JRA

Waivers don't generally accomplish a whole lot except making some people feel better. If the organizers are negligent, they're negligent, waiver or no waiver. There are some rights a person cannot sign away. On the other hand, a person assumes certain risks simply by participating in a cycling event, waiver or no waiver. Some risks are inherent in cycling.

I doubt that a "must wear a helmet" requirement accomplishes even as much as a waiver, which isn't much. There are some risks inherent in not wearing a helmet which would make it pretty tough for a helmetless rider to get a judgement against event organizers for a head injury. Maybe a mandatory helmet rule makes some worry-wort orgainzers feel better. And maybe an insurance company can pass it off as a requirement of insurance, although I have serious doubts about that.

If organizers really wanted to make a ride safer, they'd require particpants to pass a riding proficiency test rather than worrying about something superficial like a helmet. Do they check to see that the helmets fit properly? If not, could the orgainizers be found negligent for requiring a helmet but not checking for a proper fit?

When it comes right down to it, the purpose of a mandatory helmet requirement is the same as the purpose of a waiver: to protect the organizers, not the cyclists.

If it's a private event, they can pretty much make whatever requirement they want. And people can choose not to participate if they think the organizers are being overly nit-picky.

But, then, this is the 21st century - there's a lot of nit-picky-ness going around.

I-Like-To-Bike

Probably no tougher than a helmeted rider; especially if there is no legal requirement for wearing a helmet.

Blue Order

Many state laws specify that the failure to wear a helmet can not be used to transfer liability to the cyclist.

JRA

Well, yea, of course you're right. Because other circumstances of a crash are almost always more significant than whether a cyclist is wearing a helmet or not. Whether the cyclist was wearing a helmet would probably come up in court in the case of a head injury but there's a good chance that it wouldn't be the deciding factor.

As I said before, if event organizers are negligent, they're negligent. If there is negligence, "waiver or no waiver" and/or "helmet or no helmet" probably isn't going to mean much more than diddly in court. The same is true if the organizers aren't negligent.

A mandatory helmet requirement, like a waiver, is little more than smoke and mirrors. It may seem impressive but it doesn't really mean squat.

Adiankur

there is the possibility that the people organizing the even truly want people wearing them for their own good. we can assume its only to cover their rears, but there is always the possibility that the people holding the event, actually care about others and what happens to them.

I-Like-To-Bike

Well its good for keeping away the riff-raff who don't share the PC belief in how a proper cyclist should dress.

I-Like-To-Bike

If that's so, their means of expressing/demonstrating that "care" is misplaced/misguided by bicycling brand PC.

pHunbalanced

+1

I care not about "requirements" ... I care about my brain. For the record, I am opposed to helmet laws for those of us over 18 years old.

Dannihilator

Always do when I race or ride, if I didn't I probably would have died 3 years ago.

N_C

Whether or not it is to make the organizers feel better or not I think it is a good idea to have the requirment for organized rides. Does it make the ride dangerous or appear dangerous? No. Does it say the organizers are negligent or have caused a participant to get hurt through negligence on the route? No. Does it protect the organizers from being individually sued? Probably. Is the waiver worth more then the paper it is printed on? Probably not. But the waiver is from our insurance policy, verbatim. One of the reasons we have an insurance policy is all 3 the cities the ride goes through requires it. We could not host the ride with out the policy.

As a former ride director/head coordinator for the first 2 Tri-State Trails Tour bike rides I can tell you there was not one single participant who did not have a helmet on, everyone did. They all had them prior to the start of the ride, not a single person had to be asked or reminded to wear one or advised there are helmets for sale if they did not have theirs. The bike shop that helps with mechanical support has yet to sell a helmet to anyone that did not have one. I credit that fact to the 3 words on the registration form: HELMETS ARE REQUIRED.

Not only was I the ride director, I was & still am the safety coordinator for the ride. The rider packets include bicycle safety information, most of it is the RIDE RIGHT materials from RAGBRAI. At the first ride participants did not know what was in the packets until they opened them, they are in a black plastic bag donated by one of the sporting good stores. Returning participants knew what was in the packets & gladly accepted another one. No one has ever had a problem with what is in the packets. If anything we have received tons of positive feedback about it.

If someone does not want a packet that is fine, they do not have to take one, most do because it makes a nice bag to put the ride t-shirt in until the end of the ride. People do not view it as the organizers trying to push our agenda of bicycle safety off on to them.

I have a feeling some here in the forums would view it that way, even though accepting the packets is purely voluntary.

The bottom line is if you want to participate in the Tri-State Trails Tour you will wear a helmet, it is required.

