Compulsory helmet laws

Serious discussion of cycling issues
User avatar
tarquin_foxglove
Posts: 533
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 13:30 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby tarquin_foxglove » Tue Jul 10, 2012 16:09 pm

Ron Stuart wrote:The clue is in the name I guess :roll:


Arf, first time I've received an ad hominem attack on this site.

Enlighten me, why does James Cracknell saying that his helmet didn't prevent a serious injury make wearing a helmet a 'no brainer'?

User avatar
megilleland
Posts: 738
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 09:14 am

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby megilleland » Thu Aug 02, 2012 07:47 am

Following the death of a cyclist near the Olympic Park here in the Guardian today:

After the fatal incident, gold medal-winning cyclist Bradley Wiggins was asked for his views on how safe London's roads are for cyclists. He said: "It's dangerous and London is a busy city and [there is] a lot of traffic. I think we have to help ourselves sometimes.

"I haven't lived in London for 10 to 15 years now and it's got a lot busier since I was riding a bike as a kid round here, and I got knocked off several times.

"But I think things are improving to a degree – there are organisations out there who are attempting to make the roads safer for both parties. But at the end of the day we've all got to co-exist on the roads. Cyclists are not ever going to go away as much as drivers moan, and as much as cyclists maybe moan about certain drivers they are never going to go away, so there's got to be a bit of give and take.

Wiggins said he would like to see the introduction of a law making it compulsory to wear cycling helmets.


I can see the politicians jumping at this and making it compulsory now that Bradley has added his voice. Looks like us gentle cyclists won't get a choice as we will be lumped in with the high speed lycra group.
The more you spend - the faster you go - the less you see.

User avatar
megilleland
Posts: 738
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 09:14 am

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby megilleland » Thu Aug 02, 2012 08:09 am

More media have now jumped onto Bradley Wiggins statement about compulsory wearing of helmets.

Daily Mail
Independent
The Times
The more you spend - the faster you go - the less you see.

User avatar
disgruntledgoat
Posts: 8756
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 14:56 pm
Contact:

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby disgruntledgoat » Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:46 pm

How does a helmet stop you getting crushed by a bus?
"In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

@gietvangent

User avatar
diy
Posts: 6383
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 20:49 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby diy » Fri Aug 03, 2012 09:48 am

I think there is a stronger argument that motorcylists shouldn't wear a helmet than cyclists. I really can't see why anyone would object to wearing a helmet. I also don't get the argument that "gentle" cyclists are at less risk. It is slower speed impacts where a helmet can make the difference.

You can be riding at 5mph, get clipped by a car and hit your head with sufficient force to kill you.

snorri
Posts: 2975
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 19:44 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby snorri » Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:14 am

diy wrote:I really can't see why anyone would object to wearing a helmet.

You don't have to understand the reasons, just as long as you are happy to accept the vast majority of utility cyclists don't want to wear one and don't want to be goaded in to wearing one. :)

potters1863
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 19:47 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby potters1863 » Fri Aug 17, 2012 19:19 pm

Yes I think everyone should wear a helmet when riding.

No evidence for reasons apart from common sense, I have to wear one at work in plant rooms and outside due to the fact that if I hit my head or something else hits my head I will have a better chance of a less serious injury than not wearing some head protection.

Cycling is just the same, you don`t have to fall off every week, once in 50 years is good enough reason. You may not hit your head on the road, curb or anything else but if you do then it is far better that the padding in the helmet takes the bashing and damage rather than starting at the skull and so on.

Saw a family today, two kids with helmets and the father without. Is he any safer than they are? Why does he think they are better off with helmets and he is not? Not the best to look after the welfare of your children and then ignore your own welfare, do they raise themselves if the dad is killed due to his thinking that he is ok and they need protection?

Yes always wear a helmet, may not save you in a serious accident but the chances of survival must be better than not wearing one on the basis that any damage is being taken out on the helmet before your skull rather than direct.

User avatar
bails87
Posts: 13051
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 22:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby bails87 » Mon Aug 20, 2012 10:41 am

AARRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!

FFS, there's a difference between "doing X is a bad idea in my opinion*" and "doing X must be made illegal".

What's so hard to understand about that?!



*"despite the fact that I've just said I've got no evidence to support my opinion"
MTB/CX

"As I said last time, it won't happen again."

User avatar
JamesB5446
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 17:25 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby JamesB5446 » Fri Aug 24, 2012 13:06 pm

zummerzet-lou wrote:I really don't understand why compulsory helmets are not enforced in the UK.

Because it's a stupid idea.

There is evidence that numbers of cyclists drop in areas where helmets are mandatory.
There is evidence to show that helmet laws do not bring head injuries down by much.

http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1241.html

dylanfernley wrote:the pro compulsion lobby would logically have to extend helmet wearing for all pedestrians , in case they are hit by a vehicle, the helmet might reduce head injury, a common one involving cars and people, also there are a suprising number of head injuries to occupants of vehicles involved in collisions so scope there also for helmet wearing.

Head injuries per mile are higher for pedestrians than cyclists, so you're bang on the money on that one.
(Drunk walking is also statistically more dangerous than drunk driving, although only for the person doing it)

Ron Stuart wrote:http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cy ... 309109.ece

It's a no brainer isn't it :?:

It is, he's proof that a helmet won't save you from a brain injury.

