Shocker, it only took someone two posts to interject their own anecdote in a sarcastic and mocking delivery. And from Portland, no doubt.

Awesome, BikeForums!

My heart goes out to the family tragedy this post represents, I've often thought about one of my kids ending up this way as a result of a casual commute to work or campus. Horrific outcomes are one of the risks of life.

But the logic of the post deserves to be mocked. You could make the same illogical argument about wearing seatbelts, carrying a loaded pistol on a commercial flight, not vaccinating your kids, food safety regulation, soap, etc., etc. Good ideas will always have the isolated outcomes that feel horribly wrong and unjust. Blaming the good idea is fruitless, the OP needs to let it go. Just saying, it's this kind of logic that results in crazy politicians and pointless wars.

but it's really hard to imagine that a helmet would have saved Mr. Hakka's brother from his tragic fate. Bicycle helmets are good for a lot of things, but mostly low-impact. I've often wondered what the result would have been had I not been wearing a helmet when I drove my head into a truck running light. At a minimum, I avoided a serious headache and certainly avoided an ambulance ride to the hospital and subsequent 24 hour observation. However, given the spot on my skull that would have impacted the light, it could have easily broken my skull. And the prognosis from that is not good.

Given the current emotional climate and family/medical pressure to get any head impact "checked out" immediately at a hospital "just in case," I doubt that you would have avoided the ambulance ride to the hospital and subsequent 24 hour observation if your helmet was so much as scratched after an impact with a truck. I am surprised that the hospital didn't run all sorts of expensive tests i.e. MRI's just in case, especially if the procedure would be covered by somebody's insurance.

OP said brother DID wear helmet. OP wanted brother to not have helmet, then the traumatic events that his family suffered would not have happened.

OP wants to group ride and ride competitively with others and does not want to wear a helmet and feels pressured to do so and wants to know why he cannot sign a waiver regarding helmet compliance.

OP seems to advocate for helmet choice.

No one reads here!!! I only noticed this because "Hakkalugi" is the coolest bike I ever owned.

Not news...

My wife suffered a NON contact subdural hematoma when we were rear-ended. Wearing a helmet would not have made a difference. A young customer of ours fell while riding his 20" BMX bike, struck his helmetless head and wound up in a coma. A helmet most likely would have prevented his disabilities.

Or not.

well, it's not exactly emotional given the death of Natasha Richardson. But they've been doing that for years anyway. In my case, I rode away from the incident with a broken helmet and a sore shoulder, but i wasn't going to ride an ambulance for that. You would have picked up the bill since I was active duty military. My previous head injury - without a helmet - ended up in me losing a large amount of blood and getting almost 30 stitches. And then they kept me overnight and woke me up every two hours to make sure I wasn't dead. MRI's weren't real common back then, and the university didn't have one.

although the post was a little obtuse, it was clear to me that he wanted the injuries to be more severe so that the brother would have died instead of remaining in a persistent vegetative state. I can understand that, but given that bicycle helmets don't necessarily protect that well for that type of incident it's not clear that the helmet changed the outcome.

I've done rides plenty of times where I rode with groups doing some sanctioned ride who happened to be on the same route as me, ha, I even was cheered at some finish line. Don't sign up and go do the ride if you don't want to wear a helmet. Or wear a helmet and don't crash...your choice.

First off, I'd like to say that I have successfully managed to avoid this thread in all of the years I've been here, but I'd like to share this tidbit.

I believe that helmet use should be a matter of personal choice and not mandatory. I really, really don't like wearing mine. But I do. Here's why:

I don't have the best vision, I need a ball cap to block a lot of the Sun's glare even at midday. I would rather just wear the cap, but I can't. I use the helmet to keep the cap from blowing off of my head- not because I'm blasting downhill (I get squeamish at anything over 20 mph and start backing off/using the brakes), but because we get some pretty good headwinds here in OK.

I also wear glasses. The helmet straps keep my glasses from flying off if take a tumble. I know this to be true because I did take a tumble last year. I was on a ride, intending to go to the next town over, get on the MUP that runs to another, larger city and go drool on some bikes at the closest LBS that had the sanest, safest route to get to. (Three other shops, including my primary where I bought my bike are a little closer via a different route, but my confidence and skills dictate that I don't even attempt it.)

Anyway, I was riding along, roughly 6 miles from the house and like 2 miles outside of my town, when my intestines started telling me I'd better go find a bathroom pronto. Reversing my route would have meant dealing with the combined exit and entrance ramp to the toll road, as well as having to deal with a fairly steep hill with a stop light just before reaching the bottom of it, and then crossing rail road tracks just beyond that before coming to the downtown district and then another 1/3 mile to the nearest public restroom (other than the c-store at the top of the hill and no way I'm stopping there, as it's a unisex and they get a lot of traffic off of the toll road...).

I figured I'd be able to get to the Arby's quicker that is on the other main road by cutting across a back road. Well, as that road enters town, there are two sets of train tracks that crosses the road- complete with that metal plating/diamond/skid plate stuff. Thing is, they don't cross at a 90 degree angle, one is more like 45 and the other is less than that. I successfully crossed the first set, but I went down on the second set. I couldn't alter my path, as this is on a narrow, 4 lane and designated truck route, so I attempted to hop the front wheel over the track... I misjudged, it came down short, slid on that metal, (I think I may have turned) the bar turned towards the curb which paralleled the actual track rail, and I went flying... sort of. Don't ask me how I did it, but I managed to land in like a sprinter's stance- right leg extended behind, left knee on the ground, hands on the ground (I wear gloves), and the bike was under me. I did not head my head. But the helmet did save me, as they kept my glasses from flying off- had my glasses had come off, my first instinct would have been to try and find them instead of dragging my bike to the curb out of traffic that was coming up from the rear. And this happened right next to the glass plant- during the right time of the day, it casts a rather large shadow on the road and I was in that shadow- and I didn't have/wasn't running daytime lights back then (was wearing a hi viz yellow shirt).

