Helmets

Home Forum Bike Forum Helmets

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 30 total)
  • Helmets
  • Premier Icon cookeaa
    Subscriber

    Paging TJ….

    Biscuits and Tea on standby…

    soma_rich
    Member

    So in short TJ is wrong and its obvious you should wear a helmet?

    Dickyboy
    Member

    Sadly one of the reasons I would wear a helmet 🙁

    don simon
    Member

    Let’s use a worse case scenario and extreme example to support an argument.
    The author should fit right in here.

    GW
    Member

    on the way to the local woods last night I rode past an old bloke on a cycle path with a helmet on and actually wondered to myself why he was wearing one!
    there’s no way he ever wore one when he was young and I very much doubt he’ll ever hit his head pootling along cycle paths. his choice tho. as it is mine not to. (and long may that be the case)

    Can’t see me ever sueing anyone for anything, never mind compensation for a bike accident.

    don simon
    Member

    If helmets become a legal obligation, how long will it be before some numpty decides that full body armour should be obligatory too? And where would this end?

    Junkyard
    Member

    oh nice argument to start of with DS is that like the way seatbelts led to us all having to drive in inflatable sumo suits to further protect us 😉
    he raced a bike without a helmet on and crashed I would say he has some responsibility for the injuries.
    TJ will of course remind us all we cannot know he wont have been injured if he had worn one.
    Not sure about compulsion for adults but I am more in favour for kids
    IME you see quite a few parents who have forced their kids to wear helmets but they themselves dont wear one so I suspect it is less of an issue.

    GW
    Member

    I hope TJ doesn’t post on this one, we all know he’s right!

    I rarely wear one, my kids wear one much more often. I wouldn’t want it to be compulsory for any of us.

    aP
    Member

    The guy in the article had apparently been pushing other guys over on the “bonding day” previously and being generally aggressive, I say he got what was coming to him, in fact I’m surprised that he hasn’t been pursued by the other guys on the course for compensation now that he’s got his cash.
    I’m so glad that I don’t have to get involved in that kind of shit, except one where a PM organised a team building day but didn’t invite any of the consultants. It was funny at the progress meetings when he asked who’d enjoyed it and about half the people at the table (basically all the people actually doing the work) turned round and asked him what team building exercise…

    don simon
    Member

    oh nice argument to start of with DS is that like the way seatbelts led to us all having to drive in inflatable sumo suits to further protect us

    Is that what they call air bags these days? 😆 But yes to a degree, as people take less responsibility for their own actions others have to take up the slack. In the last 25 years of driving I haven’t needed to wear the seatbelt because I haven’t had an accident. Has the seatbelt made me a better safer driver? Equally, if I have an accident when I’m not wearing a seatbelt any injuries caused by this are entirely my fault. If the seatbelt fails to do it’s job…
    It did, however, restrain myself from continuing from the body armour and including building a nice metal cage around us and a couple of extra wheels for stability and I guess we’ll have to stick in a motor to help with all the extra weight. 😈

    gonzy
    Member

    there are a lot of people at fault here…
    firstly the guy himself that he chose not to wear a helmet and then ride in a dangerous manner which resulted in his injury and potentially the injury of others.
    the employers should have had adequate risk assesments in place to ensure that all participants must wear a helmet.
    if the ride was organised by employers then they should have hired a professional cycle leader/instructor to eversea the event, but if they had then the onus falls on the leader/instructor to ensure that all riders had helmets.
    i’ve been a qualified mtb instructor for nearly 10 years and in that time i have neber allowed a single rider to ride with me if they didnt wear a helmet.
    lets not kid ourselves into the belief that wearing a helmet will prevent a brain injury in the event of an accident, that’s not what its designed for…what it does do is reduce the risk of serious head injury in the event of an accident by absorbing the force on the impact.
    having said that the number of times i have had people under my instruction turn up wearing their helmet like it was a baseball cap i.e. too far back/forward, lopsided or not stapped up correctly makes me wonder “well whats the point of wearing your helmet like that..you’re not doing yourself any favours there so you might as well not wear one”
    more needs to be done to teach riders at a younger age the importance of wearing a helmet when riding a bike..regardless of whether they are going on a long ride or just down to the shops. yes wearing helmets might not make you look cool at times, but given the choice its better to look uncool in fromt of your peers than to be a fool who ruins their life by taking the risk.
    the cost of a decent helmet nowadays is so low that it impossible to justify it from a cost point of view..if you damage your helemt..you can always get a new one..but if you damage your head you cant…
    as unfortunate as what happened to this guy is, he should have been the first person to take responsibility for his own safety, and took the decision to wear a helmet and be safe.
    if there are any of our fellow riders out there who do ride without helmets…it’s a simple message…PLEASE GET YOURSELF A HELMET!!

