Good choice crikey. I’m mostly not wearing a Specialized S3. I was going to not wear a Prevail, but that proved a bit to pricey for little extra benefit.

This is probably a waste of time, but is this the summary so far:

a) Some people are saying you don’t have to wear a helmet to cycle, they’re not really going to make a difference in a RTA, but do in some cases. (and most of this lot say they actually wear them some of the time)

b) some people are saying that if you don’t wear a helmet everytime you get on a bike you are going to end up dead.

c) one person says they’d ignore you if you fall off a bike without a helmet on but really they wouldn’t but they might do, so respect them.

d) someone’s got no trousers on and is rubbing themselves.

e) everyone should give up and ride their bikes (after doing a full risk assessment and deciding on appropriate PPE obviously)

Sorry Terry, that isn’t going to end the debate….

Much more succinct summary in the first seven words of that post, Terry!

For comedy value, here is me, on the busy roads, wearing a helmet AND high-viz vest:

You all wear a high-viz vest right? Common sense really. Be lunacy not to. Darwinism in action. I wear mine in bed. 😀

I have just ridden my road bike without a helmet…………

How cool was that ?

I’ve found that the straps act like a kind of drainpipe when you’re sweating, which was a bit odd until I realised what was happening, Ikept thinking it was rain drops on my legs. ..

But,yes I’d recommend one.

Where’s the neon ‘Caution! Cyclist’ sign, massive airzound horn, and panniers carrying a paramedic’s emergency first aid kit? You’re just not taking this safety business seriously are you?

or comedy value, here is me, on the busy roads, wearing a helmet AND high-viz vest:

which one are you?

Sorry Terry, that isn’t going to end the debate….

Was a bit thick of me 🙁

I agree with ned.

which one are you?

I’m the black guy.

*What am I looking at in this thread?*

Beep boop, “Caution, this cyclist is not wearing a helmet”, beep boop

Good choice crikey. I’m mostly not wearing a Specialized S3. I was going to not wear a Prevail, but that proved a bit to pricey for little extra benefit.

I wore a cheaper Specialized Echelon in 38 degree heat in France recently. It was remarkably well ventilated considering the buckets of sweat pouring off me, cycling up Alpe d’Huez.

My first helmet and my latest.

The Sub 6 is from 1992…

More power to you if you can wear a cat on your head…

Shoulder, yes
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8F8WR2rzPA[/video]
But head?

EDIT: He’s wearing a hat, a helmet and a cat. Where does he stand on this issue?

Those Catlike helmets always make me think of the rather creepy “breast rash larvae” hoax that was doing the rounds a while ago:

Snopes link possibly NSFW

GrahamS your argument is now using safety equipment which allows you to perform a task more safely causes injury

Demonstrated quite effectively on lots of building sites where eye protection is causing extra slips, trips and falls. I’m not sure if the research has been carried out but the numbers were showing a trend when I left the business.

Interesting how “common sense” risk analysis is so cultural biased.

I understand that back in days of unharnessed high steel, workers in North america wore steel toe-capped boots so that their toes aren’t crushed by errant steel. High steel workers in the far east reckoned that it’s more important to guard against the risk of falling off and dying than the risk of losing some toes, and wore(wear?) sneakers so they can fell the edges of the beams beneath their feet.

Both common sense, but both are cultural conformity with the norm, a cultural understanding of what’s best.

“Common sense” does not really exist – it’s all a product of our personal experiences and prevalent culture. If they are largely the same, then you’ll agree. Otherwise, nope.

That’s why it’s common!

I’ve never worn my lid on my commute or when i did a bit of roadie riding and some 10 TT’s ,but do every time on the MTB, After watching helicopter heroes this morning tending a guy who fell off on road going down a hill I think I should start.

Ironically, people do not always agree about which particular perceptions, judgements and understandings are “common sense”. So although the term originated in philosophy, it is often seen as an inexact and subjective term, to be avoided in precise discussion.

Ho, ho! No danger of finding any precise discussion on here!

“Common sense” does not really exist – it’s all a product of our personal experiences and prevalent culture. If they are largely the same, then you’ll agree. Otherwise, nope.

I disagree.

Common sense should be called ‘commonly accepted belief’. It’s often not sense at all 🙂

Well, blow me down, I have learnt something from (because of) a helmet thread.

It encouraged me to think about what common sense means. I’ve been working on the usage of it as “good reasoning” i.e. “Don’t you have any common-sense?” said to someone who’s done something a bit silly.

Which ignores a great other part of what how it’s used and what it means: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_sense

Common sense should be called ‘commonly accepted belief’. It’s often not sense at all

This.

Particularly in the cycling world there are many things that would appear to fit into the ‘But it’s common sense!’ approach which are actually not true.

Nothing like a philosophical tangent to kill a thread. fingers crossed…

…you’d have to be a nutter to get on a bike without a helmet on.

imnotverygood – Member

…you’d have to be a nutter to get on a bike without a helmet on.

*Holds hand up*

Young Lady Falling off her bike without a helmet and looks fine:

(its Friday!)

Oooh strappy shoes and toe straps – that’s a recipe for blisters!

Speaking from experience ?

but on the plus side she would get a wide pass

Been happening for years…….

judges do need much of an excuse to give lenient sentences as we have less rights than the average dog when involved in a rta.

You are an idiot if you don’t wear a helmet!

Reply deleted as point made previously upthread.

Martin Porter has written some good stuff on the legal side of things.

e.g.
http://www.newlawjournal.co.uk/nlj/content/personal-injury-blame-victim

“Smith had not been wearing his cycle helmet and that, asserted Finch, made him at fault and partly responsible for his own brain damage”

“However, Smith was spared a reduction in his damages by the defendant’s inability to prove that a helmet would have made any difference.”

few more in here too…
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2033.pdf

see page 4

“Phethean-Hubble v Coles [2011] EWHC 363 (QB) HHJ Wilcox
Child cyclist rides from pavement onto road into the path of (child) motorist sustaining serious brain injury in the resulting collision. The Judge followed Smith v Finch finding both that the cyclist was at fault in not wearing a helmet and also that it had not been established that a helmet would have made any difference. The division of responsibility or causing the accident was one third cyclist and two thirds motorist (a decision that may well not survive appeal). The finding that a helmet would not have made a difference was not appealed. Shorrock was not cited”

he spared double road killer Gary McCourt from jail.

How about this one from the US, where a driver kills a child cyclist while doing 84mph in a 45mph limit, and the SUES the child’s parents because he wasn’t wearing a helmet!?! 😯

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/driver-convicted-of-killing-child-sues-victims-parents–28447/