• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Mandatory bicycle helmets?

#63
Fassa Albrecht said:
One thing I've noticed whilst watching old cycle races is the lack of helmets, even during sprints and the like. Guess what? Few people were ever injured.
Click to expand...

This is 100% false. Furthermore, racing and commuting are two very different scenarios.

If you want to ride without wearing a helmet, that's your choice, but trying to justify it as anything other than your own willingness to put yourself at risk is lame. Especially, when you use stupid (and wrong) examples like this one. :rollno:
 
#64
For what its worth, when I rode my bike (had to sell it last month to cover rent due to some unnamed TBer being extremely slow in delivering funds) I always wore a helmet. When I was younger, I used to find it comical to wear my grandfather's steel pot helmet from WWII. A lot of good that would've done me if I ever got hit, but as least I was safe from snipers. :p

Whenever I ride now, I wear a good crash helmet. I'm on my second one. I got hit about 2 years from behind, went flying from my bike, and hit a parked car doing about 30 miles per hour and then bounced off of it onto the sidewalk. I injured my shoulder permanently, and if I didn't have my helmet, I'd be dead.

That said, the only exception to this is when I do a leisure ride on the boardwalk by the beach where there is no traffic, or in the park. I clip my helmet on the back of my bike. For those who think helmets are dorky, mine's got a Sublime sun on the back and Willie Nelson giving the finger on the front. :D
 
#65
chicago_mike said:
Enough laws. This is more common sense than anything. Although I saw and experienced many bike crashes and so forth, Never wore a helmet and never had a head injury, and all the kids I knew who HAD head injuries, got back on the bike without a helmet and were fine. doc visit or no doc visit.

We can only be babied for so long and I think too many safety laws on the books turn us into wimps. Who bust's arse anymore except migrant workers and mechanics?
Click to expand...
Yeah, brain damage is macho.
 
#67
Fassa Albrecht said:
Back to the point, most COMMUTING cyclists here don't wear helmets, so I'd only be one of a majority.

If I choose to enter sporting biking, then the chances are I'd be made to wear one.

Plus, I've taken bangs to the head before. It's all part of the risk I take when I ride.
Click to expand...

Did those bangs on the head interfere with the part of your brain that makes common sense decisions like wearing a helmet to stop yourself getting bangs on the head? One day it might not be just a bang, it might be brain damage or paralysis or worse, as attested to by numerous TBers right here in this thread. Commuting is the worst, riding in traffic is so much more dangerous than road racing, where you're generally in traffic free environs. But then, getting hit by a careless driver and needlessly suffering brain damage is all part of the risk you take when you ride, it's your head after all. BTW, if you find helmets uncomfortable, try a different helmet. You may be surprised...
 
#69
Fassa Albrecht said:
:D


I know what you'd like to say....
Click to expand...


Since Spade's used up his walking cards, I'll say it for him:

How many of those bangs to your head involved men, with no clothes??

Lol, sorry. I was thinking the same thing.

Back on topic: I'm echoing other posters about the whole car thing. My outlook on the open roads changed DRASTICALLY when I started motorcycling. I was used to being in a big truck that got it's way in traffic. Now on my little Ninja...I tend to ride like I am under fire. Cover to cover, never stay in one place too long (traffic wise). All because of the dumbass car drivers.

But in the end: You're going to do you, and I'm going to do me. With a helmet.

Peace,
Greg
 
#70
Jim Campbell said:
then why not cars too......plenty of head injuries in car wrecks,seatbelts or not.....or outlaw skydiving,skiing,recreational scuba,cheezeburgers,alcohol,tobacco,as tax dollars get used for these injuries,illnesses
......big canoworms
Click to expand...

As I said (or hopefully intimated) my big beef isn't in what people do, it's in what my tax dollars get used for. I'd prefer not to have my hard earned income spent on saving the lives of people who are too vain or too stupid to figure out how to do it for themselves.

iow, I do *not* support mandatory helmet laws. I *do* support mandatory...um, I guess you'd call it Free Health Care Waivers for people who *don't* use practical safety gear.
 
#71
I always wear a helmet. Drivers round here are too ridiculous not to. I've been cut up more times than I can count. It's almost like people in cars think that bicycles don't count as other vehicles on the road, and as such you don't have to give way to them and they never have right of way.

I'm just waiting for the time a driver cuts in front of me at a roundabout and I go flying over the top. I'll be glad of my helmet then.
 
#72
Hoover said:
As I said (or hopefully intimated) my big beef isn't in what people do, it's in what my tax dollars get used for. I'd prefer not to have my hard earned income spent on saving the lives of people who are too vain or too stupid to figure out how to do it for themselves.

iow, I do *not* support mandatory helmet laws. I *do* support mandatory...um, I guess you'd call it Free Health Care Waivers for people who *don't* use practical safety gear.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you are from, but in Hawaii, the EMT's, ER physicians, hospital, etc send each patient a bill. Taxes don't pay for most medical bills (exceptions Medicare and Medicaid). Patients are responsible to pay their own hospital bills. Wearing helmets to reduce the severity of an injury saves the wearer (not necessarily the taxpayer) excess pain and expense.

I'm in favor of people making the right choice of wearing a helmet when cycling, I just don't like the strong armed approach used by government to force people to comply with their rules. It's strictly a carrot versus stick issue with me.
 
#73
Well here we've got a wonderful thing called the National Health Service, so medical bills aren't a worry seeing as it's paid for by tax. BUT I'm not going to use that as an excuse though.


