It absolutely can impact your rates after it hits the MV records. Even though I didn't say anything about insurance there.

And being required by law is reason enough regardless of the immediate consequences.

My observation is that lots of "mumble jumble riders" do not ride with helmets here. (Ironically, except for the folks passing on Barnaby bridge inbound, better than a coin flip. Can't zen moment for a few hundred meters?)

-mr. bill

Seat Belt Ticket: Moving or Non-Moving Traffic Violation? | DrivingLaws.org

Tickets that don't raise your insurance rates

Seat belt ticket is considered an equipment violation, they do not make your insurance rates go up unless you live in New York, or in some states if you are frequent flyer. f you are wondering if getting a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt will increase your rates the answer is a resounding maybe! It really depends on the state you live in , what your driving record is like, how many violations you have in the past and what state you live in car insurance laws happen to be.
In every state, it is the law for the driver and any front seat passengers to be wearing a seatbelt when you drive. In some states the driver of the vehicle receives a ticket if he (or she) or their passenger is not wearing the seat belt. In other states, the passenger is ticketed. If you passenger is your minor child, you will be receiving the ticket!
However, whether or not your ticket equates to points on your license is not the same in every state. In some states, such as Minnesota, you pay a fine but it doesn’t count as a driving violation. This means that the insurance company will not see this violation on your driving record and your rates will not increase.

So you're right, but you're not because it depends on the state you live in.

Thought I would catch up on my helmet thread reading tonight, and after 34 or so pages my brain is pretty numb. Kind of regret missing the deleted posts a few pages back, by the person who called you meanies and edited everything.

I do have a question, for both the pro and anti helmet debaters. Is your mission to convince others of your helmet opinions limited to this thread, or do you hassle other riders you see in the analog world as well?

I ask because there is a super pro helmeteer who recently moved to my area, and since I am one of the 20.24% who sometimes does, sometimes does not wear a helmet, he has recently accosted me when I was out riding without. Its the second time, and I am thinking about becoming one of the 5.59% of riders who stops wearing one just to see the veins in his face throb while he froths about it. Its actually kind of hysterical, cause since moving here from Canadia, he has mostly stopped riding, as its to hilly, to hot, and the roads are to narrow and dangerous.

I am sort of joking, I will continue to wear a helmet or not regardless of anyone elses opinion, but seriously, if the guy goes off on me again when I am just doing a relaxed ice cream run I may lose my temper, something I strive not to do.

I could give a flying hump at a rolling donut what someone thinks of my personal helmet choices, but the guy is a braying ass, who the second time followed me into a grocery while haranguing me about it. All I can figure is that he smacked his head once, it jarred something loose, and now he has no impulse control. Other than the helmet thing, he is a sort of a normal guy.

I've never told anyone they shoulda left their helmet at home.

I think i had a guy complain about my lack of helmet on the MUP the other day. Luckily I had my earbuds in so couldn't understand a word he said.

First from a personal standpoint - do not wear a helmet on the road - I get the "where's your helmet?" routinely, an simply tune it out, or respond with something like "same place as your manners" or similar depending on my mood. OTOH - I've never asked anybody about why they wear a helmet because I simply don't care what others do.

That's from the personal side, but as an observation of human nature, I suspect that most proselytizers are on the "do good" side of the ledger. We have devout folks trying to spread the word of god, or against drinking, or against fatty diets, or for safety as in helmets. You don't tend to have folks on the opposite side of the ledger doing much proselytizing at all. So it shouldn't surprise anybody that helmet advocates (a sunset of helmet wearers) feel the need to enlighten those of us who simply don't know how important helmets are.

fb

Wrong assumption. While I support the use of helmets on the basis of logic and safety, I have NEVER said one word to another cyclist about them not wearing a helmet.

And OTOH I have never been the target of any local cyclist telling me I am dumb for wearing a helmet. That only happens here on this forum, by the small vocal anti helmet group.

I'm a helmet nanny. I don't ride my bike without a helmet. However, the choices others make is none of my business, (except for my kids).

It is rather bothersome that some feel the need to pester complete strangers about their personal choices.

I love this reply!

