*sigh* wear a helmet

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I ride. I wear a lid. I don't try to tell others whether to wear one or not, that is their choice. But I am SO TIRED of all the BS reasons not to wear..
.
.
.
If you don't want to wear, and the law doesn't make you, then by all means feel free to ride with the wind blowing through your hair. But stop with the bullshit reasoning.

+1 (they know it's stupid, so they are really just trying to rationalize it - the way most people think is neat and should be studied)

However,

Here's an acceptable conversation:
B - "Where's your helmut"
A - "I don't wear a helmut"
B - "Why? Isn't that dangerous?"
A - "Yes it can be, I just don't like them"

as long as it ends at this point it's good - but it doesn't, "B" typically starts getting all snitty and preachy at this point, and "A" wants to be left alone. So don't be too mad at A, those crappy responses are usually just him trying to avoid some self righteous ninny. They are better off just walking away once the pushiness begins - but people like to "win" disagreements

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[normiss 733]

When I answer the question...it's usually:
"I choose to not wear a helmet because I like it. It's like safe sex...I KNOW it's dangerous to not wear a condom...but Goddamn does it FEEL good!"

I usually ride with a helmet these days...but I can understand, appreciate, and respect one's ability to decide what level of risk they are willing to accept in their own life. It's all about freedom and personal choice the way I see it.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

When I answer the question...it's usually:
"I choose to not wear a helmet because I like it. It's like safe sex...I KNOW it's dangerous to not wear a condom...but Goddamn does it FEEL good!"

I usually ride with a helmet these days...but I can understand, appreciate, and respect one's ability to decide what level of risk they are willing to accept in their own life. It's all about freedom and personal choice the way I see it.

I with you on that whole post. About 90% of disagreements can be solved by realizing that we don't HAVE to explain most all our choices at all and it's ok if that total stranger over there disagrees on some subjective issue.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[nigel99 325]

While I can't imagine riding my bike without a helmet, I do find the general UK mindset towards full protective clothing a little more extreme than I was used to (still do it though).

However I can't justify wearing a helmet on a bicycle - even for my kids, I just can't relate a cycle helmet to increased safety (despite having a 12 year old killed 1/2 a mile from our home on his bike). It seems that lack of cycle tracks is a far higher risk for people on bicycles?

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[Remster 27]

Quote

However I can't justify wearing a helmet on a bicycle - even for my kids, I just can't relate a cycle helmet to increased safety (despite having a 12 year old killed 1/2 a mile from our home on his bike). It seems that lack of cycle tracks is a far higher risk for people on bicycles?

Do not kid yourself.

The energy from impact from a fall from a bicycle or a motorcycle IS THE SAME. In fact, it may be higher on a bicycle since the height of the rider's head is actually higher on a bicycle.

Obviously we are not talking about an impact into a wall; but the vertical impact will be the same.

Remster

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

The energy from impact from a fall from a bicycle or a motorcycle IS THE SAME. In fact, it may be higher on a bicycle since the height of the rider's head is actually higher on a bicycle.

Except that if you're going 65 and hit an object like a tire (as I did), you get more air jumping over it, making the vertical fall higher again. Though in my case, the head and helmet were almost untouched, save for minor sliding on the chin bar at some point.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Choice, shmoice. "Choice" only applies if the general population is not adversely affected.

If fewer bikers wear helmets, more bikers will be seriously injured or killed from head injuries. That means everybody else on the road stands a greater chance of being held liable sue to getting into an accident with a biker who winds up being seriously injured or killed. That means auto liability insurers will be paying out more money on serious claims from bikers or their survivors. And that means everyone's automobile liability insurance premiums go up.

Lack of helmet laws translates to higher auto insurance premiums for everyone. And that makes it everyone's business.

Careful, Andy. As I said earlier, the skydiving world is at great risk from the social burden myths.

The CA CHP keeps a metric - fatalities per 100 accidents. When the lid law passed in our state, that metric did not decline, it in fact rose an insignificant amount. A bit embarassing, really.

