I don't know what the law is, but you want to know how to improve bike safety in the DC area? Require bikes to use lights at night. And be willing to enforce it. I have very nearly hit bikers on quite a few occasions around here when for some reason, idiots decide that it's a really bright idea to bike around, on occasion even without reflectors, but definitely without lights, usually without helmets, at dusk, or even in the dead of night. If you're that much of an idiot, you honestly deserve to get hit by a car.

Wasn't there some study in the Netherlands that found that, counter-intuitively, requiring helmets actually increased fatalities? Something about wearing them made bicyclists less cautious. It was a few years ago, and I'm too lazy to google it on a Saturday morning.

Bob Falfa: How about this: get rid of all bicycle & motorcycle helmet laws, then let Darwin do his thing.
It will sort itself out.

Fine with me. Add in seat belt laws too.

/cyclist
//wears a helmet

Ah a bicycle thread. I'm sure this won't devolve into a flame war between cagers and spandex wearers.


//I'll be in the back making popcorn.
//Who wants kettlecorn?

Bob Falfa [TotalFark]


How about this: get rid of all bicycle & motorcycle helmet laws, then let Darwin do his thing.
It will sort itself out.

Problem is, government just won't let Darwin do his job. At this point he'll probably never catch up.

Most of the non-helemeted cyclists I see are college kids riding while texting, and people weaving back and forth at a glacial pace on the wrong side of the road. I say let them forego their helmets, and with any luck we'll reduce the percentage of cyclists who act like jerks and give the rest of us a bad name.

/cyclist

numbone: Bob Falfa [TotalFark]


How about this: get rid of all bicycle & motorcycle helmet laws, then let Darwin do his thing.
It will sort itself out.

Problem is, government just won't let Darwin do his job. At this point he'll probably never catch up.

Keep electing Republicans. It will happen.

Never wore a helmet as a child.
Never needed one as an adult (on city streets anyway).

/biatches.

Bike helmet laws are a conspiracy by the petroleum to sell more plastic.
The speed most casual cyclists ride at is not dangerous enough to warrant a helmet.

I've ridden bikes extensively in urban areas for 40+ years without a helmet, and have never come close to having an accident involving head trauma.

I just recently started wearing helmets on hill rides, but even then I don't really feel vulnerable without one.
I'd never ride my motorbike w/o a helmet, though. But I'd prefer the rest of the country allow lane-splitting than worry about helmet laws.

I wear my helmet all the time, but on one ride I forgot to pack it and did the ride helmetless and it felt so weird, like driving my car without wearing a seatbelt. It was a city ride too with lots of traffic, not really the best time to leave it at home.

Now when I was a kid I don't even think they had helmets and during my college years they were very big, ugly, and uncomfortable. So when we would ride out for a Mt. bike ride, we would strap the helmet onto the rear rack until we rode to the trailhead then stop and put them on.  BRILLIANT!

Helmets today are inexpensive, light, have a bit of style and offer lots of ventilation. There really isn't any reason not to wear one.

The best guess I could make of this: The cyclists like wearing helmets, but don't want the law because they want to surround themselves with idiots who don't wear helmets, for added safety.  They have figured out some cars target cyclists and do not prefer the taste of helmet.  I kind of wonder if a t-shirt reading "I don't have to ride faster than that car, I only have to ride faster than you" would sell well.

Should helmets be mandatory for anyone out for a walk too? There are studies that find the risk of injury is comparable or greater than for cycling. http://cyclehelmets.org/1199.html

My big objection to mandatory helmet laws is that it discourages cycling - it adds expense and gear to deal with on every trip. It sends the message that cycling is 'dangerous'. Of course injury is possible, but it's simply not true that it's significantly more dangerous than any other means of travel. I think the roads would be better for everyone, safer too, if more people cycled when practical, so unnecessarily discouraging that has a real cost.

Here's another site with a lot of discussion and reference about the issue. Many popularly held assumptions, "facts", and statistics don't seem to be valid: http://bicyclesafe.com/helmets.html

I think mandatory helmets for children are a much more sensible case - they're generally much less experienced both on a bike and getting along in any kind of traffic, and more likely to have the kind of low-speed, single vehicle accidents where helmets are usually very effective. But for adults it seems easy to make the case that they're unnecessary and inarguable that it's counterproductive to the goals of promoting physical activity and discouraging automobile use.

