Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue Nov 25, 2025 17:01

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » Specific road user groups » Cycling

All times are UTC [ DST ]



Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 2
  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
  Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
MrGrumpyCyclist
PostPosted: Sun Feb 06, 2011 16:51 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 15:26
Posts: 117
I agree with most of what you said there. I do think, though, that it is important to separate the issue of whether helmets improve safety (which I am convinced they do, and actually do wear a helmet myself when cycling), from whether there is enough proven benefit to justify making them compulsory.

As far as compulsion is concerned, it becomes an issue of where society wants to place the balance between freedom for people to take that particularly risk if they want to and compulsion to reduce the potential burden on society that might result from their taking that risk, along with the issue of the cost and feasibility of policing such a law. It is clear from the evidence that the benefit is nowhere near the benefit of wearing seatbelts in cars, so comparisons with that are often unhelpful (including the author's use of them).

_________________
"That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without argument.” - Julian Assange
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
weepej
PostPosted: Sun Feb 06, 2011 20:23 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Most people I discuss helmet wearing with don't appear to want cyclist to wear helmets for their safety, they want them to wear them simply so that they are seen doing what they are told.

The other reason appears to be that if they whack them with their car they prefer the perception that they're not going to injure the cyclist and be stuck with a big legal bill.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
RobinXe
PostPosted: Sun Feb 06, 2011 23:49 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
MrCyclist, I'm glad you agree with me, do you wear your helmet primarily for the protection it offers, or because it's a convenient place to mount your camera?

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
RobinXe
PostPosted: Sun Feb 06, 2011 23:53 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
weepej wrote:
Most people I discuss helmet wearing with don't appear to want cyclist to wear helmets for their safety, they want them to wear them simply so that they are seen doing what they are told.


Why is it that you want motorists to obey speed limits set for reasons other than the 85th %ile (the statistically proven speed chosen by the safest motorists)?

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
weepej
PostPosted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 06:13 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
RobinXe wrote:
weepej wrote:
Most people I discuss helmet wearing with don't appear to want cyclist to wear helmets for their safety, they want them to wear them simply so that they are seen doing what they are told.


Why is it that you want motorists to obey speed limits set for reasons other than the 85th %ile (the statistically proven speed chosen by the safest motorists)?


Because I understand it makes the roads a safer environment.

To add, the term "safest" doesn't mean "safe".
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
RobinXe
PostPosted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:41 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
weepej wrote:
RobinXe wrote:
weepej wrote:
Most people I discuss helmet wearing with don't appear to want cyclist to wear helmets for their safety, they want them to wear them simply so that they are seen doing what they are told.


Why is it that you want motorists to obey speed limits set for reasons other than the 85th %ile (the statistically proven speed chosen by the safest motorists)?


Because I understand it makes the roads a safer environment.

To add, the term "safest" doesn't mean "safe".


Maybe because you believe it makes the roads safer. Maybe.

Nothing is completely safe, safest is clearly the best option!

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
MrGrumpyCyclist
PostPosted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 20:59 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 15:26
Posts: 117
RobinXe wrote:
MrCyclist, I'm glad you agree with me, do you wear your helmet primarily for the protection it offers, or because it's a convenient place to mount your camera?


Well I have worn a helmet whilst cycling for 20 years now, and I got my camera last October.

I do actually disagree with the idea of compulsory helmet wearing, though, because, unlike seat belts and motorcycle helmets, there is still an active debate regarding whether the benefits to society (as opposed to the wearer) are sufficiently significant to warrant the attack on freedom of choice, and it looks as though they probably aren't. To illustrate this, it seems likely that the compulsory wearing of helmets by pedestrians would be of more benefit to society, but that would be patently absurd. However, I can't claim to have studied any scholarly research on the topic (other than the BMJ article), so this is really just my opinion.

_________________
"That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without argument.” - Julian Assange
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
CJG
PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 17:53 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 21:15
Posts: 699
Location: Belfast
:gatso2: An update on that story

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opini ... 10575.html

For many people, an Assembly Bill making cycle helmets compulsory must seem a great idea. We're all encouraged to wear them for safety, so why not make them mandatory?
Now we have just such a piece of legislation - a Private Members' Bill, proposed by SDLP MLA Pat Ramsey which, if enacted, would make it compulsory for all cyclists to wear helmets.

But, while we respect and share Mr Ramsey's desire to make cycling as safe as possible, his Cyclists (Protective Headgear) Bill is misguided.