Ron Stuart wrote:The list of riders that have had a head injury as a result of a cycling accident but have sustained much lesser injuries as a result of wearing a helmet is growing all the time, I myself have experienced this as I was run down by a hit and run driver. Also 5 weeks ago a rider I know was playing silly whotsits racing for the village sign on a club run as some do when he lost control hit the road head first, broke his jaw, nose and suffered concussion/ brain swell and bleed. Afterwards he was told by the surgeon that had he not been wearing a helmet he wouldn't be here today. The helmet was in several pieces after the crash.

I think anyone who makes statements like this should be made to back them up by taking part in double blind trials.

essjaydee wrote: There haven't been any reported cases (that I know of) where a helmet has caused additional injuries, and if a compulsory law saved one life, surely it's worth it?

1.http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1039.html
2. No, it wouldn't be worth it if it puts people off riding leading to more cars on the road and less people taking regular exercise.

diy wrote:You can be riding at 5mph, get clipped by a car and hit your head with sufficient force to kill you.

You can get clipped by a car as a pedestrian. You can fall down the stairs drunk (girlfriend's sister is a physio in a brain injury hospital, huge number of patients are in because of this). Do you wear a helmet when these could be a risk?

potters1863 wrote:Saw a family today, two kids with helmets and the father without. Is he any safer than they are? Why does he think they are better off with helmets and he is not?

Because kids fall over a lot more than adults. Quite simple really.
Risk of falling off when racing or mountain biking > risk of falling off when riding to work or the shops.

Sorry for the huge post, but I think the links I've posted are quite interesting.

snorri
Posts: 2975
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 19:44 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby snorri » Sun Aug 26, 2012 10:39 am

potters1863 wrote:Yes I think everyone should wear a helmet when riding.
No evidence for reasons apart from common sense, I have to wear one at work in plant rooms and outside due to the fact that if I hit my head or something else hits my head I will have a better chance of a less serious injury than not wearing some head protection.

I think everyone should wear a lifejacket when travelling by ferry.
No evidence for reasons apart from common sense.
Regarding your work situation, I doubt that helmets are much more than a visible evidence of your company safety culture. If helmet wearing had been introduced as the sole safety measure in the workplace 50 years ago I doubt if we would have seen much difference in accident statistics. It is the less visible measures which have improved industrial safety,eg training staff to think safety, safety inspection of tools and plant, regular testing of potentially dangerous equipment, encouraging staff to report accident hazards, etc etc.
Unfortunately, the call for helmet wearing has become a dangerous distraction from the real issues affecting cyclist safety on our roads.

User avatar
diy
Posts: 6383
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 20:49 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby diy » Mon Aug 27, 2012 06:38 am

cyclehelmets.org is an anti helmet campaign site, I've been through much of their claims and its mostly distraction and diversion. Some of it is quite reasoned though, but its not a balanced site.

User avatar
JamesB5446
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 17:25 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby JamesB5446 » Mon Aug 27, 2012 07:57 am

It has links to pretty much all the 'pro-helmet' studies I think, or at least it used to.

Which site would you recommend for a more balanced picture?

User avatar
diy
Posts: 6383
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 20:49 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby diy » Mon Aug 27, 2012 08:10 am

I don't think there is one. People seem to come down on one side or the other, which isn't helpful.

User avatar
JamesB5446
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 17:25 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby JamesB5446 » Mon Aug 27, 2012 08:43 am

Sod people. I look at which side the evidence comes down on. And it seems to be on the side that says compulsory helmet use is a terrible idea.

User avatar
diy
Posts: 6383
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 20:49 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby diy » Mon Aug 27, 2012 19:11 pm

Why?

User avatar
JamesB5446
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 17:25 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby JamesB5446 » Mon Aug 27, 2012 21:02 pm

Why what?

User avatar
diy
Posts: 6383
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 20:49 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby diy » Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:33 am

JamesB5446 wrote:I look at which side the evidence comes down on. And it seems to be on the side that says compulsory helmet use is a terrible idea.


Just interested in what you thought was the compelling argument(s).

User avatar
JamesB5446
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 17:25 pm

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby JamesB5446 » Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:57 am

1. That numbers of cyclists on the road go down when these laws are introduced.
2. The number of deaths per 1000 cyclist on the road doesn't go down by much.

As I say though, I go with the figures, not opinion. If someone has any evidence to show they are a good idea I'd love to take a look.

jimmies
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 08:55 am

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby jimmies » Tue Sep 04, 2012 13:03 pm

I'm new to road cycling, so this is something I've had to think about as I have had to buy gear - Now from a pure riding perspective, I do prefer it without a helmet.....but there is little in it - but I also know that my wife would not be happy....so I now wear one

I guess that if you are a person who would not be put off riding by wearing one....then it does make sense to wear one, I would also say that making it compulsory would be a backwards step for ALL those people who would be put off riding. I'm sure the people who ride without a helmet know what the risks are. If they do not know the risks, then they probably wouldn't care about any laws that would be in place should it be made compulsory anyway.

I personally think no laws are needed and that personal responsibilty needs to be the order of the day.

I ride bikes and I'd never go out in jeans,trainers and t-shirt even though it is legal to do so. There is plenty of evidence to show that boots,leathers and kevlar inserts save riders from all sorts of injuries, yet I too wouldn't want these made law that they had to be used.

freddiegrubb
Posts: 399
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 11:12 am

Re: Compulsory helmet laws

Postby freddiegrubb » Wed Sep 26, 2012 18:22 pm

I don't like wearing a helmet, but I do. I personally knew 3 cyclists (dead) who had the misfortune to die of head plus other injuries, none wore helmets, you pays your money!!!!!!!!


Return to “Campaign”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests