BBC Breakfast: Should helmets for cyclists be made compulsory

Home Forum Bike Forum BBC Breakfast: Should helmets for cyclists be made compulsory

Viewing 40 posts - 41 through 80 (of 226 total)
  • BBC Breakfast: Should helmets for cyclists be made compulsory
  • bencooper
    Member

    Hmm, I’m now considering making dummy tax disc stickers to stick on the bikes I sell…

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    See when you’re trying to win a battle it’s always better to have an elevated position. Make helmets compulsory, take the high ground, THEN go after the muppets in tin boxes.

    We already have the high ground. We don’t kill thousands of people a year with our vehicles!

    VED stickers for bikes would be a good start too.

    They really really wouldn’t.

    VED would mean you need to have some kind of registration plate to identify the bike it applies to. Which means ownership documents and a registered keeper. How does that work for hire bikes or people who swap frames around?

    Pointless bureaucracy which would cost millions to the tax payer and ultimately discourage people from cycling.

    IanMunro
    Member

    Mind you, having said that the sooner that all the brain-deads have got what little grey matter they aleady possess smeared all over someone’s windscreen and the better. At least that way I won’t have to share my oxygen supply with them.

    My you’re a charming chap.

    Premier Icon tomaso
    Subscriber
    glupton1976
    Member

    VED would mean you need to have some kind of registration plate to identify the bike it applies to. Which means ownership documents and a registered keeper. How does that work for hire bikes or people who swap frames around?

    Frame number? Or just put “bike” in the reg number place.

    Pointless bureaucracy which would cost millions to the tax payer and ultimately discourage people from cycling.

    Away and shite.

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    I don’t know about anyone else, but if I’m going to take part in a potentially hazardous activity then I’m going to make damned sure that I come out the other side if not completely intact

    Damned sure eh? So you always wear a full-face motorcycle helmet, neck brace, spine protector, leathers, knee and elbow pads, high viz vest, fluoro helmet cover, helmet mirrors, …?

    Mind you, having said that the sooner that all the brain-deads have got what little grey matter they aleady possess smeared all over someone’s windscreen and the better. At least that way I won’t have to share my oxygen supply with them.

    That’s just lovely.

    I too look forward to watching your intestines being forced through your nose by an HGV despite the fact you are wearing a helmet.

    Oh no, wait, no I don’t, because that’s a horrible thing to say!

    Premier Icon miketually
    Subscriber

    I don’t know about anyone else, but if I’m going to take part in a potentially hazardous activity then I’m going to make damned sure that I come out the other side if not completely intact then at least 95% of the way there – so anything that improves my chances of surviving is a good thing.

    Now that you’ve seen the image on page 1 will you be wearing a helmet in the car? Cycling isn’t a dangerous activity, it’s just perceived as such.

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    Frame number? Or just put “bike” in the reg number place.

    Right so just free stickers, paid for by drivers, that mean nothing and are not traceable to an owner and possible not even specific to the bike? Like this kind of thing:

    Yeah I’d have one of those if it was a legal requirement. Can’t say I really see the point though.

    > Pointless bureaucracy which would cost millions to the tax payer and ultimately discourage people from cycling.

    Away and shite.

    One of the beauties of cycling is simplicity.
    That shouldn’t be underestimated.

    Premier Icon miketually
    Subscriber

    Meanwhile, in my local paper:

    * 12-year-old girl with head injuries after a car crash
    * Drunk driver challenges police to a fight
    * Cyclist killed by sat nav

    But, yeah, bloody cyclists and their not wearing helmets.

    Premier Icon miketually
    Subscriber

    One of the beauties of cycling is simplicity.
    That shouldn’t be underestimated.

    Indeed.

    At the moment my wife’s bike is being used by her mum; would we need to register this with anyone? What about when we get the bike back to use it ourselves?

    (Incidentally, her mum rides the bike on off-road cycle routes only. My mum also ride her bike, but only on off-road cycle routes.

    I wonder what we could do to encourage cycling?)

    crikey
    Member

    I’ll give it 4.. no, 5 pages.
    I see we’ve had the ‘wishing violent death’ from a helmet advocate, has anyone done ‘Darwinism’ yet?

    Premier Icon Northwind
    Subscriber

    hjghg5 – Member

    compulsory helmets on roads with higher speed limits (maybe kicking in above 40?)