If you look at the big picture, bicycle helmets are quirk of certain (sub-)cultures. Your typical cyclist on planet earth doesn't even consider a helmet, let alone wear one. So for people who don't suffer from cultural myopia it's clear it's the Cult of the Magical Foam Hat that's the small vocal minority. The anti-helmet crowd, doesn't really exist outsdide the head of helmet-mongers. There's some individuals with moderate opposition towards helmets, and that's about it.

Methinks thou doth protest too much....

There was no assumption, only a reflection about the nature pf proselytizing. In any case, I would have expected that someone who claims to be a logician would know that you cannot reason from the general to the specific, so what you do or don't do has no bearing on the general accuracy of my statement.

Well, I picked "Used to but don't anymore" because that was true back in '07 or whenever it was that I first looked into this idiotic thread. But since I started riding cyclocross for the first time in a couple of decades I am now in the "sometimes" category, primarily because I'm a pretty useless cyclocross rider, and also because the low-speed crashes which typify cyclocross are also the kind of crashes for which bicycle helmets are designed.

WRT to car seatbelts, I suppose my answer is "yes". When tooling around in an essentially risk-free environment, I am perfectly comfortable without a seatbelt. For general use, I think a seatbelt is a fine idea. And when in a high risk environment, I think a seatbelt is obviously inadequate and insist on truly protective gear like a motorsports helmet and five point harness. To spin the argument, I'd point out that to a motorsports enthusiast, the bicycle helmeteer's argument is idiotic: "You have to wear a seatbelt every time you get into a car, but a seatbelt makes you safe when you are driving" - regardless of whether you are in a golf cart on a deserted private road, or an F1 racer at 200 MPH.

Honestly, the proselytizers are the entire problem. I mean, I am perfectly fine with people believing whatever they want WRT bicycle helmets. I am genuinely surprised that people think their little foam hats are going to save their lives when struck by motor vehicles at freeway speeds, but hell, even that kind of idiocy is not really my business. What is my business is when those idiots decide that they need to aggressively push their ignorance off on me, when I'm just trying to get some exercise and fresh air.

As I have maintained from day one: do what you want, but leave me alone. That's all there really is to it.

six

Where in all of these threads did I, or anyone else state that wearing a helmet would do any good at freeway speeds?

Second you state that you just want to be left alone to ride without a helmet. So why do you and so many anti helmet posters keep blathering away at the helmet users such as myself. Maybe you should respect our point of view also.

Does he care about safety, or is does he just have a bad personality?

Tell him that helmets make (utility) cycling appear dangerous (when it isn't, relatively) and this inhibits people from cycling. When there are less cyclists on the road, the roads become more dangerous for cyclists.

Its a simple argument, supported by some evidence from Australia and elsewhere (though in Australia we have a particularly intense, even toxic, climate of debate and the evidence is also disputed, but you don't have to tell him that).

That's true, but he might take it personally since you'd be saying that he's really the problem, going around berating strangers about the dangers of cycling.

Until recently, I did not wear a helmet when on a MUP, only when i will be in the street. I avoid riding in the street but sometimes I do in order to get from one place to another like the Hudson MUP to Central Park. Last week I was on a MUP when I noticed a gentleman riding a very bright red Cannondale. I guess it was the color which caught my attention. Anyway, he was on the part of the MUP which circled a rather large pond. As he neared me, he began to turn to his left( I would say he was at about 15-20mph) when his rear wheel slipped, he went into yaw and then crashed. I watched as he went down and his head bounced off the asphalt. He and the bike slid a few feet and then came to a stop, as did I in order to render aid if needed. His helmet (yes he was wearing one) was badly damaged. The plastic shell had cracked into a few peices and was scattered about. He had some roadrash on his elbow, hip and had his wits about him. We noticed that there were a few wet leaves on the road where he fell and it appeared what was why his tire slid out. I had some stuff to clean off his roadrash ( I keep a few things handy in my bag) and he went on his way. I can tell you his head hit the ground hard. I cannot fathom the injury to his head had he not been wearing a helmet.

I should have known better and always worn a helmet. Lesson learned, I will from now on.

No. When I'm selling helmets in the bike shop, I am very honest about helmet use. I disabuse customers of their incorrect, preconceived notions. Although I am perfectly willing to sell a helmet to a buyer who doesn't specifically ask about helmet safety efficacy...