My problem with the whole 'it's going to put a strain on the NHS/hospitals' argument is this:


Money gets spent treating lots of other self-inflicted injuries, such as smoking, problems linked to obesity, injuries from car accidents, sports injuries. If your argument is going to be 'if you don't wear a helmet you shouldn't get free treatment' or 'you should face bigger bills for treatment' you're going to face the inevitable issue of the above- if you turn away cyclists without helmets, you could then legitimately turn away ANYONE.


Also: when should any helmet law kick in? Should someone be fined for going 10yards without their helmet? Going across the street? If the law operated like any traffic laws here, the above examples I give WOULD be fined, just as you'd be fined for using a phone whilst driving, or smoking and driving.
 
#75
Fassa Albrecht said:
Well here we've got a wonderful thing called the National Health Service, so medical bills aren't a worry seeing as it's paid for by tax. BUT I'm not going to use that as an excuse though.


My problem with the whole 'it's going to put a strain on the NHS/hospitals' argument is this:


Money gets spent treating lots of other self-inflicted injuries, such as smoking, problems linked to obesity, injuries from car accidents, sports injuries. If your argument is going to be 'if you don't wear a helmet you shouldn't get free treatment' or 'you should face bigger bills for treatment' you're going to face the inevitable issue of the above- if you turn away cyclists without helmets, you could then legitimately turn away ANYONE.


Also: when should any helmet law kick in? Should someone be fined for going 10yards without their helmet? Going across the street? If the law operated like any traffic laws here, the above examples I give WOULD be fined, just as you'd be fined for using a phone whilst driving, or smoking and driving.
Click to expand...

It's not a matter of charging a patient more simply because he/she didn't wear a helmet. It's simply that severe head traumas are more difficult and costly to treat than minor injuries. Wearing a helmet reduces the severity of head injury (in many cases) thus it automatically serves to reduce medical costs as well.

I never mentioned nor suggested turning away patients who weren't wearing a helmet. It is against the law here, for emergency rooms to turn away patients for ANY reason.
 
#76
My history teacher in high school suffered permanent brain damage because he fell off his bike and hit his heas on the curb. He lives, but he has been in a coma for a week and has no short-term memory now. Had he worn a helmet he would have been allright.

So yeah, bike helmets can be useful.
 
#77
I've never worn a cycle helmet - don't have a bicycle, because my preference is for two wheeled transport with a great big engine. I do have two Ducatis that I ride on the road, and on track, and wouldn't dream of getting on either of them without wearing a helmet for anything over a walking pace trundle to the garage or onto a trailer.

That's just as well because, in the UK, wearing a motorcycle helmet has been compulsory since 1973. I'm old enough to remember the arguments raging at the time over this legislation coming in, there was even a Motorcycle Action Group formed to lobby against mandatory usage, I think their mantra was "Helmets yes, compulsion no". The self same arguments were used as you now find in the cycle helmet debate - "Clumsy", "Uncomfortable", "Too hot", "Don't look cool" and so on.

Subsequently, helmets were proven to save a lot of lives and prevent brain damaging injuries. My own view is that somebody thrown from a motorcycle at 30mph is subject to exactly the same forces as somebody thrown from a cycle or a horse at a similar speed - is there any difference in the likelyhood of serious injury because the vehicle from which you are launched is not considered as inherently dangerous as a motorcycle? I doubt that the laws of physics know the difference - it's the same kinetic energy your head may have to stop.

Funny how fashion turns as well, nowadays, in the motorcycling world, far from looking 'uncool' the crash helmet has become a fashion statement and status symbol, especially those with carbon fibre shells or race replica paint jobs. Maybe some sea change will occur that makes the cycle helmet as exclusive a fashion statement as a pair of Oakley shades?
 
#78
Fassa Albrecht said:
My problem with the whole 'it's going to put a strain on the NHS/hospitals' argument is this:


Money gets spent treating lots of other self-inflicted injuries, such as smoking, problems linked to obesity, injuries from car accidents, sports injuries. If your argument is going to be 'if you don't wear a helmet you shouldn't get free treatment' or 'you should face bigger bills for treatment' you're going to face the inevitable issue of the above- if you turn away cyclists without helmets, you could then legitimately turn away ANYONE.
Click to expand...

No one is arguing that. Imagine the outcry if they started doing that - you fall off your bike and the hospital just lets you die at the side of the road because you weren't wearing a helmet - how would the public react to that?

Also, if you're going to argue that there are lots of other self inflicted injuries which waste money so why shouldn't you inflict some on yourself - don't be so bloody selfish! Just because everyone else is doing it, it doesn't make it acceptable. Think of the time, money, expertise and bed space which are saved by wearing your helmet when you have an accident - that could go towards saving someone else who couldn't have prevented their injury by doing something as simple as wearing protective clothing.
 
#79
Fassa Albrecht said:
My problem with the whole 'it's going to put a strain on the NHS/hospitals' argument is this:


Money gets spent treating lots of other self-inflicted injuries, such as smoking, problems linked to obesity, injuries from car accidents, sports injuries. If your argument is going to be 'if you don't wear a helmet you shouldn't get free treatment' or 'you should face bigger bills for treatment' you're going to face the inevitable issue of the above- if you turn away cyclists without helmets, you could then legitimately turn away ANYONE.
Click to expand...


Oh, don't get me started on smokers!
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back