Also embarassing is that the fiscal savings promise by Dick Floyd was also false. Unhelmeted, uninsured bikers are cheaper to care for than helmeted, uninsured bikers. Death is cheap.

Of course, uninsured biker costs are dwarfed by uninsured motorists costs. And costs from smokers and fat people and....so the whole notion that these laws are necessary to protect society is just a load of crap. For Dick Floyd, it was all about telling bikers what to do.

And btw, if people don't want to pay for liability claims, they could stop making illegal left turns.

[Remster 27]

Quote

Except that if you're going 65 and hit an object like a tire (as I did),

Oh, I agree... And similiar things can also happen on a bicycle (tho 65 would be pushing it! lol... But I do hit 45 once in a while).

Remster

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

but not to Kroger or my office 3.9 miles down Memorial

Statistically speaking, this is where people are more than likely to have their accident.

TO ALL: Keep the politics out of this and it won't end up in SC.

Scott you are correct, the only time I was hit by a car, I was two blocks from my house, and slowing down from 20mph to a stop.

I broke my helmet when I went over the high side and slammed the back of my head.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

The whole "most accidents happen within 5 miles of the home" is skewed. Duh, you're more likely to have an accident that close to home because you spend most of your time that close to home. If you spent an exact equal amount of time 20 miles from home, you would be just as likely to have an accident 20 miles away.

I think you understate the significance of this result. And I think you miss the real problem - people tend to relax near home because it is a familiar envirornment. This should result in less accidents, not more. Yet it doesn't. I don't think their focus is as strong. And as so often said, people will forego the helmet and other safety precautions as a result.

It's akin to the guy getting a high wingload and saying he'll only land it straight in.

Don't take this as preachy. If I needed to ride one mile to the store, I'd certainly skip the armoured leather and the helmet potentially if the state permitted it. But it is a case where laziness works against us.

[normiss 733]

Quote

The CA CHP keeps a metric - fatalities per 100 accidents. When the lid law passed in our state, that metric did not decline, it in fact rose an insignificant amount. A bit embarassing, really.

I love how motorcycle ownership numbers are never factored into these statistics.

[Andy9o8 1]

Quote

Quote

The CA CHP keeps a metric - fatalities per 100 accidents. When the lid law passed in our state, that metric did not decline, it in fact rose an insignificant amount. A bit embarassing, really.

I love how motorcycle ownership numbers are never factored into these statistics.

In this particular context (the real-world effect of helmet laws), I'm not sure that's relevant, because we're not talking about raw numbers (which can be misleading), but rather varying rates of X resulting from a constant Y number of incidents.

I'd think the most relevant statistics would be rate of serious head injuries per X number of accidents, and/or rate of fatalities due to head injury per X number of accidents.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The CA CHP keeps a metric - fatalities per 100 accidents. When the lid law passed in our state, that metric did not decline, it in fact rose an insignificant amount. A bit embarassing, really.

I love how motorcycle ownership numbers are never factored into these statistics.

In this particular context (the real-world effect of helmet laws), I'm not sure that's relevant, because we're not talking about raw numbers (which can be misleading), but rather varying rates of X resulting from a constant Y number of incidents.

I'd think the most relevant statistics would be rate of serious head injuries per X number of accidents, and/or rate of fatalities due to head injury per X number of accidents.

The state and other did claim great success as the fatality rate dropped in the 90s. However, it did ignore the drop in motorcycle use (recession, demographics) as well as the benefit in mandating (and funding) MSF rider training for those under 21.

Some of the metrics related to head injuries versus not are a bit questionable as well. Many head injury deaths would still have been fatal otherwise due to the internal organs.

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

Amen to the helmet use and thanks for what you do Dave.

I have a very good idea of what a helmet can protect someone from. Believe me, you don't want to go through what I have been through and I was enormously lucky.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So you advocate the govt. to require you to wear a helmet whilst walking down the stairs?