Because your arguments are vapid and without support or references. You state opinion as fact, which rightfully needs to be called out as logical fallacy. It's not your helmet use which is the issue, it's your "arguments" and one-shot, unsupported statements which draw return fire in this thread.

Nobody cares that you wear a helmet -- good on you! -- but your regular statements in support of helmet use are generally baseless.

POC introduces MIPS to their road line.

http://brimages.bikeboardmedia.netdn...-mips-2015.jpg

I respect the point of view of helmet users and have no reason to engage them on the street (I simply don't care what anybody else does). OTOH THIS is a FORUM, which implies that there will be discussion on both sides of the issue. Discussing the limitations of helmets, or stating that you don't wear them doesn't make someone anti helmet. Also expressing opinions on a forum that exists for that very purpose, isn't the same as accosting folks on the street. Apparently you don't understand the difference.

You apparently want a helmet thread where no opinions different than yours are ever expressed. Maybe the mods should rename this thread the "helmet testimonial thread" and it could consist entirely of "my helmet saved my life threads".

Somewhere way back, you stated something to the effect (not going to search back for the exact post) that you keep posting here so that nobody would be misled by some of the posts here into not wearing a helmet. I guess you don't understand that a forum is a place for opposing views to be discussed. Readers are presumed to have some intelligence, and able to draw their own conclusions, though I guess you feel everybody except yourself is to dumb to see what you call clear logic.

The helmet cracked so there's a good chance it didn't perform as it should have. Coupled with the fact that bicycle crashes like that typically don't result in serious injuries, that injuries to other parts of his body where lacking and that helmets don't really seem to prevent serious injuries to begin with, I would say there's more than a fair chance he would have been OK without the helmet. It probably saved him some bruising and road-rash, though.

I don't actually want to interact with the person at all. I try not to judge personalities of others, as mine would probably be questionable as well. Hell, I have stayed out of this thread except to make fun of it a little, back around page 180+/-.

Interestingly, I own four helmets, not including the two that are on the "shelf of respect", or whats left of them. While I don't know if my life was "saved", it was certainly made less complicated by at least one of them. Three months after that wreck, and the various bones and muscles had knitted enough to ride again, I decided to ride without a helmet for a while. Mostly because it was pretty unnerving getting back on at all, and even though in that case the helmet had worked in a textbook fashion, direct impact landing strait down on pavement, I don't want a psychological leash.

It strikes me as funny, that as someone who generally does wear a helmet, its not the first time I have been bothered for not wearing one. Once, on tour, I picked up the Katy Trail in MO. As soon as I was off the sketchy rutted highway and on the trail, I took the lid off and put on my sun hat. Two hours later two sweet older ladies were lecturing me about how my mother would be so sad if she saw me without my protective gear. So, I did tell them that my mother had never owned a helmet in her life and rode all through the seventies, so probably wouldn't care much.

I have read some interesting responses to my original question, and am encouraged that everyone seems to draw the line at bothering people on the street. Since I don't need a hobby I probably wont spend to much time debating my lack of one way or anotherness on the subject.

There ya go, wearing a helmet would be worth it just for that... As for how in-effective it may have been for more serious injuries that is totally unknown...

Actually, the way the helmet works is that is absorbs the energy instead of your head. I'm certain that the helmet worked exactly as designed. I'm not sure what level of injury if any, it prevented. I would say that in my experience, the least it saved him was a nice sized knot on the left side of his head if not something much more severe. In my experience, helmets save lives on Motorcycles and I would tend to extend that to bike crashes as well.

I would calculate that his head hit the ground at about 4mph if it was accelerated only by gravity. That does not seem to be fast execept you have to consider that his head would stop instantly upon impact but his brain would keep moving and then crash into the inside of his skull. This is the stuff concusions are made of.

There's also a good chance that it performed exactly as it should have. That it absorbed energy and mitigated injury right up until the point where its design parameters were exceeded and it failed.

Who knows? Not me. Not you.

I would not extend motorcycle helmet effectiveness to the bike helmet effectiveness debate. Different construction, different spec's and safety standards; different results.

Also, bicycle helmets are not designed to help with concussions...