| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Do you agree with mandatory helmet use |
| No way, nobody tells me what to do! |
|
66% |
[ 43 ] |
| Yes, its the sensible approach. |
|
20% |
[ 13 ] |
| Only for the under 18's |
|
13% |
[ 9 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 65 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Tucker
Tour Winner
Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 15722
Location: Swindon
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:20 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Joursans wrote: |
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Under 12s only, I reckon. |
What do you think would be an appropriate criminal sanction for your average under 12? |
Atomic wedgie or purple nurple. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
John McC
Moderator
Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 24510
Location: Leafy Barnet
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Under 12s only, I reckon. |
Under twelve months?
_________________
John McClelland's victory in the motor paced event with Derek Marloe on the derny was a thing of beauty (Oldmanof) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DNAse
E, Gold
Joined: 24 Feb 2006
Posts: 2414
Location: Oxfordshire
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The helmet debate gets clouded by a number of issues.
One is the type of cycling people on this forum tend to do compared with the average punter. Many people on here will be racing, going out on fast group rides and doing challenging off-roading. For these activities I think the wearing of a cycle helmet is sensible given the risks. indeed this type of activity is exactly what cycle helmets are designed for.
Now in contrast, your typical non-competitive cyclist is usually riding on their own on the road 12-15mph to work or the shops. This type of cycling in itself is very safe. The risk of serious injury comes almost exclusively from collisions involving motor vehicles. Cycle helmets are not designed to protect against this. You might argue you would be better off getting hit by a car whilst wearing one, however no other form of transport is expected to take the burden of mitigating the risk from more dangerous forms of transport.
In this respect cycle helmets are the biggest red-herring in road safety policy. Promoting their use is an admission (or worse an acceptance) that you cannot or do not want to control the danger of the motor vehicle.
_________________
"Train?! Training is for people with no natural ability!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robabank
E, Bronze
Joined: 31 May 2006
Posts: 364
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TBK wrote: |
| Would, "Yes, I would prefer to be a cabbage after a head impact rather than be killed outright." be more acceptable to you? |
How about
"Yes, I realise that 70-odd percent of cyclist fatalities are the fault of negligent motorists and that helmets would save at most 10 percent of these, but I wholeheartedly approve of dumb victim-blaming token gestures as confronting the real issue is much too difficult"
and
"No, imposing a largely fruitless victim-blaming token gesture will only further impede taking measures to address the real issue and significantly improve road safety for cyclists (and as a knock-on effect, motorists too)"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joursans
Div 2 Pro
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 4840
Location: The Whole Year Inn
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Joursans wrote: |
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Under 12s only, I reckon. |
What do you think would be an appropriate criminal sanction for your average under 12? |
Nothing. A fine for the parents for negligence. |
The sort of thing would have given Jacqui Smith a nice warm feeling inside. More laws, more control, more pointlessness etc etc. 
_________________
I tell myself I will not go,
even as I drive there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Salsiccia
E, Gold
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Posts: 2316
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joursans wrote: |
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Joursans wrote: |
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Under 12s only, I reckon. |
What do you think would be an appropriate criminal sanction for your average under 12? |
Nothing. A fine for the parents for negligence. |
The sort of thing would have given Jacqui Smith a nice warm feeling inside. More laws, more control, more pointlessness etc etc. |
Listen, I'm not a fan of new laws for the sake of it, especially in the name of counter-terrorism/eradication of personal liberties, but anything that makes parents take more personal responsibility for their little shts would be good
_________________
Thinking about riding since 1988 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Billy Boy
T de F Winner
Joined: 11 Aug 2003
Posts: 30726
Location: Not Aylesbury
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Joursans wrote: |
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Joursans wrote: |
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Under 12s only, I reckon. |
What do you think would be an appropriate criminal sanction for your average under 12? |
Nothing. A fine for the parents for negligence. |
The sort of thing would have given Jacqui Smith a nice warm feeling inside. More laws, more control, more pointlessness etc etc. |
Listen, I'm not a fan of new laws for the sake of it, especially in the name of counter-terrorism/eradication of personal liberties, but anything that makes parents take more personal responsibility for their little shts would be good |
And what you you propose wouldn't do that.
_________________
"Well done, you are 100% absolutely without a shadow of a doubt spot-bollock-on correct." - Tucker
"Eating is not for wimps" - coal miner
"most of us don't have your brilliance." - John McC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
racyrich2
E, Gold
Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 3123
Location: Essex
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Joursans wrote: |
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Joursans wrote: |
| Salsiccia wrote: |
| Under 12s only, I reckon. |
What do you think would be an appropriate criminal sanction for your average under 12? |
Nothing. A fine for the parents for negligence. |
The sort of thing would have given Jacqui Smith a nice warm feeling inside. More laws, more control, more pointlessness etc etc. |
Listen, I'm not a fan of new laws for the sake of it, especially in the name of counter-terrorism/eradication of personal liberties, but anything that makes parents take more personal responsibility for their little shts would be good |
Codifying responsibility is how to guarantee people will no longer take on their own responsibility but will rely on others having done it for them.
And if what was supplied by the 'others' didn't do the trick you can guarantee lawsuits will follow.
eg - I'm made to wear a helmet but I still got brain damage - I'm suing the government, helmet manufacturer, whomever.
_________________
Rich |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stuart
Moderator
Joined: 12 Dec 2002
Posts: 16263
Location: Thorne
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cycle helmets are only designed and tested to withstand an impact equivalent to an average weight rider travelling at a speed of 12 mph falling onto a stationary kerb shaped object from a height of 1 metre.
_________________
'What's up with her? I been hearing that she's been giving that stuff out to all them grafitti guys!' ' Yo, shut the :evil: up, Chico, man!' 'I'd paint 3 of those murals for some of that ass....' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hans Datdodishes
T de F Winner
Joined: 28 Feb 2002
Posts: 28370
Location: On the Superior Forum with the cool kids
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nerbody tells STUART what to do
_________________
World Masters Drive HillClimb For Taureans Category C Champion 2013.
I'm a qualified coach. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Important Notice: VeloRiders copyrights all images appearing
on this website and in the Gallery. Images are displayed for viewing only,
and commercial or personal use of any of these images without the written
permission of VeloRiders is prohibited under international copyright law.
Copyright 2002/2013 VeloRiders. All rights reserved.
Powered by phpBB
© 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
E-mail VeloRiders. Comments, questions or send your photos
to , Order your photos@