That wasn't my point. I personally know the damage that can be done from a head injury. I catapulted down a flight of stairs and struck my head on a concrete floor covered with porcelain tile. It's been 4 1/2 years now and I still am unable to work and am in chronic pain. My injuries have not completely healed yet...and some won't.

Now if I could do that much damage with what I described, imagine hitting the pavement with your head at 60mph.

_________________________________________
Chris

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

While I can't imagine riding my bike without a helmet, I do find the general UK mindset towards full protective clothing a little more extreme than I was used to (still do it though).

No kidding - and it isn't just the UK... welcome to the bubble-wrap generation.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[nigel99 325]

Quote

No kidding - and it isn't just the UK... welcome to the bubble-wrap generation.

I seriously struggle with the right and wrong's of this. I grew up climbing tree's riding a bike without a helmet, motorcycling in shorts and tee-shirt etc. Most of us had broken an arm or leg at some point (or both), the worst "accident" that I knew of was a boy in my brothers class who killed himself falling backwards off a school chair (his head caught the desk behind him).

I now as a parent have to reconcile my children either being "wimps" who are terrified to ride around the backgarden without a helmet on (all neighbours without exception do NOT ride in their gardens without helmets). The alternative is encouraging a sense of risk taking and having to live with the consequences. It is not easy and I hope that we are striking the right balance.

An unfortunate side-effect of a risk-averse nation is that not only do sports such as skydiving, moto-cross etc start to die out, business risk taking also gets impacted.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[Royd 0]

I've recently purchased a motorcycle and researched the safety factors. There is a saying, "Dress for the crash, not the ride."
Statistically, sooner or later, you're going to go down, and you're not going to win against the asphalt.

I've been a cyclist for years, have had plenty of road rash, and two accidents that probably would have left me addle brained, if not dead, if I was not wearing a helmet.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I've recently purchased a motorcycle and researched the safety factors. There is a saying, "Dress for the crash, not the ride."
Statistically, sooner or later, you're going to go down, and you're not going to win against the asphalt.

There's no guarantee you will crash, but over time the probability does trend towards 1.0. I made it 98,000 miles before the experience. That's 2 lifetimes for the average RUB biker.

Don't forget earplugs if you're doing longer rides.

[ExAFO 0]

Quote

Don't forget earplugs if you're doing longer rides.

And a Ruffed Lemur to ride bitch. Nothing says macho like a Madagascar prosimian on the back of the bike.

Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW.

[Loonix 0]

Quote

While I can't imagine riding my bike without a helmet, I do find the general UK mindset towards full protective clothing a little more extreme than I was used to (still do it though).

However I can't justify wearing a helmet on a bicycle - even for my kids, I just can't relate a cycle helmet to increased safety (despite having a 12 year old killed 1/2 a mile from our home on his bike). It seems that lack of cycle tracks is a far higher risk for people on bicycles?

Sounds pretty irresponsible of you.

I have one friend who'd most likely be dead today if it wasn't for his helmet. He was 10, and was hit by a truck. There are _plenty_ of examples, if you search a little.

With a few close calls of my own, one of which could've turned out to be pretty ugly, I've decided to never ride my bicycle without a helmet.

If you choose not to wear yours, fine with me, but if you're serious about not encouraging your kids to, then you're not just stupid, but effectively endangering your kids.

[Andy9o8 1]

I agree with you. When I was a small kid in the early 1960's we didn't wear seat belts because most cars didn't have them yet, and we really didn't know better. Growing up, epecially as a teen, I rode my bike everywhere, without a helmet - because bike helmets weren't common yet, and we really didn't know any better. I never got a scratch.

Now, not only are seat belts and bike helmets common, but so is the general knowledge of the huge degree to which they reduce the risk of injury & death. My daughter's 16-yr old friend was just killed when he was hit by a car as he rode his bike out of his driveway. He wasn't wearing a helmet, and his cause of death was head injury. Today, when I see people in a car w/o a seatbelt, I think they're fucking idiots; and when I see kids riding bikes w/o helmets, I want to horse-whip their parents.