Let's just get it over with and require everyone to stay indoors wearing a helmet, kevlar vest, floatation device and eye protection.

American Decency Association:

the helmet is a great place to affix lights so there's nothing to get stolen when parking

My 4 year old picked out a helmet that has built in flashing LEDs where the strap meets the back of the helmet. It's an amazing idea and I wish I could find that in a helmet for me.

commuter cyclist.  urban/suburban riding.  Wear a helmet, have front, rear, and wheel lights (Monkeyeletric FTW) and have a reflective vest.  And when I say commuter, I mean a 7 speed, fat tire comfort bike I take to work, the store, etc.

/ don't like the spandex douches either.
//  prefer to remain alive
/// I like kettle corn

zez: There really isn't any reason not to wear one.

I just find them uncomfortable and don't like them.  That's my reason, and it's good enough for me.

sirrerun: Bike helmet laws are a conspiracy by the petroleum to sell more plastic.
The speed most casual cyclists ride at is not dangerous enough to warrant a helmet.

I've ridden bikes extensively in urban areas for 40+ years without a helmet, and have never come close to having an accident involving head trauma.

I just recently started wearing helmets on hill rides, but even then I don't really feel vulnerable without one.
I'd never ride my motorbike w/o a helmet, though. But I'd prefer the rest of the country allow lane-splitting than worry about helmet laws.

My grandmother smoked for 60 years and never died of cancer. I guess that's just a conspiracy too.

eiger: Wasn't there some study in the Netherlands that found that, counter-intuitively, requiring helmets actually increased fatalities? Something about wearing them made bicyclists less cautious. It was a few years ago, and I'm too lazy to google it on a Saturday morning.

Yeah, I'm wondering where exactly the "stupid" tag is supposed to go?  To subby for reading comprehension failure?

MythDragon: Bob Falfa: How about this: get rid of all bicycle & motorcycle helmet laws, then let Darwin do his thing.
It will sort itself out.

Agreed.

Used to blow my mind to see people in FL ride motorcycles with nothing but shorts and sandels. I would at least wear helmet, gloves, boots, and a long sleeve shirt (for local low-speed rides) and leather jacket if I was gonna get on a main road.

As these people will only be hurting themselves, I say go for it. The government can only protect you from yourself for so long.

Yeah, degloving is a biatch.

OccamsWhiskers: My big objection to mandatory helmet laws is that it discourages cycling

You know, you are welcome to cycle all you want without having to feel validated by everyone else thinking they need to be a hip as you.

I don't wear a helmet, and cyclehelmets.org pretty much covers all of my reasoning. Unfortunately most of the public will flat out refuse to embrace results that run counter to common-sense, which explains the ubiquitous bans on texting while driving. (People still do it but they don't look at the road anymore they look at their lap).

I DO wear my motorcycle helmet, but I've had 3 relatively high-speed low side crashes, the last was approx 50mph, and my head has never come close to hitting the ground.

BiffDangler: OccamsWhiskers: My big objection to mandatory helmet laws is that it discourages cycling

You know, you are welcome to cycle all you want without having to feel validated by everyone else thinking they need to be a hip as you.

I'm not looking for validation, I'm looking for reduced traffic, pollution, and oil dependency.

But impressing you probably would be a thrill, now you've given me something to strive for.

So what do you no-helmet bicycle geniuses say about preventing a car from not stopping at stop signs or pulling out of driveways before driving over the intersecting bike path?  I rode my bike for my 4 mile trip to work with a bike path along the entire way less than a dozen times and have been inches from being T boned three times or slamming into the side of a car once because they don't stop and look.  I stopped riding and sticking to parks.

oukewldave: So what do you no-helmet bicycle geniuses say about preventing a car from not stopping at stop signs or pulling out of driveways before driving over the intersecting bike path?  I rode my bike for my 4 mile trip to work with a bike path along the entire way less than a dozen times and have been inches from being T boned three times or slamming into the side of a car once because they don't stop and look.  I stopped riding and sticking to parks.

I'm not sure I understand the question, how does a helmet help in those situations? Besides preventing minor cuts and scrapes when your old, fat, and uncoordinated ass hits the pavement.

If there's one thing that isn't tolerated in Maryland, it is giving up freedom for a little safety.

