Wear your helmet...??

[NAILTRAIL96]

I take issue with the way pedestrians and cyclists are compared.

In traffic both of them are likely to get hit by a car.

Agree and come off worse

If you're a pedestrian then you wont be "in traffic".
The first thing in the green cross code tells you to find a safe place to cross. That means zebra crossings islands etc, where you are protected and separated from the traffic.

If you choose not to wear a helmet thats fine, but trying to justify it by comparing a cyclist, who on a road bike could easily be over 30mph amongst the traffic, using the same rules and lanes as faster, heavier vehicles and a pedestrian who has a protected path and travels aprox. 4mph, is not subjected to the same rules or expected to interact except when crossing and then has dedicated places is seriously flawed logic.

Would those choosing not to wear do the same on a moped or motorbike?.

 

[Woz]

Cyclists are road users, pedestrians are not.
There is no comparison.
Do I look like a tit? no, I look like a cyclist.
We choose to ride off road and accept the risk of injury involved when we fall.
There are steps you can take to reduce the risk of injury involved when we fall.
If you never fall you're not trying hard enough.

....err. This has wafts of a boy racer buying a bucket seat from Argos and driving like a moron in a Ford Fiesta because of an induced sense of "I'm safe. I'm invincible. I am god. Mummy pays the insurance".

I'm a non helmet wearer not trying hard to fall off like a tit.

 

[legrandefromage]

in full collisions with motor vehicles the evidence doesn't establish that helmets are effective, because the applicable standards for cycle helmets don't require testing at impact speeds above about 12mph, which is the impact speed of a fall to the ground from a typical bike seat.

Disturbing and perhaps should be made more public.

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.

Sound advice.

 

[NAILTRAIL96]

Cyclists are road users, pedestrians are not.
There is no comparison.
Do I look like a tit? no, I look like a cyclist.
We choose to ride off road and accept the risk of injury involved when we fall.
There are steps you can take to reduce the risk of injury involved when we fall.
If you never fall you're not trying hard enough.

....err. This has wafts of a boy racer buying a bucket seat from Argos and driving like a moron in a Ford Fiesta because of an induced sense of "I'm safe. I'm invincible. I am god. Mummy pays the insurance".

I'm a non helmet wearer not trying hard to fall off like a tit.

If anything I take more care now then ever before, being self employed means I can't afford a big spill.
I Ride how I ride and I wear a helmet to help reduce the chance of injury when the fall happens.
Where I live a cyclist without a helmet is usually a charver and a cyclist with an expensive bike an no helmet is usually a bikethief.
Please read that properly and in context before piecing together quotes and getting upset.

 

[jonnugget69]

I wear my helmet because it will protect me better in the event of a fall or traffic event than my naked skull.

I don't see a downside to wearing it only upsides.
It's light, it's comfortable, it's safer.

Do I look like a tit? Maybe. Do I care, no.
I'd say 90% of cyclists I see out and about are wearing one.

I don't care if you don't wear one although I don't understand it.

Comparison to pedestrians is ridiculous.
Do I walk in the road at 30mph? No. I cross it when safe to do so. What you do on foot when off road bears no comparison to what you do on a bike, and the risk involved.
All elements of life carry a risk. A proportionate response when riding a bike is a helmet IMO.

 

[technodup]

Comparison to pedestrians is ridiculous.
Do I walk in the road at 30mph? No.

Tell that to the parent of the next child killed by a car mounting the pavement or running a red light.

 

[jonnugget69]

Comparison to pedestrians is ridiculous.
Do I walk in the road at 30mph? No.

Tell that to the parent of the next child killed by a car mounting the pavement or running a red light.

There is a difference between protecting yourself against hazards that you can reasonably foresee and wrapping yourself in cotton wool to protect yourself against any eventuality.

 

[technodup]

There is a difference between protecting yourself against hazards that you can reasonably foresee and wrapping yourself in cotton wool to protect yourself against any eventuality.

I've been riding on and off road for 25 years and have never hit my head on anything. Hands and knees yes, head never. You clearly see different hazards to me.

I'm not suggesting walkers wear helmets, I'm just playing devil's advocate because the helmet lobby are out in force as per.

 

[jonnugget69]

There is a difference between protecting yourself against hazards that you can reasonably foresee and wrapping yourself in cotton wool to protect yourself against any eventuality.

I've been riding on and off road for 25 years and have never hit my head on anything. Hands and knees yes, head never. You clearly see different hazards to me.

I'm not suggesting walkers wear helmets, I'm just playing devil's advocate because the helmet lobby are out in force as per.

I can see that you are. I'm not suggesting everyone wears one, I'm just saying I can't see a downside to doing so, so I do!

 

[highlandsflyer]

I've been riding on and off road for 25 years and have never hit my head on anything. Hands and knees yes, head never. You clearly see different hazards to me.

I'm not suggesting walkers wear helmets, I'm just playing devil's advocate because the helmet lobby are out in force as per.

That is stunning. I think this calls for a poll!