[LongWayToFall 0]

Quote

I'm going to step up on my soap box regarding this issue, so please forgive me.
People say its up to the rider with regard to the use of a helmet, if the have a crash and die in the accident they only hurt them self. I can not disagree more.

On September 13, 2007 at 0530 hrs I was on my way home. A 57 year old male ran a red light and impacted the side of my vehicle while riding his motorcycle without a helmet. I exited my vehicle to go see if I could help him. His only OBVIOUS injury at the time of the crash was his open head injury. Although he did have other less serious injuries, he died from the injury to his brain.

Although this accident wasn't my fault I still have nightmares about the accident. I can't drive by the intersection where the crash occurred without feeling depressed and on more than one occasion I have broken down in tears.

My feelings aside, this man left behind a wife, children, grandchildren, and other family. Who have all morned his loss.

This tragedy as well as many others could have been prevented by the use of a safety helmet. Yes, they can be hot, cumbersome, and uncomfortable in some peoples opinion but the fact is, they save lives. The decision not to wear a helmet affects MANY more people that the rider. Please be safe.

Chuck

The reason you were affected was because of your inability to deal with gory situations. NOT because some guy spilled his brains in front of you. DEATH HAPPENS. If we were living thousands of years ago, you would see dead bodies and guts all the time. You would come to terms with this. Although you would not enjoy seeing it, it would make you a stronger and more capable individual. Example: You are driving, and see a dead body on the side of the road. Most people in this day and age would panic and freak out, turn away, and then plow right into the cop who is standing in front of you trying to direct traffic. If a doctor got shaken up every time someone died in front of him, then he would have a higher probability of messing up on the next guy. I would suggest you come to terms with the accident you were involved with, rather than try to prevent them from happening. That 57 year old man might have been a recovering drug user, and riding his motorcycle without a helmet and feeling the wind in his hair was the only thing that kept him going, and made him enjoy his life. Who are you to tell him he cannot do this anymore?

And to the person who said injuries from no helmets means high insurance, this may be true. But how about we mandate that all cars must have front, side, rear, overhead, and underhead airbags. Along with 5 point racing harnesses. Everyone must buy new vehicles now, if they want to drive a car, because everything else is so unsafe. Granted, the cost of a helmet is not much compared to the cost of buying a new car that is outfitted with every possible safety feature, but once you start the ball rolling in that direction, do you see where it will go???

+1 Bubblewrap society

[wmw999 2,334]

Quote

DEATH HAPPENS

And sometimes people get uncomfortable reminders of the likely impact of their demise, and don't like that.

Most of us won't be around after we're dead, so it's OK with us what happens. But it's probably not a bad idea to think of the consequences to people we care about, and those who care about us. Not that it controls what we do, but it's just as real as anything.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

However I can't justify wearing a helmet on a bicycle - even for my kids, I just can't relate a cycle helmet to increased safety (despite having a 12 year old killed 1/2 a mile from our home on his bike). It seems that lack of cycle tracks is a far higher risk for people on bicycles?

My sister left her helmet at home one too many times. When I first visited her at the hospital she no longer had any (60 seconds was too much) short term memory. She ran up thousands of dollars in medical bills and was out of work for months.

While not wearing a helmet on a bicycle is unlikely to kill you, even a minor slip can be enough to really screw up your life.

As far as bike paths, the road is safer because cars are watching for traffic there while they're not looking at the paths that run parallel to the roads. I've only been hit by cars while cycling on bike paths.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

As far as bike paths, the road is safer because cars are watching for traffic there while they're not looking at the paths that run parallel to the roads. I've only been hit by cars while cycling on bike paths.

The only good bike paths are that ones that are designed by themselves, rather than as an add on to a road. It shouldn't be intersecting side roads every 100 yards with a 4 way stop sign.

A bike path that runs along the coast, or through a park/marshland works very well. Unless it is multiuse, full of walkers, joggers, rollerbladers and loose dogs having a good time.