuries was more serious than not wearing the helmet.
Maybe the seatbelt isn't the best comparison, but unlike the bike helmet it has good statistics to show for. On top of that it's not the one thing safety is supposed to come down to, it's a thing that works together with airbags and crumplezones.

The point about riding in the heat is a fundamental one: You have to be able to rely on your own judgement, a mandatory helmet sends the wrong message, especially because it's such a passive safety device. I've always considered refusing to wear a seatbelt of see wearing one as distrust of the driver irrational and a bit silly, but the idea behind it that the driver is the main influence on safety makes a lot of sense.

Originally Posted by jon c. View Post
I don't understand what difference the clothing would make in terms of safety.
It's two different kinds of cyclists. If you change into spandex before cycling anyway putting on a helmet to doesn't really make a difference. It's the people dressed for the destination that just want to jump on their bike who might not if they have to get their helmet first.

If they don't there's less cyclists on the road, and there's safety in numbers when it comes to cycling.
Stadjer is offline  
Old 03-17-18, 02:57 AM
  #34  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 25,255
Mentioned: 204 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13627 Post(s)
Liked 1,908 Times in 1,445 Posts
There are plenty of cyclists that don't wear spandex that do wear helmets.

One can simply hook the helmet to the bike handlebars, and it will be there the next time one grabs the bike.
CliffordK is offline  
Old 03-17-18, 05:11 AM
  #35  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 12,695

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 142 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6083 Post(s)
Liked 976 Times in 549 Posts
Originally Posted by CliffordK View Post
There are plenty of cyclists that don't wear spandex that do wear helmets.

One can simply hook the helmet to the bike handlebars, and it will be there the next time one grabs the bike.
Pleny of cyclists who do wear spandex don't wear helmets. One can simply lay the bibs across the seat ...
Maelochs is offline  
Old 03-17-18, 05:50 AM
  #36  
jon c. 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,110
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1142 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 333 Times in 181 Posts
Originally Posted by Stadjer View Post


It's two different kinds of cyclists. If you change into spandex before cycling anyway putting on a helmet to doesn't really make a difference. It's the people dressed for the destination that just want to jump on their bike who might not if they have to get their helmet first.
Makes a lot of sense. If I lived in an urban area, I'd probably do that at times myself.
jon c. is offline  
Old 03-17-18, 06:44 AM
  #37  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 12,695

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 142 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6083 Post(s)
Liked 976 Times in 549 Posts
This really isn't about safety versus danger. Riding a bike in traffic is dangerous.

It is about free will versus an overweening nanny-state driven by public interest groups, which, however well-meaning, don't seem to understand that they don't need to try to be telling people how to mange every detail of their lives.

If every municipality which wanted cyclists to be safer Really wanted cyclists to be safer, they would add wider bike lanes, dedicated bike-only paths or segregated lanes in congested areas, and would start ticketing cyclists and arresting and charging with maximum applicable charges, seeking maximum penalty, for car drivers responsible for bike /car collisions.

But politically all that is much harder---more cost and more interest groups protesting. So, they mandate that cyclists wear styrofoam cups on their heads.

The road rash scars on the various parts of my body my broken and separated shoulders indicate to me that helmets don't do much, but not getting hit by cars is a Real safety improvement.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 03-17-18, 06:57 AM
  #38  
rumrunn6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
rumrunn6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 25 miles northwest of Boston
Posts: 24,964

Bikes: Bottecchia Sprint, GT Timberline 29r

Mentioned: 104 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3751 Post(s)
Liked 895 Times in 626 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
Good point, I did not know that MA and NZ had similar weather.
the lifestyle story isn't about weather, nor was my comment. what was your comment about?
rumrunn6 is offline  
Old 03-17-18, 03:29 PM
  #39  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by rumrunn6 View Post
the lifestyle story isn't about weather, nor was my comment. what was your comment about?
And what did your statement
here in MA, only kids are required to wear helmets
have anything to do with the story?
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 03-17-18, 07:13 PM
  #40  
rumrunn6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
rumrunn6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 25 miles northwest of Boston
Posts: 24,964

Bikes: Bottecchia Sprint, GT Timberline 29r

Mentioned: 104 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3751 Post(s)
Liked 895 Times in 626 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
And what did your statement
have anything to do with the story?
helmet requirements. try to keep up
rumrunn6 is offline  
Old 03-17-18, 11:10 PM
  #41  
Kontact
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,595
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2148 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Seattle mandates helmets for all, but has ride share bikes everywhere with no helmets.

