Could be that. You might start by looking up "socialism" on Wikipedia and see how that matches my posts.

Hell, I'm so uneducated that I still consider Wikipedia to be a non-source. So uneducated that I don't even consider "socialism" to be an epithet. I simply use it as a descriptive term for the idea that things work best when distribution of income is managed by the state. Or, in Rydaspeak, "B'crats taking money from taxpayers and giving it to someone else".

:saweeet: I've changed my mind about wearing a helmet. not on the road but rather whilst reading threads. . .:injured:

Helps when beating your head against a wall, anyway,

I, for one, love the new direction the thread has taken. :lol:

What? No mention of Nazis yet? This thread is full of life!

When the government is required to take care of those seriously disabled in the course of recreational activity, then they have a right to require certain safety measures for partaking in that activity. A quadrapelegic will cost several million dollars to take care of over a lifetime, so I don't think it's unreasonable to have laws that might prevent or mitigate serious injury.

And if we take that "logic" to its conclusion, we'll have agents going through your refrigerator looking for transfats. So that was probably kind of a stupid way to introduce yourself to BF. But welcome aboard anyway.

why did you ask for nayzees?

yes welcome, i'm guessing you've always worn a helmet WT?

Sorry I made such a bad impression. I wanted to point out that those who pay the bills get to make the rules. When individuals alone take responsibility for the consequences of their choices, then the gov't has no right to impose restrictions.

No worries, mate. I'm usually drunk and bitter when I sign on to BF, so you shouldn't pay much attention to me.

That would all be very well if 1: cycling was a dangerous activity, and 2: cycle helmets were designed to prevent serious injury.

Don't look for any logic or reasoning anywhere in this thread. Many of the comments are being made by cyclists who should have been wearing a helmet...... :D

Welcome to the BF.

Am I supposed to laugh or cry?

I don't know. Maybe you should ask Wikipedia.

I have no idea what the statistics on bicycling injuries are, but among the young people I worked with in rehab, I'd say a quarter of them had permanent brain damage from bicycle accidents. One time i dumped my bike and bounced my helmeted head off the pavement. Even with a helmet I suffered a moderate concussion. I might not be here if I had not been wearing a helmet. Yes, all my evidence is anecdotal.
I would like to see detailed stats on bike related injury, hopefully divided by age and riding experience.

You seem to suggest that Wikipedia is not to be trusted on simple matters as the definition of "socialism". It can, though, and had you cared to enlighten yourself, you might have found that other encyclopedias will confirm it.

You are perfectly right that government should do something that might prevent or mitigate serious injury. Only, the kind of helmets that would do that are way too troublesome to ride around with. Meanwhile:

http://www.cycle-helmets.com/elvik.pdf

Head injury vs. neck injury.

So, perhaps governments should concentrate their efforts on bike lanes, controlling the speed of motorized vehicles etc. - things that actually work.

hagen

I live in the US. We can see what socialism and big government has done to Europe. Big brother dictates such as helmet laws is driving Europe broke. Thats why we dont need that kind of nanny state here. As I have stated, I believe in personal responsibility, and that includes riding with a helmet. To waste police and justice time on helmet laws is just plain a waste of money. I personally think people are dumb if they dont wear a helmet, but to make them a criminal if they dont is beyond the pale.

It's been my experience that most Europeans are pleased with their system and, when visiting America, are a little uncomfortable with people having so much liberty and responsibility. So I doubt that line of argument is going to gain much traction.

And with the arrival of yet another clueless noob, the eternal cycle begins anew.

“Through countless births in the cycle of existence
I have run, not finding
although seeking the builder of this house;
and again and again I faced the suffering of new birth.
Oh housebuilder! Now you are seen.

You shall not build a house again for me.
All your beams are broken,
the ridgepole is shattered.
The mind has become freed from conditioning:
the end of craving has been reached.”

― Siddhārtha Gautama

Uh... sure :P

People themselves need to make this decision. If we rely on government, pretty soon we'll be required to wear helmets ad pads to shop for groceries.

I would say that they have little time for thinking while they are here because they are too busy shopping for the things they can't find or afford at home thanks to socialism.
As far as poor hagen he is so full of canned phrases (like his Fox remark) that he has lost all capability for individual thinking at all.....besides the bureaucrats wouldn't like that !

Have you actually been to Europe?

He's heard of it. You know, that it's part of the socialist East Block, is very poor etc. Kinda like North Korea.