Forum menu
It is strange how most people's thoughts on helmets and cycling have been trained over time.
MOlgrips – the point being rates of head injury when driving or walking are similar to cycling. so why cycling helmets and not driving or walking ones?
Yes this exactly. If one suggests that people wear protective helmets inside cars (outside of motorsport) then most people think you've lost your marbles, yet far more motor vehicle occupants receive serious head injuries each year than cyclists do.
I also like what the hierarchy of controls diagrams JonBa shared highlights, I introduced that exact same diagram a few years ago when discussing this topic elsewhere.
Not only can mandatory helmet-wearing laws cause safety issues through reduced cycling but they foster an environment that exacerbates behaviours in motor vehicle drivers which is dangerous for cyclists.
No. People need protecting from themselves. How many of you look back on the stuff you did as youths and think ‘my god I did some stupid stuff back then’ ? How many of you are now parents and worry about the consequences of your kids doing the same stuff you used to do?
I'm not sure that's the best analogy. Kids will always do stupid stuff and ignore the rules that say they shouldn't. Even in the 1970s when I grew up and pulled some ridiculous stunts that make me shudder to recall, there were safety regs and laws of the land that outlawed stuff we did. We ignored them then and I'm sure kids today do the same. Except they post it on social media which thank the heavens was not a thing in my yoof.
Kids aside, it's pretty patronising to say we need protecting from ourselves. Who decides what we need protecting from? Do you have complete faith in those charged with making those decisions? A lot of outdoor activities are intrinsically risky. To those that don't participate, they might seem reckless even. Should those people dictate what we need protecting from? I'd rather make my own choices.
that people wear protective helmets inside cars (outside of motorsport)
a good comparison. some people take their cars on a race track, and depending on the level might find themselves in a helmet, full flameproof suit, 5 point harness etc. To drive to work, a 3 point seatbelt is all thats required.
Likewise on motorbikes, boots, full leathers (or textile alternative), airbag vests, is suitable and generally worn in many situations like motorway riding, "spirited" backroad riding on sports bikes; yet riding a moped around a city a 3/4 helmet and long trousers may be sufficient.
But on a pedal bike, some people lose their minds if you suggest a gentle roll to the shops with a bare head.
Interestingly, I know some people who are in the helmet everywhere camp, yet they will be doing bike park wales in an open face helmet, or riding rocky trail centres/singletrack with no kneepads or gloves.
I’ve seen maybe half a dozen cyclists on the deck following accidents. I’ve probably seen the same number of pedestrians, but in most cases they were knocked over by someone else. In one, some poor woman who looked pretty unwell just collapsed.
On the cycling stats they cover all cycling by all parties. For one person it is more of a risk that a other. Person a commuting like a warrior, person b pottering to shop
But on a pedal bike, some people lose their minds if you suggest a gentle roll to the shops with a bare head.
Interestingly, I know some people who are in the helmet everywhere camp, yet they will be doing bike park wales in an open face helmet, or riding rocky trail centres/singletrack with no kneepads or gloves.
Pretty much this ^^
Having fallen off wearing a Fox Flux half shell, breaking my jaw and another time bouncing my head off the ground at BPW wearing a convertible Bell Super (which probably saved a lot more damage), I've now got three different helmets for different rides. Maybe I'll wear the wrong one at some point. Also have varying degrees of body protection that may or may not be the right choice on the day.
I'll not wear a helmet riding to the shops, or the pub though, it's an assessment of risk. Generally though, I'll not ride down the big set of double steps from the pub to the park if I've had 5 peroni and sans helmet.
Every day is a risk assessment at work in construction and in the same vein, riding the bike. Sensible decisions and a dose of pragmatism usually prevail
Every day is a risk assessment at work in construction and in the same vein, riding the bike. Sensible decisions and a dose of pragmatism usually prevail
/thread
But even if there was conclusive evidence and compulsion I’d weigh my own risks. And the calculation would likely be how likely would it be for the cops to stop me.
The logical end point of that argument is the end of the national speed limit.
it’s pretty patronising to say we need protecting from ourselves
It's true though. Some people do. Are you saying everyone is intelligent, rational and responsible?
Take drivers for example. People will moan about how terrible drivers are at any opportunity, but as soon as the conversation turns to imposing limits on them, people will suddenly switch to saying that we should al be empowered to make our own decisions because we're all really good at that.
No. People need protecting from themselves. How many of you look back on the stuff you did as youths and think ‘my god I did some stupid stuff back then’ ? How many of you are now parents and worry about the consequences of your kids doing the same stuff you used to do?
To continue this thinking is to ban anything remotely risky.
And the interesting bit of course is the real risks to children and young people is not a banged head - it is harm in the home (abuse and sexual abuse), it is mental health and suicide, it is lifestyle attributed health issues of obesity, etc etc. I recall (but am struggling to find the report online) a Banardo's report from about 10 years ago - showing that children were at less risk of harm unaccompanied in a local park than in their own home, let alone the long term benefits of being out playing, in nature, while socialising in their local community..
I would much rather our discussion and thoughts focus on those REAL issues, rather than a perceived issue.
Well said Matt!
A great example of this is how councils remove rope swings from trees because someone might break their arm. I see one child did sadly die on one of those swings recently. But how many children get hit and killed by cars because they never do anything risky in life and thus are both bad at risk assessment and craving danger? How many bored teenagers get sucked into drug problems or lost in the dark corners of the internet because there’s nothing exciting accessible?
Here in Brighton lots of playgrounds have been replaced recently and everything is too easy for the age range it’s aimed at, presumably for “safety” reasons. It’s utterly moronic!
Every day is a risk assessment at work in construction
Sounds like whataboutary.