My legs had minor road rash, had a sore wrist and banged up knee, my reproductive system was unscathed, I somehow managed not to soil my shorts, and the bike got a scuffed up bar end and lost the computer.

So, yeah, I don't like the helmet, but I use it. Plus, it's a good place to put lights ;)

It most certainly isn't a good place to put lights.

I saw a couple sarky remarks about one side "losing the argument", and someone else agreeing. Let me keep it simple.

Speaking as a helmet-choice advocate:

1.) I'm not arguing with you, your opinion is meaningless to me.

2.) You cannot and will not coerce, guilt, persuade, or cajole me into accepting your point of view as my own.

3.) I don't want to hear about "your/my tax dollars", because they CEASE being yours once you drop them into the big infinite tub that is the IRS. So your contention that "your" tax dollars are being wasted taking care of people who disagree with your POV is arrogant in the extreme. "Freedom" isn't defined by the standards you live by. There may well be parts of your life that others feel outraged at having to tolerate, but it's "oh, well" for them, too.

4.) You have no clear, definitive, unarguable evidence to support your claim; I've checked. It's one reason we disagree.

5.) Your passion for your POV does not lend it additional credence; it is an OPINION, no more or less valid than mine.

6.) The single best sentence ever spoken was "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." I've shortened it to "Treat others the way you want to be treated". I try to live it, and it's easy on this subject -- wear one if you want, don't if you don't, and extend to me the same courtesy without preaching. (There is no censor available in a face-to-face....)

I feel deeply for the banned Hakkalugi and his story. It's a penetrating statement of how perversely unpredictable life truly is.

I own helmets, both for myself and my kids. We CHOOSE when to wear and not wear them. Organized rides demand them, and we also choose whether or not to participate. As I alluded to earlier, it's called "freedom".

On my ride today in midtown Manhattan, I saw quite a few cyclists wearing helmets, all were wearing gray, black, or mud-colored shirts that were similar to the asphalt color (even the helmets were similar colors). I was wearing a very high-viz jacket without helmet, no one around could have failed seeing me. Who's better off? :rolleyes:

I'm not in any a helmet advocate, but this is an apples and oranges argument. Nothing stops anyone from wearing a helmet and bright clothing, so it's not like there's a choice involved.

We all make hundreds of safety related choices daily, both on and off the bike. Each stands alone in tilting the odds slight for or against us. Your question would only be valid as a possible retort if one of those riders were to give you the "where's your helmet" as you passed. I got that the other day from someone riding the other way as he burned a stop sign onto a fairly busy cross street (go figure).

Well... I'd say you're both f'd: them for thinking a helmet is a magic safety force-field, you for thinking your hi-viz jacket magically makes you visible to drivers.

OTOH- it's perfectly possible to use safety equipment or measures without an exaggerated expectation of miracles. I pass plenty of helmeted riders and I don't think they're all overly optimistic.

Really? Just the other day I saw a vehicle hit a school bus, painted in typical school bus yellow paint, how does someone miss seeing large yellow school bus? You're just a speck in their eye and you think they'll see you? Try again.

Just out of curiosity, is it possible to say anything on this forum without getting flamed?

Well, if they don't see you in a hi-viz jacket, or even a yellow school bus, do you think they'll see you in a mud-colored T-shirt?

Very true.

Point I wanted to make is that anyone who wears hi-viz, thinking "no one around could have failed seeing me" is as wrong as those who think helmets somehow confer safety upon the wearer far outsize of their actual contribution to riding safety.

Hi-viz garments contribute to visibility and visibility to safety. They do not ensure safety or visibility any more than wearing a helmet ensures safety...

When I said no one could have failed seeing me, I didn't imply no one could have hit me. Being seen reduces chances of being hit, though not eliminate.

My point was that if some idiot will run into a big yellow school bus wearing a hi vis jersey won't stop that idiot from hitting you....BUT, I'm not coming against HI Vis jerseys in fact I agree with using them! Just saying that a person riding wearing a hi vis jersey doesn't give them an excuse not to wear a helmet because the hi vis jersey will save their arse better than no helmet and a mud jersey will, once hit your head regardless of jersey color, all you might have left to save your life or prevent serious brain trauma is your helmet, your jersey won't even come close to helping you in that department.

Wasn't trying to flame anyone just trying to get a realization that having a no helmet is potentially dangerous regardless of using a bright jersey or not, one isn't better than the other, ideally you should wear a hi vis jersey AND a helmet, but if I had to choose between one of the two I would take a helmet hands down over a hi vis jersey.

And I say you are very wrong if you assume people see you just because you are wearing hi-viz. As wrong as those who think they are safe just because they wear a helmet. Just because you are wearing hi-viz does not mean no one fails to see you.

I did not infer or imply that you think no one could have hit you

I was trying to make this point, thanks for clearing it up better than I did.