    Premier Icon ir_bandito
    Subscriber

    As a firm believer in s0d’s law, i wear one for every single bike ride I do.
    99.9% of the time, I don’t fall off and bang my head. But i might and it might be my reckless riding, or it mught be a boy-race knocking me off, or it might be a greasy manhole-cover in the rain. Either way, I’m not going to risk it for the sake of £40.

    Common Sense/Darwinian.

    You take a risk, it doesn’t pay off, you pay the consequences. I hate to say it, but no way was it the employers’s fault the unfortunate fella banged his head (other than suggesting he ride a bike, and he didn’t have to did he?)

    GW
    Member

    Got 3 thanks, please don’t tell me when to wear them tho (unless I sign up for a course with you)

    Premier Icon cookeaa
    Subscriber

    Interesting that they split liability for the incident like this.

    I’d be interested to know if the employer in this case had carried out a formal risk assessment for the activities and shown it to the participants, They did make Helmets available, but clearly did not compel participants to use them…

    To put it in context, if my employer asks me to visit a construction site or do some work on site then they are legaly required to provide me with suitable PPE, the site manager is required to ensure I am informed of all site dangers and risks (normally with an induction or briefing) and that I correctly use the PPE provided or else I am denied access to the site, this ensures that all reasonably practicable measures have be taken and formally logged so that when I have an accident the company can point out they took steps to minimise risk, including PPE, training and information specific to the task.

    This case is different to most Bicycle RTAs that end up in court as it wasn’t about a private individual riding a bicycle on the public highway, this was an employee taking part in an activity during work hours organised and under the supervision of his employer, the fact that he was apparently acting like an Arse and chose not to wear the provided helmet is only part mitigation of their legal responsibility.

    It’s interesting that the context of the accident; the fact that no motor vehicle was involved, and speeds were lower means the use of a helmet is considered to be a “stronger” defence against injury as the impact speed was likely to be within the range at which a bicycle helmet is considered effective…

    This (Slightly Trite) summary is all you really need to know:

    The case may also make it more likely that courts will award less compensation in the future to other cyclists who suffer head injuries at low impact speeds while riding without a helmet. But, on its own, the case isn’t a reason to change personal decisions about helmets. The court cases on helmets involve life-altering accidents, and show above all that the most important thing is to ride safely, however you choose to do it.

    One question it does raise for me is how does this affect the Liability of Professional cycle teams? they effectively employ cyclists who’s job is to compete against other cyclists (As in this case), any accident during competition is likely not to involve a motor vehicle and will presumably be at impact speeds for which a bicycle helmet is designed, is there a requirement for Team management to formally risk asses their employees professional activities and provide/compel them to wear “Suitable” PPE? Just playing Devils advocate…

    gonzy
    Member

    GW – dont worry, i’ll only enforce the helmet rule if you’re riding with me…i’m sure you’ve enough sense to know when to wear one though!! 😉
    ir_bandito – i agree with you that it not worth taking the risk for the sake of £40. but i disagree with you on the other issue. the employer has to accept its part in all of this. whilst it would not have been able to do anything when the accident happened..it should have takin reasonable measures to ensure that if it was organising the activity that sufficient and appropriate risk assessments had been made prior to the activity to minimise the risk of accidents. if they really wanted to remove all responsibility of the actions of the participants from themselves they should really asked all the riders to sign a disclaimer to say that they have been advised to wear helmets and by not doing so the employer cannot be held liable for any resulting injury

    gonzy
    Member

    cookea – i completely agree with you on that.
    however, i suppose for professional race teams, they will have those necessary risk assessments in place and would be provided witha copy of the venue risk assessments, who would have to comply with this to validate their public liability insurance. the teams would also ensure that the ridesr are properly debriefed on the venue/race course and would ensure that suitable PPE is worn whilst riding competitively. but should their be an accident that occurs, they have probably done their part in trying to minimise the risk of serious injury, kind of similar to a footballer being told to wear shin guards at all times but still breaking his leg, as has been the case on many occasions. i suppose with pro riders they know the risks involved and take the approiate measures to reduce the risks…which is the point i’m trying to make here…we know that wearing a helmet can reduce the risk of serious injury in an accident so why take the risk?