Along with talk of pedestrians, this that or t'other. What happens on a building site, or inside a car, or even walking along the road bears no relation to cycling along. Be that on or off road.
Take drivers for example. People will moan about how terrible drivers are at any opportunity, but as soon as the conversation turns to imposing limits on them, people will suddenly switch to saying that we should al be empowered to make our own decisions because we’re all really good at that.
Well clearly what we mean is "I drive correctly and shouldn't have any limits imposed upon me, everyone else is wrong and should be compelled to change"
Along with talk of pedestrians, this that or t’other. What happens on a building site, or inside a car, or even walking along the road bears no relation to cycling along. Be that on or off road.
Pretty sure all those activities involve ongoing risk assessments
Hmm this have anything to do with with hordes of cyclists dying due to not wearing helmets that we don’t have.
TBH I get fed up hearing that line that’s said every time some one has an assisted ‘accident’ with a bike.
Not sure how good a piece of polystyrene is when you’ve been articulated into the next world.
Big difference between motorcycle and cycle helmets and most cyclists aren’t achieving the speeds that a motorcycle does, and we’ve seen the effectiveness of hoodies whilst bouncing a Suron off something hard at speed.
Also differences in pootling on your bike in the park and hammering it down a rocky trail or tearing up the road.
I wear helmets but am under no illusion of their effectiveness, they aren’t some magic solution, especially not in an urban environment.
Anyway I’m just repeating what cycling U.K. are saying ,the numbers show that not cycling is worse.
Trust the numbers and wear sunscreen.
Crikey, are people that precious about their hair? Whenever I'm in the bike I wear my lid, worst case it never gets used to save my swede, best case it means someone else doesn't have to scoop bits of my swede off the road and tell my family what happened.
Compulsory though, far too much hassle to police when there are easier targets
Pretty sure all those activities involve ongoing risk assessments
IMHO life is one big ongoing risk assessment 🙂
life is one big ongoing risk assessment 🙂
Are you sure about your facts ?, last I heard it was a dream.
You OK there Big Brother?
Prove me wrong, go on!
Fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and
accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with those of the State, which stands
for the conscience and the universal will of man as a historic entity. It is opposed to classical
liberalism which arose as a reaction to absolutism and exhausted its historical function when the
State became the expression of the conscience and will of the people. Liberalism denied the State
in the name of the individual; Fascism reasserts
Benito Mussolini.
You must be joking.
People need protecting from themselves
That's quite totalitarian. Especially when it comes to the rather genteel topic of bike helmets.
They rub along in Amsterdam quite nicely without being infantilised at such a level. But then maybe some people feel an emotional refuge in totalitarian ideals.
For me, I'd find such a loss of autonomy both stultifying and terrifying. But horses for courses I guess.
Sounds like whataboutary.
Along with talk of pedestrians, this that or t’other. What happens on a building site, or inside a car, or even walking along the road bears no relation to cycling along. Be that on or off road.
Point missed
What happens in every walk of life requires an assessment of risk, it's not a comparison between those different activities.
Some people will consider the risks of certain situations more than other people will, but to some degree, everyone does it. On a construction site, yes you have to think about it more than a walk to the shops because the hazards and likelihoods are greater, but even walking to get your pint of milk, you assess risks when you're crossing the road for example. It's a simple risk assessment that you do in your head without really realising, but you are doing it nonetheless.
Driving a car, you assess the risks when pulling out of a junction, overtaking, many other things.
Riding a bike has risks and you generally assess them. Can I make that drop and what will happen if I don't, how fast can I take this techy section without crashing? What are the consequences if I do crash? Do I really need a helmet to ride to the shop, what are the chances of smashing my head into a rock compared to when I'm hurtling through the woods at 25mph? Yes there's still an element of risk there, but the severity and likelihood are both greatly reduced.
What level of risk you are prepared to allow in your activity (cycling) is down to the individual and as always ppe (in this case a helmet) is the last line of defence. Prepare against the other risks/hazards before your helmet is even needed - to paraphrase my analogy earlier, don't ride down steps pissed is a perfect example 🤷 Not getting pissed before riding a bike would provide better preventive measures. Not riding a bike at all OR not getting pissed would reduce the risk of anything (including fun) happening at all. The helmet is merely a backup that may protect you if all that goes out of the window
I bet el duce had a helluva job getting a bike helmet to fit his bonce
Benito Mussolini.
Does any fascist count for Godwins law or does it have to be Hitler. Saying that, I am pretty sure Hitler was all for compulsory helmets for cyclists.
I am pretty sure Hitler was all for compulsory helmets for cyclists.
Stands to reason, he was a vegetarian.
jonesyboyFull Member
Crikey, are people that precious about their hair?
statement useless unless we see a photo of your hair.
isnt it odd that (it certainly seems to me, to be) the same people who are aggressively for this (and anything that makes it more onerous to choose a sustainable form of transport), are the same people who whinge about
"'elf and safety gone mad, we didnt need this back in my day"
Similarly, people violently against the introduction of a low traffic neighbourhood around school, so that its a pain to drive little Tyson and Chaznay right to the school gate but safer to walk or cycle, are also the people who had to
walk 8 miles to school, in the snow all year round, up hill in both direction.
to paraphrase my analogy earlier, don’t ride down steps pissed is a perfect example
Someone I once rode with categorically wouldn't ride with you if you didn't wear a helmet, but was quite happy to stop at a pub mid ride & knock back a couple of pints 🤔
Another guy started his pro helmet every time he rode a bike story, by explaining how he'd gone OTB whilst leaning down to adjust his qr on the move.
In both instances I thought it was good that they should always wear helmets
Dictators and helmets eh?
Crikey, are people that precious about their hair?
*flicks luxuriant locks*