Back in my first adult riding career (early '80's as a commuter/utility cyclist) I didn't wear a helmet, until one night, on my way into work, a rabbit came out of nowhere in the middle of a fast downhill run, right in front of me. After that, I decided that a hemet might not be such a bad idea.

When I started riding again in 2008, I found a vintage Bell Tourlite helmet that I am currently wearing.

I have heard that helmets should be replaced every five years, (personally, I think it is a marketing thing), so it can be argued that my helmet isn't really doing much to protect my head, but, I figure that it is doing more than a helmet that I won't wear. I don't like the looks of any of the currently available helmets. I wouldn't wear any of them.


edited to add:
I would ride without a helmet long before I would ride without a mirror.

My stance is that it up to you whether or not to wear a helmet. However, if you don't wear one you should not use your insurance for any medical bills related to a head injury.

The poll should add one option: "I've never worn a helmet and will continue to do so." I'm sure that fits some people.

"If you don't wear a full-face helmet you should not use your insurance for any medical bills related to a facial injury."

"If you don't wear a neck brace you should not use your insurance for any medical bills related to a neck injury."

And so on and so forth.

In fairness, I don't really think that everyone here is obsessed about helmets. It's just the conversation needed to be put in its own place because it never plays nice in public... like VC but less (maybe) vehement.

Why not?

Parse this for a moment or three: If you wear a helmet, you should not use your insurance for any medical bills related to a head injury.

If you choose to not protect your head, I should not have to pay higher insurance because of your decision.

If you choose to protect your head and suffer injury anyway, why should I have to pay higher insurance because of your decision?

If you choose to ride a bike and get hurt why should anyone else have to pay higher insurance because of your decision, eh?

Your complaints should be directed towards insurance companies. The fact that you've accepted how they do business is almost as pathetic as your notion everybody who rides without a helmet WILL crash WILL sustain head trauma and worst of all according to you WILL cause YOUR rates to go up. I would call you clueless but I know you've read the doctor's post on this thread where they say helmets don't help in head traumas. They help with head booboos. but it's all about you saving a dime with you. You don't care about the injured cyclists you care about a 25 cent increase in your costs.
I'm still wearing my helmet so please spare me the hairy chested, knuckle dragging, hope I die witticisms.

Goodness, someone hasn't read most of this thread...

Maybe you should direct your screed at member robble, who brought up insurance in the first place. I was merely trying to enlighten through example, using the same nonsense he first spouted.

Please point out where I said, "...everybody who rides without a helmet WILL crash WILL sustain head trauma and worst of all according to you WILL cause YOUR rates to go up." You may please quote directly from any post I've made, ever.

I care about cyclist safety. Helmets are a part of that, but a very minor part. I wear a helmet very nearly any time I ride a bicycle. I certainly don't count on it to keep me safe, except in the rarest of occasions.

You know nothing about me or what I do regarding cycling safety. I doubt you do more. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

I certainly do hope you die, but I also hope I die someday as well -- immortality does not appeal to me. May your death occur at a time when you are in a state of grace, at an apogee point in your life, after living however much life you prefer to live.

And thusly tyranny is born anew.

I've read too much of this thread and for all your flowery prose, consistency is not your strong suit. Most of time you are not arguing a position, you are just arguing.

I've clarified my position any number of times. What I won't tolerate without comment is nonsense spouted by either side of this debate and there's plenty of that. It's not helpful and deserves to be called out. I am extremely consistent regarding this, without regard from which "side" of the debate such nonsense issues.

The insurance gambit is especially offensive to me, so I commented on it in kind, trying to offer an illustrative refutation, which you completely misinterpreted.

I note that you got nothing, NOTHING, regarding my request that you cite where I said what you claim I said, nor are you interested in challenging my commitment to cycling safety. As expected.

I argue against hyperbole, but there are plenty here who enjoy engaging in such. You've proven to be one of them.

FWIW, even though mconlox and I have butted heads repeatedly on this thread, I have to give him due for being consistent and logical. His stuff does require close reading for full understanding, because he's not posting the half-witted soundbites which typify online "debate". But if you put in the effort, you'll see that he tends to be pretty rational and consistent.

Even though he's wrong almost all the time... :lol:

Luckily, I'm a helmet-wearer.

Do people who choose not to wear helmets also choose to not wear seatbelts?

Do people who choose to wear helmets choose to eat Oriental food with chopsticks? Just as irrelevant.

No. I wear a seatbelt religiously. They come pre-installed in the car, there's no inconvenience for me using them, and they have a proven track record of effectiveness. In my case, all of those factors being different for bike helmets led to a different choice.

No, but I do have toe straps on the pedals of some of my bikes.

Do people who chose to wear helmets while cycling also wear helmets while motoring?

I wear a helmet nearly every time I ride a bicycle.
I wear a helmet every time I ride a motorcycle.
I wear a seatbelt any time I'm in a car/truck.
I do not wear a helmet in a car, on the bus, on a train, on a plane, while walking, while showering, or while on a ladder.

When national health insurance goes into full operation they won't have that choice about wearing a helmet, it will be required to wear a helmet or their head injuries won't be covered. So they might as well get use to the idea sooner rather then later.

I did for nearly every ride I did in the 1990s.
I'm about 50/50 on lifetime MC rides, haven't been on one since the early 1990s, though.[/quote]
I usually do. I guess the last time without was in a 55 chevy with no belts[/quote]
Helmets are required for most auto racing and airplane racing, not for racewalking, shower or ladder racing, however. Not sure what current train racing regulations are like.

Wut?!?

Not sure if serious, tending to believe not...

I'd certainly fight this at the state level, no matter what.

I find that extremely difficult to believe. In the European countries in which universal healthcare is available, almost none of them have mandatory helmet laws and the exception (Spain) makes no distinction between helmeted and unhelmeted cyclists when providing treatment. In other words, in Spain you might be prosecuted for going helmetless but you would, if injured, still receive free treatment. Everywhere else it would be no issue at all, either legally or for health insurance.

I see no reason why the US system wouldn't take a similar line.