MHL’s
I left this discussion 10 years ago so was a little curious as to what has happened since.
24 years ago my province instituted an all ages mandatory bicycle helmet law. It followed Australia and New Zealand laws and shortly after our law passed, Canada’s 3 Martime provinces followed suit. I know the US has a different way of enacting laws than Canada but I believe there were a number of states that added mhl’s as well. It seems to me that the push for mhl’s has decreased. They haven’t increased in Canada and only 19 of the 50 states have them. I was also surprised to find that the enforcement of our law has significantly declined. Vancouver Police used to issue about 1800 tickets a year for no helmet, nowadays, they average only 18 per year. Our shared bike system has stopped providing helmets whereas previously, they had been supplied with each bike. Am I right in thinking that the bloom is off the rose for mhl’s? That most people think they aren’t a good idea? |
In practice, MHL's are grossly unevenly enforced. (That's putting it in a way that won't punt this to P&R.)
Discuss bicycle helmets with your doctor, not your police officer. -mr. bill |
Originally Posted by mr_bill
(Post 21660513)
... discuss bicycle helmets with your doctor, not your police officer.
-mr. bill |
The current resistance to anti-Covid measures should give a clue about enforcement of M-Anything-Ls.
|
I wouldn't equate the drop with more people thinking it's not a good idea. Probably more that when first implemented, there was a request to the authorities to act on it.
However, like many laws, there really isn't much tooth to it and law enforcement officers just hate getting chewed up and down for writing a helmet ticket that probably the violator will get out of without penalty. I see quite a few with helmets hanging on their handle bars. I guess they are going to put them on just before they have an accident. <grin> |
From what I’ve seen after my absence is that there hasn’t been an increase in the laws. There hasn’t been a mhl passed in Canada in over 20 years and it seems there hasn’t been many passed elsewhere either.
Maybe they were “the flavour of the day” back then. It seems, separated bike lanes and encouraging more to ride have taken over as a more effective way to cycling safety |
Good riddance to MHLs. I never will wear a stupid helmet. I do always wear a baseball cap and glasses.
In 2018 I rode 3,900 miles thru AB, BC, WA, OR, ID, BC, AB. I rode the last 90 miles to Vancouver on the Trans Can highway all the way to the Port Mann bridge, on a Saturday. WA is making a concerted effort to rid bikes off of any divided highway, Jerks. If it makes you happy, they are still gung ho in OZ and NZ I hear. From what I have seen, over 80% wear the useless things all over, anyway. |
Should make helmets mandatory for automobile drivers too since far more of them per miles driven sustain traumatic brain injuries than do bicyclists. I think that helmet use should be left up to the individual.
Cheers |
It's pretty certain that I'd be dead if I didn't have a helmet on last year. First cycling accident that ever caused more than a scrape in way over 50 years of cycling. I used to think I was invincible. Now I'm just almost invincible.
|
Originally Posted by Iride01
(Post 21661754)
It's pretty certain that I'd be dead if I didn't have a helmet on last year. First cycling accident that ever caused more than a scrape in way over 50 years of cycling. I used to think I was invincible. Now I'm just almost invincible.
|
They stopped enforcing it here, for the "homeless" first, then the ride share put a fork in the mandate for good.
|
I don't know, I can't imagine myself willingly returning to a discussion I left 10 years ago, to try and stir up passion again, in a new cohort, unless I was really bored out of my mind. Probably not even then.
|
Originally Posted by Leisesturm
(Post 21661921)
I don't know, I can't imagine myself willingly returning to a discussion I left 10 years ago, to try and stir up passion again, in a new cohort, unless I was really bored out of my mind. Probably not even then.
|
No MHL’s in AZ. Some local ordinances for kids under 18 is about it.
i don’t think it should be mandated - I don’t wear one when riding out to the mailbox or over to the grocery store but, one of those little styrofoam lids saved my life so, I’ll keep wearing one while training either way. |
At this point, I don't think it's an open controversy whether helmet wearing provides an increased margin for safety, it clearly does. What's lacking is any evidence whatsoever that mandatory helmet laws increase helmet wearing.
|
Originally Posted by livedarklions
(Post 21663521)
At this point, I don't think it's an open controversy whether helmet wearing provides an increased margin for safety, it clearly does.