    If you get hit by a car doing 40, your helmet is unlikely to make any difference.

    johnellison – Member

    The same was said about motorcycle helmets in the 1960s, but how many motorcyclists do you see not wearing a helmet? Very, very few

    It’s not really the same, though. Higher speeds obviously, much higher costs of entry (the price of getting on the road on a pushbike is less than the cost of a decent motorbike helmet!), side benefits (enclosed helmets just make more sense to ride in, full visors etc- bee protection!), and the helmets are a lot more protective.

    wordnumb
    Member

    Informed vibrant debate via the telebox, is there nothing it can’t resolve?

    You’re more likely to suffer head damage during a discussion about compulsory cycle helmeting than you are by riding without a lid. Probably.

    Premier Icon mikewsmith
    Subscriber

    Sat in Melbourne today watching people ride bikes with helmets on, all of them from hipsters to girls on dutch bikes to racer types and a TT’s racing down brinswick. All of them wearing helmets and way more riding that you would ever see in a british city.

    Though as every one above will have said BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH most of the big objectors would wear one if the law said it was illegal just to stick it to the man.

    Premier Icon miketually
    Subscriber

    Sat in Melbourne today watching people ride bikes with helmets on, all of them from hipsters to girls on dutch bikes to racer types and a TT’s racing down brinswick. All of them wearing helmets and way more riding that you would ever see in a british city.

    What happened to overall cycling figures after the law was introduced?

    What happened to cycling-related head injury numbers after the law was introduced?

    How many can you see compared to, say, a German or Dutch city? How do overall cycling rates compare? How do head injury rates compare?

    I’d quite like evidence-based policies, rather than law-making by anecdote.

    mrmo
    Member

    one thing to think about, Motorbike and car, you need a licence, there are rules already in place. You have to be a certain age, you accept speed limits, etc etc.

    Bikes, horses and walkers, no age limits, no licence, basically no framework rules.

    So how do you enforce helmet rules on kids?

    Premier Icon andytherocketeer
    Subscriber

    has anyone done ‘Darwinism’ yet?

    yep, up there^^, but for car drivers/passengers, not cyclists.

    Actually, bring back Morris 1100’s and cars of that constructional quality. The fact that the floor might fall out due to rust at any time ought to make drivers think twice about driving kids to school. Or going too fast. And old school skinny tyres would mean driving in snow would be much easier again.

    So kids on bikes or walking to school would be much safer.

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    It’s not really the same, though

    Agreed. And of course the casualty rate on a motorcycle (despite helmets) is 122 deaths per billion miles, whereas cycling is about a quarter of that (35 per billion miles) and more like walking (42 deaths per billion miles).

    Premier Icon D0NK
    Subscriber

    so anything that improves my chances of surviving is a good thing.

    anticompulsion isn’t about the efficacy or otherwise of helmet during a crash it’s all the other shit that goes with it. I wear a helmet >90% of the time but I’m anticompulsion coz there’s just too many negative effects.

    Aswell as being bloody stupid of course, see driver head injuries, see armouring up the victims when it’s shite driving to blame in many cases, see marginalising cycling even more, see complicating a simple effective means of transport.

    samuri
    Member

    But then I’m assuming its nice and sunny there mike. 😉

    Premier Icon ratherbeintobago
    Subscriber

    The problems with helmets are:
    [list][*]They’re designed to protect you in low energy falls, ie. they’re not much use being hit by a car at 40mph[/*]
    [*]There is some evidence to suggest that drivers drive less cautiously round cyclists who are wearing helmets[/*]
    [*]The actual incidence of head injuries from cycling is much, much smaller than that from driving/walking/DIY etc, and no-one is suggesting helmets should be made compulsory for these activities[/*]
    [*]As the incidence of head injuries is small, the health benefits of making helmets compulsory are far outweighed by the health implications of the resultant decrease in people cycling[/*]
    [/list]
    Having said all this, I wear mine every time, but it should remain the right of the individual to decide, not the law.

    samuri
    Member

    Agreed. And of course the casualty rate on a motorcycle (despite helmets) is 122 deaths per billion miles, whereas cycling is about a quarter of that (35 per billion miles) and more like walking (42 deaths per billion miles).

    So walking is more dangerous than cycling?

    Why is this debate even happening?

    soobalias
    Member

    It would be better if the cyclist wasn’t a smug, brakeless fixieridingasshat

    dont think my colleagues will notice that level of detail

    Premier Icon ratherbeintobago
    Subscriber

    Why is this debate even happening?

    Because some ill-informed editor at the BBC has decided to stir it up again?

    Premier Icon mikewsmith
    Subscriber

    What happened to overall cycling figures after the law was introduced?

    From my friend in Vic Roads Safety (he should really know) there is a small dip before it returns to normal levels

    What happened to cycling-related head injury numbers after the law was introduced?