    Premier Icon steveh
    Subscriber

    if they really wanted to remove all responsibility of the actions of the participants from themselves they should really asked all the riders to sign a disclaimer to say that they have been advised to wear helmets and by not doing so the employer cannot be held liable for any resulting injury

    You are mistaken here, the presence of a disclaimer is pretty meaningless. If a court could judge that you have been negligent in anyway then the disclaimer isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. If you believe that getting people you guide to sign one is a way out of anything you’re wrong.

    gonzy
    Member

    steveh – i agree with you on the disclaimer..i was just saying that they could have but i agree with you that it would not have been worth the paper it was printed on…its not something i agree on and is not a something i practice…although one organisation i was asked to work with did ask me to do this…suffice to say i never responded to them

    Premier Icon ir_bandito
    Subscriber

    if they really wanted to remove all responsibility of the actions of the participants from themselves they should really asked all the riders to sign a disclaimer to say that they have been advised to wear helmets and by not doing so the employer cannot be held liable for any resulting injury

    Yep. I guess they didn’t though.
    Still an unfortunate reminder that legislation takes priority over common sense these days.

    Premier Icon kilo
    Subscriber

    we know that wearing a helmet can reduce the risk of serious injury in an accident so why take the risk?

    Beacause most of the time in cycling it’s a very, very, very low risk

    Premier Icon sparkyspice
    Subscriber

    Blood clot on the brain and fractured skull – not good injuries, but I survived (just).
    I always wear a helmet to protect my head. In the last 6 years I’ve had to rely on my helmet probably about 6 times, so roughly once a year, or less than 1% of the rides I do.

    I have yet to plan and accident.

    People are saying that they are exercising their rights not to wear a helmet – fair enough. But WHY wouldn’t you? WHY don’t you want to wear a helmet? I don’t get it…

    GW
    Member

    I hate them because they’re hot and uncomfortable, reduce clearance under overhead branches and they don’t do a whole lot in most crashes anyway.
    hate gloves too.

    Premier Icon nitrambocg
    Subscriber

    I always wear a helmet and would encourage others to do so also. But to make them compulsory would bring onto the cycling community the same sort of excessive random harassment by the Police that Motor Cyclists now experience. In Wales weekend Motor Cycling is now a series of Police roadblocks to check Visor legality, Road Tax, Tyres etc that would have made an official in 1930s Germany proud. Its the inevitable consequence. Its a turn-off to the general public if you want encourage cycling. Is this what you want ?

    Premier Icon sparkyspice
    Subscriber

    They reduce clearance under overhead branches!!!! Do you cut down your bars so you can scythe through the forest too?

    GW – saying you would never sue is a bold statement. Whilst in this case I think the bloke was a tool for not wearing a helmet and from the few fact we have, it seems like he choreographed his own demise. However if you have got a mortgage and kids to feed and you are injured totally because of someone elses negligence, then why wouldn’t you sue? To suggest that you’d let your house be repossessed because of something that completely wasn’t your fault is naive.

    fourbanger
    Member

    Thin end of the wedge this. When it’s only legal to ride on cycle paths in with full protective gear, licence and insurance, some of you will look back on these times of free choice and think “maybe TJ had a point”.

    TandemJeremy
    Member

    Just a note – the CTC believe that compulsory helmets would lead to 200+ more deaths – seems odd? the best that can be expected is saving a dozen or so deaths from head injuries, however there would be over 200 deaths because of the number of people that would stop cyling and therefore get illhealth from lack of activity.

    http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5339

    Edric 64
    Member

    Can’t see me ever sueing anyone for anything, never mind compensation for a bike accident.

    I am because a retard postie opened his van door knocking me into a wall which split my helmet open

    GW
    Member

    Like I said, sparky, (naive or realistic?) I honestly can’t see it happening.

    Aw Teej 😕

    GW
    Member

    Do you cut down your bars so you can scythe through the forest too?

    Yes I do cut down my bars to 660mm but not to scythe through the forest, so I can X-up without catching my knee.

    Re: the “tool”. I wouldn’t want to put on a used sweaty cycle helmet either, would you?

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 30 total)

The topic ‘Helmets’ is closed to new replies.