It doesn't sound like the issue is with the "helmet" part, the issue is with the "mandatory" part.

zez: There really isn't any reason not to wear one.

A couple years ago in the last miles of a long ride, looking down resulted in sweat that built up between the foam and lid washing across my eyes and completely blinding me. The front tire caught a rock just as my hand went up to wipe my eyes and I went down hard on concrete, torso out in Saturday shopper traffic. Fortunately I pulled in before a car hit me but I was still technicolor for months.

 Hipsters out in summer heat with the latest, unventilated skate-board style models make me wonder. I still wear a helmet but they're not guardian angels.

Step 1: Wear a bicycle helmet.
Step 2: Get hit by a car.
Step 3: Die anyway.

farkeruk: Someone in the UK did a test with helmet on and off and used sensors and found that cars drive closer when wearing a cycle helmet than not. He also found that putting on a woman's wig made cars give him more room.http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/articles/archive/overtaking110906.ht ml

If you want to improve bike safety, make yourself farking visible, ffs. Had a near miss when a guy rode past my junction wearing a black jacket, dark trousers and no lights at night. Lights and if possible, a hi-viz (or at least, wear a brighter jacket than farking black).


Visibilty.

farkeruk: Someone in the UK did a test with helmet on and off and used sensors and found that cars drive closer when wearing a cycle helmet than not. He also found that putting on a woman's wig made cars give him more room.http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/articles/archive/overtaking110906.ht ml

If you want to improve bike safety, make yourself farking visible, ffs. Had a near miss when a guy rode past my junction wearing a black jacket, dark trousers and no lights at night. Lights and if possible, a hi-viz (or at least, wear a brighter jacket than farking black).

Maybe because the car-drivers are assuming that the helmet-wearer is less of a farking idiot, and so could be better trusted.

Archie Goodwin: Step 1: Wear a bicycle helmetseat belt.
Step 2: Get hit by a carDrive into lake.
Step 3: Die anyway.

FTFYour logic.

Cyclist here. I ride mainly for fitness/exercise, not commuting, and yes, I wear a helmet and the Lycra. But there's a huge difference between me speeding down a country road at 20+ mph, and casual riders derping along at 8 mph. I wear a helmet because a fall at that speed could be serious. Someone poking along on the park trail is much less likely to be seriously hurt at those low speeds.

Unfortunately, most accidents come from a lack of education on the part of both cyclists and motorists. I can't tell you how often I see idiots on bikes with no lights, or riding on the wrong side of the road, or wearing dark hoodies at night. I'm not talking about 12 year olds, but adults. That's just stupid. But I also see motorists cut off cyclists on turns, or pass dangerously close, or yell at them in traffic in town.

Instead of mandatory helmet laws, I'd love to see a couple of hours of bicycling education inserted into the mandatory classes that we have for motor vehicle licensing. Drivers need to know that cyclists are allowed to take the road at certain points. Adult cyclists need to know when and where those times are appropriate - and to be aware that they need to make themselves visible with lights and reflectors (already required by law for night riding in most states).

Archie Goodwin: Step 1: Wear a bicycle helmet.
Step 2: Get hit by a car.
Step 3: Die anyway.

Step 1: Wear a Motorcycle helmet
Step 2: Get hit by car.
Step 3: Die of a broken neck.

What's your point?

Helmets are to prevent specific types of low speed injuries. You know, the ones where your brain starts swelling and then your mom has to unplug you from life support.

Bob Falfa: How about this: get rid of all bicycle & motorcycle helmet laws, then let Darwin do his thing.
It will sort itself out.

Unfortunately on the way out the door the non helmet riders will be in a coma for several weeks to months before dying costing a couple thousand dollars a day while in the hospital.

/Yes I wear my helmet when biking. To many accidents.

If you are going out for a 100 mile ride on your Bianchi, wear a helmet. If you're going into the woods for some fun with rocks and logs, wear a helmet. If your riding to the neighborhood pool for a swim, helmet un-necessary.

Judgement. Some people don't have any, so let's kill fun for everyone in the name of fairness.

Preface: I am a major bike advocate in my area.
Statement: The problem is within both the advocacy and manufacturing industry. The advocacy side says that bikes are super cheap in comparison to cars and don't like talking about all the additional costs of beginning to bike (helmet, locks, lights, patch kit, bike pump, multi-tool, tire levers). Thus, new or low-income riders see those items as "unnecessary".