    Not sure but incredibly hard to measure as there is no like for like around – hot head helmet saves head people move on?

    How many can you see compared to, say, a German or Dutch city? How do overall cycling rates compare? How do head injury rates compare?

    Again how do you compare? There is so much more cycling culture in Holland compared to the UK/Oz the road design is completely different and the provisions for cycling is different. From the same friend above who has visited the leading cycling nations, their road safety people would love to put a mandatory helmet law in place but public opinion is against them.

    In the end of the day the main part of the body that doesn’t heal is the brain, I’ll put a helmet on while dicing with cars and other moving objects. Not my choice over here but it doesn’t dissuade me from cycling it just means I have a helmet.

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    Sat in Melbourne today watching people ride bikes with helmets on

    And has there been a dramatic drop in cycling deaths from this new law?

    No.

    Has there been a dramatic drop in cycling numbers?

    Yes.

    Wow, that sounds great, let’s do that.

    Premier Icon ransos
    Subscriber

    As Chris Boardman said (on BBC Breakfast) you don’t wear a bullet proof vest on the off-chance someone decides to shoot you.

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    (Is it just me or has the forum just gone a bit mental??)

    Premier Icon miketually
    Subscriber

    (Is it just me or has the forum just gone a bit mental??)

    I think ratherbeintobago tried to make a bullet point list 🙂

    Premier Icon miketually
    Subscriber

    Again how do you compare?

    Injury rates and modal share. Not particularly difficult to do.

    Premier Icon miketually
    Subscriber

    Hopefully a new page will fix the broken page…

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    I’ve “reported post” – hopefully a mod will fix it

    Mr Woppit
    Member

    smug, brakeless fixieridingasshat

    Bit harsh, I feel…

    Premier Icon stilltortoise
    Subscriber

    but it should remain the right of the individual to decide, not the law.

    Following a Spring/Summer of far too many (off-road) crashes, I’m nursing a variety of minor injuries, most of which would have been prevented by elbow and knee pads. I own elbow and knew pads, but my right to decide to wear them usually results in me not wearing them. I think I need some laws to make me wear them before I have one crash too many 😆

    ^True story, but tongue firmly in cheek. On a not tongue in cheek note, I have had a few offs where I’ve been very thankful for a helmet, so compulsory or not I will continue to wear one.

    Mr Woppit
    Member

    The only problem I have with wearing a helmet every day is….

    (Not me in the picture…)

    Premier Icon D0NK
    Subscriber

    Following a Spring/Summer of far too many (off-road) crashes, I’m nursing a variety of minor injuries, most of which would have been prevented by elbow and knee pads.

    I hurt my hip in a crash* last night can we have compulsory hip pads too please?

    *and yes my helmet did hit the ground and yes I was glad I had it on.

    Premier Icon stilltortoise
    Subscriber

    ^Naughty

    Talking of which (and OT), whatever happened with the fiasco regarding the hot-linked image of the Winnat’s Pass avalanche that caused all sorts of legal bother between STW and the image owner earlier this year?

    Premier Icon irc
    Subscriber

    I don’t know about anyone else, but if I’m going to take part in a potentially hazardous activity then I’m going to make damned sure that I come out the other side if not completely intact then at least 95% of the way there – so anything that improves my chances of surviving is a good thing.

    So 20mph speed limits on every urban road in the country, enforced by camera. Compulsory driving re-tests, every 10 years. 3 month ban for using a hand held mobile. 3 month ban for speeding. Oh Wait! That’s dealing with the danger rather than getting the victims to try and compensate. Can’t have that can we. Even though it would make sure cyclists come out the other side if not completely intact.

    Or maybe there is a debate about what is effective and proportionate. The evidence from places where there is a helmet law shows that it isn’t effective art saving lives.

    Brain dead? You might be.

    Premier Icon andytherocketeer
    Subscriber

    So 20mph speed limits on every urban road in the country, enforced by camera

    and drivers staring at the speedo for fear of getting a ticket

    Premier Icon stilltortoise
    Subscriber

    I hurt my hip in a crash* last night can we have compulsory hip pads too please?

    Despite it being tongue-in-cheek, this is kind of my point. If, for example, elbow and knee pads were compulsory, I’d wear them all the time. This would have prevented some of my recent injuries, or at least made them less serious. I’m still happy to take the risk and decide myself and I’m not advocating compulsory all-over body armour or helmets for that matter. Merely an observation that interested me

Viewing 40 posts - 41 through 80 (of 226 total)

The topic ‘BBC Breakfast: Should helmets for cyclists be made compulsory’ is closed to new replies.