N_C

Need or not I think it is more like a triple protection thing. The participants sign a waiver & wear a helmet & the event organizers has the insurance policy as required.

The helmets help protect the participants from potential head injury in the event of a crash. The waiver they sign protects the orgainizers from law suits from the participants & the insurance policy covers any potential damage to property & the organization responsible for the event as it is required by the communities the ride is in.

N_C

Then how do you explain this. A couple of years ago a RAGBRAI participant died after sustaining major facial trauma caused when the front wheel of his bike got caught in a crack & he did an end over. He was wearing a helmet, but that did not protect his face or other exposed parts above his neck. His family could not sue RAGBRAI because he signed the waiver, it protected against that. How ever they are trying to sue the county agency responsible for the country highway this happened on. If it is found the waiver he signed does not cover the responsible parties in charge of the highway the family may have a legitimate case.

Smoke & mirrors? Don't think so, especially in a case like this.

Brian

Let's see, one for BMX racing.
One for the beach crusiers.
One for the MTB.
The missus and myself have matching ones for the tandem too.
Since Utah does not require us to wear helmets, we do ride without them when we take the beach cruisers out on Sundays. Of course, the rest of the state is in church, so it's a ghost town.

I-Like-To-Bike

How do you explain this? As JRA already correctly pointed out, a negligent organization can't waiver away their responsibility to be prudent. In this case RAGBRAI has nothing to with the maintenance of the road. The suit is directed at the agency thought responsible for the crack in the road leading to the accident.

BTW, RABRAI does NOT require wearing a helmet to participate. If it did, the lawyer for some future plaintiff might try to make the case that the helmet aggravated an injury (especially a broken neck injury) and then act on RAGBRAI's responsibility for insisting on the wear of this piece of "dangerous" equipment. The "waiver" won't mean poo for the organizers in such a case.

RobertHurst

...Or just the momentum of the mass helmet hysteria groupthink that has swept across N. America. Bingo. I doubt that NC is correct in his assumption that the insurance company is the force behind the helmet requirement, as insurance companies who cover events and bike clubs generally do not make that requirement, but I am ready to be proven wrong as usual.

NC, since participants are signing waivers anyway, why don't you suggest to your club leaders that the helmet requirement be scrapped, in the interest of freedom of choice, apple pie, you know, all that stuff that is supposed to make America great.

Robert

chipcom 

The Hancock Horizontal Hundred never had a helmet requirement - until this year. It sucks to live in a country where fear seems to be replacing our once proud spirit of independence and rugged individualism. Fear of insurance companies, fear of lawyers and lawsuits, fear of politicians and laws, fear of anybody you don't know, fear of terrorists in your breakfast cereal, fear of falling off a bike...etc. etc. etc.

JRA

That's actually pretty easy to explain. From your description, the rider's family had no case. You're dreamining if you think the rider's family couldn't sue because of a waiver. They probably didn't sue because they had no case and they would have had no case even without a waiver. RAGBRAI is not responsible for highway maintenance. Unless RAGBRAI had been warned about the crack or it was so obvious that they should have known and kept the event away from it, there's no negligence and therefore no case. Zilch. Nada. Having no case is a much more likely reason the family didn't sue than a waiver in which the rider presumably signed away a right that can't be signed away.

Blue Order

Legally Speaking - with Bob Mionske: To sign or not to sign

DieselDan

I can speak for beach crusiers, as I rent them for a living.

Working for a LARGE hospitality company, we have a legal department to make sure we do everything right. Since there is not a helmet law of any kind for anyone in South Carolina, Beaufort County, or the Town of Hilton Head regarding bicycles, requiring helmets would hurt our busniess. Your customer would just call the company(ies) that don't make such requirment. I do have a line in our rental agreement stating, "HELMETS ARE RECOMMENDED, and provided free of charge with any bike rental"

The only time there has been a problem with this was an 8 year old that was hit by a car and sustained a brain injury. I did rent him a helmet at his mother's request, however he had the helmet in his basket, not on his head. Again, that large legal department is taking care of this and I'm doing my job as before and have been cleared of any impropriety.

N_C

While RAGBRAI has no responsibility for highway maintenance the route is ridden by RAGBRAI officials & volunteers at least 3 times prior to the ride & a report is submitted to the depts. responsible for the highway to take care of any problems.

Brian

Hey, just because I spelled it wrong, doesn't mean you should too.

Dchiefransom

The problem with the roadway that caused the cyclist to crash might not have been a problem for the riders that pre-rode the course. As noted in other threads where bike lane debris is brought up, many of my club members will leave a bike lane that I frequently ride right through.