That's why Northern Ireland's two leading organisations which promote cycling - the CTC and Sustrans - have joined forces to oppose the legislation.

There are three key reasons why we oppose this Bill:

n It would put many people off cycling, particularly those from socially deprived communities;

n It would be a disproportionate response given that cycling is, in fact, a relatively safe activity;

n The money spent on implementing the legislation would be better spent on more effective ways of achieving safer cycling, such as on-road cycle training for every child.

Everyone is aware of the positive health and environmental benefits of cycling.

The charity I represent, Sustrans, has worked hard to promote a cycling culture in Northern Ireland and, in particular, to encourage as many children as possible to cycle safely for the good of their health.

Sustrans has worked with thousands of children in Northern Ireland to encourage them to use their bikes and to cycle safely.

The level of cycle use in Northern Ireland over the past decade has increased by 76%, with an even bigger rise in Belfast.

But both Sustrans and the CTC are really concerned that much of that good work could be undone if this legislation goes through.

The key problem is that many people prefer not to wear helmets and some simply can't afford them. In New Zealand, for example, it's estimated that nearly 4% of the total population stopped cycling in the immediate aftermath of cycle helmet legislation.

Dramatic falls in cycle use among children and teenagers were also seen in parts of Australia when helmet laws were implemented.

Moreover, children from socially deprived backgrounds are the most likely to be caught out by the proposed Bill.

In our own work with schools in Northern Ireland, we've observed markedly lower rates of helmet-wearing among children in less affluent areas. Studies in England and Canada found the same pattern.

While we fully sympathise with all those who have experienced first-hand the traumatic effects of a serious injury caused by a cycle accident, it is vital to look at the facts about cycle safety when weighing up whether a Bill like this is justified.

The fact is, the chances of you or your child being killed or seriously injured in a cycle accident are, thankfully, small. To place this in context: studies have found that a number of common activities, ranging from football to gardening, carry a higher risk of injury than cycling.

We're currently facing huge cutbacks in public sector funding. The Environment Minister, Edwin Poots, is on record as stating that Mr Ramsey's proposed Bill would be costly to implement.

We'd much prefer that the Executive focused on other solutions, such as expansion of high-quality cycle training and lower speed limits in residential areas.

These would make a real difference to cycle safety and would actually encourage more, rather than fewer, people to cycle.

It's perfectly possible to improve cycle safety and get more people cycling - but Mr Ramsey's Bill is not the way to go about it.

_________________
Anyone who tells you that nothing is impossible has never bathed in a saucer of water.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Steve
PostPosted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 22:43 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Sky News wrote:

Cycling Minister Doesn't Want To Wear Helmet

The minister for cycling has risked the wrath of safety campaigners by saying he does not wear a helmet because he likes to feel the wind in his hair.

Norman Baker, Liberal Democrat MP for Lewes and a transport minister, said it his "libertarian right" to ride without protective headgear.

"I don't wear a helmet when I cycle. The first reason is that I don't want to. I don't want to wear something on my head," he said.

"For me the joy of cycling is to have the wind in your hair, such as I have left. It's free, it's unencumbered; I don't want to be loaded down."

He said he was not encouraging others to do the same.

"I don't always have to live government policy," he continued in an interview with the Guardian. "We all have a life outside politics.

"The official government line is to draw attention to the benefits - especially for children. I don't dissent from that line. I'm just saying personally I don't want to have to wear one."

The minister said it was his "right" to ride without a helmet

Mr Baker, who bikes between his department and the House of Commons several times a day, also suggested drivers take more care around cyclists not wearing a helmet.

But Joel Hickman, a spokesman for Brake, the road safety charity, said there was evidence helmets save lives.

The vast majority of the 2,500 cyclists killed and 17,000 injured on the roads last year incurred head injuries, he said.

"Ministers should practise what they preach and when a minister directly responsible for cycling safety refuses to wear a cycle helmet, we then have to look at their suitability for the role," he added.

Transport minister Theresa Villiers was pictured riding without a helmet at last year's Parliamentary bike ride and London Mayor Boris Johnson, a keen cyclist, has also admitted he stopped wearing one because it was "hot and scratchy".

:bunker:

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PeterE
PostPosted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 23:26 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Ooh, BRAKE vs cycling lobby

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

I wonder if there is a transport version of Victimhood Poker :twisted:

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 2
  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Board index » Specific road user groups » Cycling

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.046s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]