The manufacturing industry perpetuates this issue by referring to these "additional" expenses as "accessories" when in fact they're *necessities*. They price gouge on helmets (all helmet sold in the USA pass the same standards but the prettier ones that people actually want to wear cost at least $60.). They sell patch kits with 3 patches and a tiny bit of rubber cement (instead of 10 patches and more sealant). They would prefer for you to take your bike back to the shop to have any adjustments done when most new-bike adjusts can be done completely without tools. Bikes shops still sell tiny cable locks and never focus on selling u-locks... and they never know how to assist the buyer in submitting the bike lock insurance forms.

IF bikes are to be seen as competitive with cars, the minimum standards of similarity must be met. Cars come with locks, headlamps, airbags, and a tire-changing kit. Those analogs must be sold with bikes as a package deal and THEN we will see BETTER cyclists on the road. Spread the word.

eiger: Wasn't there some study in the Netherlands that found that, counter-intuitively, requiring helmets actually increased fatalities? Something about wearing them made bicyclists less cautious. It was a few years ago, and I'm too lazy to google it on a Saturday morning.

Essentially, that was just one study and there are other studies that contradict it. The jury is still out on whether overall wearing a helmet is better than not.

Since I ride a lot, I've read up on this stuff, and what I've taken away from it is this:

1. When a rider wears a helmet, both the rider and the drivers around them are less safe in their behavior. This increases the risk of an accident.

2. When an accident does happen, it is better to have a helmet on than not. Especially if you ride fast. In life-saving terms, they are not as critical as they are for motorcycle riders, but you should still wear one.

3. If you are a cyclist, follow traffic laws, because yes, you are a vehicle, and yes, they apply to you too, you dumb twat.

// no html lists?

if your helmet in any way obscures your vision, you're wearing it wrong. I wear a full-face helmet on my motorcycle and can see very little of it. it obscures my vision far less than the a-pillar of a car when you're driving. since most bicycle helmets are are more open than a motorcycle helmet, you'd have to be wearing it over your face for it to obscure anything.

the helmet is a great place to affix lights so there's nothing to get stolen when parking

Attaching things to your helmet sounds like a great idea, but if you do happen to fall and land on the helmet, then you have a knob that could potentially push through the foam and into your head, or could catch on some other obstruction.

Oh sure you did nothing when they came for the motorcyclists, now they came for you bicyclists. And with head injuries Still the number one injury in car accidents. They're coming for you auto drivers! Mandatory Helmets for CAR DRIVERS!!! They have to in Motorsports and it still didn't save Dale Earnhart...
Helmets in cars! Helmets in cars! Helmets in cars!

Mi-go amigo: In life-saving terms...

Forget life-saving terms, what about "Hey guys, I just went OTB, pass me a beer." instead of "Ugh, I smacked my head hard and can't stop puking, better go to the hospital and pay the deductible on an examination and over-night observation."

As long as we're being anecdotal, I've got to stories that are just as statistically relevant as your stories. I crashed my motorcycle once (it was my only crash - I don't ride anymore - not because of the crash though) and hit my head HARD on the ground.  I was wearing my helmet and all was well.  I'm pretty certain that would not have been the case if I hadn't been.  I also crashed my mountain bike once where I hit my head on a root so hard it dented the helmet.  My head was fine.  I like helmets.

And if you bike dorks think people look at you riding and say "gee, that guy would be so hot looking if he just wasn't wearing that stupid-looking helmet", you're wrong.  You look like a dork with or without the helmet.  Don't worry what others think of your ridiculous looks, just ride and enjoy your pain.

There's always a risk when riding in certain situations.
Be prepared.