This is the same governing body that caused the homeless crisis by banning "unsafe" housing.


Unintended consequences.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-18-18, 03:08 PM
  #42  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by rumrunn6 View Post
helmet requirements. try to keep up
So you think helmet requirements are a major factor in adult cycling in MA over the weather. You seem to be the one slow to understand the point with your misinformed comparison.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 03-18-18, 03:12 PM
  #43  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
Seattle mandates helmets for all, but has ride share bikes everywhere with no helmets.

This is the same governing body that caused the homeless crisis by banning "unsafe" housing.

Unintended consequences.
Are you sure mandatory helmet laws are unintended consequences? If I were anti-cycling, the first step I would take would be to implement an adult mandatory helmet law. The second step would be to pass a mandatory use bike lane law.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 03-18-18, 03:17 PM
  #44  
Kontact
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,595
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2148 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
Are you sure mandatory helmet laws are unintended consequences? If I were anti-cycling, the first step I would take would be to implement an adult mandatory helmet law. The second step would be to pass a mandatory use bike lane law.
If mandatory helmets caused fewer people to ride bikes as in NZ, that would be the unintended consequences.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-18-18, 03:22 PM
  #45  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
If mandatory helmets caused fewer people to ride bikes as in NZ, that would be the unintended consequences.
Not if the real intent of the law was to cause fewer people to ride bikes.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 03-18-18, 03:23 PM
  #46  
Kontact
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,595
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2148 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
Not if the real intent of the law was to cause fewer people to ride bikes.
Right. Hence the word "unintended".
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-18-18, 04:17 PM
  #47  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
Right. Hence the word "unintended".
Your own post conflict with each other. If the reason for a helmet law was to reduce the number of cyclist, then that law achieved it's intended purpose.

If the only purpose of the law was a misguided safety reason, then the reduction in cyclist is unintended.

You seem to not understand the difference, or you just continue to be argumentative.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 03-18-18, 04:28 PM
  #48  
rumrunn6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
rumrunn6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 25 miles northwest of Boston
Posts: 24,964

Bikes: Bottecchia Sprint, GT Timberline 29r

Mentioned: 104 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3751 Post(s)
Liked 895 Times in 626 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
So you think helmet requirements are a major factor in adult cycling in MA over the weather. You seem to be the one slow to understand the point with your misinformed comparison.
seriously, go away now. you brought up the weather not me
rumrunn6 is offline  
Old 03-18-18, 05:45 PM
  #49  
Kontact
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,595
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2148 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
Your own post conflict with each other. If the reason for a helmet law was to reduce the number of cyclist, then that law achieved it's intended purpose.

If the only purpose of the law was a misguided safety reason, then the reduction in cyclist is unintended.

You seem to not understand the difference, or you just continue to be argumentative.
Seriously? The intent of the helmet law was to decrease cranial injuries.

The unintentional consequence of the law is that it makes fewer people want to ride their bikes, which has the effect of decreasing healthy behavior like exercise and increasing pollution.



Did you really think a government would pass a helmet law with the intent of discouraging cycling? I can't believe I have to even explain that to you.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-18-18, 06:05 PM
  #50  
prathmann
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
Did you really think a government would pass a helmet law with the intent of discouraging cycling? I can't believe I have to even explain that to you.
Governments are composed of many individuals with varying goals. There have certainly been legislators who have proposed laws with the intent of discouraging cycling (the Missouri proposal to require 15' high flags and various registration/tax requirements come to mind). I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of those supporting the Aus./NZ MHL laws saw the potential decrease in cycling as a positive result while others were motivated only by the prospect of potentially reducing injuries.
prathmann is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.