I like to tell people I'd wear my full motorcycle leathers if I could do it and not have heat stroke..... |
Originally Posted by livedarklions
(Post 21663521)
At this point, I don't think it's an open controversy whether helmet wearing provides an increased margin for safety, it clearly does. What's lacking is any evidence whatsoever that mandatory helmet laws increase helmet wearing.
Most assuredly, the platform on which our law was passed (to reduce serious injury and death) didn’t happen. Ive often thought one of the primary reasons why mhl’s stalled was because of this result |
Originally Posted by closetbiker
(Post 21660501)
It seems to me that the push for mhl’s has decreased. They haven’t increased in Canada and only 19 of the 50 states have them.
I don't think there's ever been a time where most people in the US thought that MHL for adults were a good idea. From a mathematical standpoint, the reasoning that it would save a lot of lives is incoherent and most people realize that. |
Originally Posted by closetbiker
(Post 21663643)
It’s been some time since I checked other jurisdictions but I do know in mine it’s been quite the opposite, helmet use had been confirmed to increase dramatically yet injury reduction wasn’t confirmed.
Most assuredly, the platform on which our law was passed (to reduce serious injury and death) didn’t happen. Ive often thought one of the primary reasons why mhl’s stalled was because of this result To be clear, the only effect of helmet usage is to reduce the risk of death and/or limit the damage from head injuries and no other cause. Even a drastic increase in the use of helmets is not likely to result in massive changes to death and injury rates as head injuries are only one category of potentially fatal injuries out of many. |
Originally Posted by livedarklions
(Post 21663695)
... Even a drastic increase in the use of helmets is not likely to result in massive changes to death and injury rates as head injuries are only one category of potentially fatal injuries out of many.
|
And this thread is destined for the everlasting gobstopper thread in 3, 2....
-mr. bill |
Originally Posted by mr_bill
(Post 21663826)
And this thread is destined for the everlasting gobstopper thread in 3, 2....
-mr. bill |
Originally Posted by mr_bill
(Post 21663826)
And this thread is destined for the everlasting gobstopper thread in 3, 2....
-mr. bill |
Originally Posted by livedarklions
(Post 21663933)
Hey, since we've got you on the line, do you get the sense that thee NTSB recommendation of MHL had any impact whatsoever?
Otherwise, let's see. Cuomo suggested mandatory helmets for some e-bike users at the end of January. But he opposed increasing increasing the age covered by New York State helmet laws from 14 to 18. Then something happened March 7. Here in Massachusetts, legislation covering e-bike users (current law on e-bikes in Massachusetts is completely broken) passed the Senate. And legistlation for reduction of traffic fatalities passed the Senate again, and is now dieing in the House Ways and Means Committee. Again. This time the obstacle isn't Jeffrey Sánchez, former chair of the committee, but something else that happened on March 10. But bicycle services were added to a list of essential services. -mr. bill |
Originally Posted by mr_bill
(Post 21664008)
NTSB recommendation was met with outrage then crickets.
Otherwise, let's see. Cuomo suggested mandatory helmets for some e-bike users at the end of January. But he opposed increasing increasing the age covered by New York State helmet laws from 14 to 18. Then something happened March 7. Here in Massachusetts, legislation covering e-bike users (current law on e-bikes in Massachusetts is completely broken) passed the Senate. And legistlation for reduction of traffic fatalities passed the Senate again, and is now dieing in the House Ways and Means Committee. Again. This time the obstacle isn't Jeffrey Sánchez, former chair of the committee, but something else that happened on March 10. But bicycle services were added to a list of essential services. -mr. bill I think it was probably destined for die with a whimper status regardless of something happening on March 10. The whole idea of getting NTSB involved seemed a bit off to me a) because it was off their usual beat, and b) because there was no carrot or stick they could use to get states to go along. I didn't agree with the recommendation, I just ended up arguing in the thread about it because I was so sick of people going on about some sort of evil, financial motivation of the NTSB on the issue. For some reason, that same assertion of corrupt bias didn't seem to apply to the other bike safety recommendations they made. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:59 PM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.