I ride a bike as well.  It's a mountain bike with on road/off road tires so I can go anywhere.  Since my starting point is here in the city & my destination could be anywhere, you'd better believe that I've got my helmet on!  I won't leave the house without my day-glow green jersey on either.  It's the same color as a construction worker along the side of a road, so I'm very visible.  A CygoLite headlight on the front as bright as a car headlight & strobe tail lights on the back for riding at night.  I take riding my bike seriously.  The traffic here in the city is crazy & people won't hesitate to jockey back & forth between lanes of traffic just because a spot in a lane right beside them is open.  Car doors fly open all the time when riding past parking spots, people walk right out in front of you like you're not even there...no way would I even consider getting on my bike without a helmet in this metropolitan!  It's just when you don't respect the sport you do is when you get hurt.  Combine your weight with your bike & compare that to a several thousand pound vehicle in a crash with you...it's like a train hitting car.  The train always wins.  Broken bones will heal, but brain injuries...who knows?  It's a 50/50 chance.  You'll be normal or you won't, afterwards.  So why take the chance?

It's a lot cheaper to buy a helmet & save my head, than it is to try to meet a deductible for a hospital stay & physical therapy later on because my head got split open by some asshat in a vehicle texting away not paying attention to what's going on around them & causing a crash!

My biking skills are fine.  It's just everyone else that I have to watch for because they're simply not paying attention...even around the lanes CLEARLY marked for bikes!

Last of the Crazy People: Mi-go amigo: In life-saving terms...

Forget life-saving terms, what about "Hey guys, I just went OTB, pass me a beer." instead of "Ugh, I smacked my head hard and can't stop puking, better go to the hospital and pay the deductible on an examination and over-night observation."

There is that too. I had an accident once when I was a young man and was not wearing a helmet. I have had accidents since when I was wearing a helmet. I can say from experience that wrecking with a helmet has been far preferable.

wambu: NSFW

NSFW

NSFW

NSFW

NSFW

[i.imgur.com image 500x375]

Why do I now have a strange desire to grow up to be a bicycle seat?

I don't know why one would not wear a helmet.  No, if you get minced into burger by a semi it won't help much, but far more likely is a normal wipeout (loose gravel, dog, whatever) that with a helmet is bruises and raspberries but without one sends you to ER.

The best part about bike helmets - stickers!!

wambu: I'll play.
NSFW

That first one was the best of the thread.

/leg man

Why do these helmet pushers hate fat people so much?  Why are they trying to kill so many people with heart disease and diabetes by pushing their farking opinion?  I hope they all die of ass cancer.

Want to not pay for my diabetes medication with your tax's? Stop making riding my bike LESS appealing ya farking dickwads!


/a lifetime of diabetes meds is a hellova lot more expensive than any brain injury.

It's basically the principle of adding safety features that temporarily reduce the number of injuries/fatalities, but after a while, as people feel safer, they take more risks and the number of injuries/fatalities goes back up to its original average.

This is exactly what happened when ABS brakes started being installed in all cars.

SpdrJay: Nanny state.

Nanny country.

We need to drop the whole 'land of the free' schtick, because it's simply never ever been true (and certainly isn't now)

For all you fugs that don't know the difference:

This is a biker




This is a bicyclist



.
It would be nicer to outlaw all helmets on bicyclists. Then just maybe they would bother to respect all other traffic around them.

then again when I come across some bicyclist turd who was run over, I assume in an unbiased manner that I don't know who is to blame for the bi cyclist scratching the car and denting its windshield and putting blood all over the pavement.
oo0oo

   If you're going to wear one at least take the time to make sure it fits properly and that the chinstrap is properly adjusted. Probably over 50% of the helmets I see folks wearing either don't fit, are tilted to far back or forward or are rocking the NHL style chinstrap (ie. loose) thus it is jewelry and a waste of time and money. Regardless of the law I have worn a bike helmet since the mid 1980's (Bell V-1, remember that?) I've seen several instances where it has saved someone's life. We have a helmet law here in BC but it doesn't address whether the helmet actually fits, should we be ticketing people for improper fitting?

    Rider safety is directly related to the rider operating in a safe manner and respecting laws as well as the fact that vehicles (even in the wrong) are bigger than you and will kill you not what gear you're wearing.

wambu: NSFW

NSFW

NSFW

NSFW

NSFW

[i.imgur.com image 500x375]

Boy I used to like her. Now she's a right wing nutjob.

Former supermodel Kathy Ireland backs effort to end Planned Parenthood funding Maybe she was always dumb, but I didn't know it back in the day.

I always wear my helmet when I go for long, serious rides. But there are times when I ride my bike to the store for a Coke where I don't. I like having that choice.

Repo Man


I always wear my helmet when I go for long, serious rides. But there are times when I ride my bike to the store for a Coke where I don't. I like having that choice.

Hey kid, wanna make ten bucks?

Stone Meadow: RandomAxe: First, cyclists wearing helmets tend to be much less aware of their surroundings. Not necessarily oblivious, but on average less aware.

Got a citation for this claim, or is this just your anecdotal observation?

My personal philosophy is that you should never assume a driver will not hit you. Don't give them the opportunity. It's great that they should be forced to share the road, but don't trust them, and don't try to make them do it.

I've been cycling for fitness for a year now (3x/wk 10 miles to work), and have found the exact opposite to be true. My personal experience has been that I need to "establish my own space" to get cars to give me that space. Riding right up against the right edge of the lane (either rural or in town) prompts cars to stay in the same lane where they brush by too close for comfort. In contrast, by moving out just a foot or two drivers seem to realize they need to move over to make a clean pass, and they act accordingly.

/wears a helmet 100% of the time on the bike
//against mandatory helmet law

I agree. As a cyclist if you do do feel circumstances are safe enough for an auto to pass you, due to parked cars, road conditions or oncoming traffic on narrow streets, then do not allow the car to pass you. Assertively take your lane and make the car driver wait until there is enough room. The worst thing to do is give a driver just enough room and have him see if he can squeeze by you.
As for the article, the cycling advocates are right. More cyclists make for safer streets for everyone. There are less car accidents overall when more bikes are on the road. Mandatory helmet laws discourage cycling and therefore roads have less bikes and are less safe.
As for wearing a helmet myself; I'd rather look like an idiot than actually become one.

RandomAxe:
btw, 'Random Axe of Kindness' would have been a great headline for the homeless hitchhiker story. Summ-MASH!

Stone Meadow: Ablejack: As for the article, the cycling advocates are right. More cyclists make for safer streets for everyone. There are less car accidents overall when more bikes are on the road. Mandatory helmet laws discourage cycling and therefore roads have less bikes and are less safe.

I see that claim being made and repeated, but I have to ask, "How so, and where is the evidence to support the claim?"

Don't get me wrong. I am against mandatory helmet laws for adult cyclists, but I'm not convinced helmet laws "discourage" riding. They certainly don't here in Cali where one sees zillions of children riding...all with helmets.

Very few of the kids I see riding in this part of California wear helmets. Too few cops to do much about it. It's too bad, the idea was to get them in the habit, hoping it would carry over into adulthood.

As a Marylander who is sick and tired of nanny-state bull, this is just more nanny-state bull.

Even if they pass this, will it ever be enforced?
I rode every day when I was a kid and rode with many others. Not once did an officer come over and point out that we didn't have helmets on. Hell, I've never seen a bicyclist of any sort get ticketed around here.

C'mon.
There are people getting shot, stabbed, robbed, and raped every day here. The last thing the police need to worry about is whether or not someone chose to do something that can only hurt themselves.

I'm still laughing at the idea and imagining helmets everywhere. I cannot see some 17 year old kid from the hood wearing a helmet while wheely-ing down the middle of the street on some 10-speed. If you're from Baltimore, you know of what I speak and how ridiculous the thought is.

You know who else used to be against helmets?

"bicycle helmet" is the wrong term for this thing. It should be called "foam hat". Because that's what it is. It's a bit of packing foam with a vacuum formed colorful thin plastic shell over it.

The actual ratings on bicycle "helmets" would expose that basically they protect from scratches and other minor injuries. Yes I am aware of all the people who hold up a cracked foam hat and declare it saved their lives. If they had an egg in their pocket it would have broken too, doesn't mean the egg saved their life.

Bicycle helmet laws, once corrected for reduce bicycling due to the law, show no positive change in severe injury occurrences. Which one would expect as a piece of syrofoam isn't going to help when you're hit by a bus.

My experience of personally going down and whacking my head two different times while wearing a bicycle helmet, and receiving nothing worse than a headache, bears out all of the research and other evidence that shows that these airy bits of foam are good for reducing your risk of serious head injury. Without them, all you have is a thin layer of skin, and a not much thicker layer of brittle bone to protect your brain. In the past eight years, there have been two separate altercations here where a guy got punched, knocked out, and hit his head on the concrete when he went down, causing a fatal brain injury. That's it, falling down on the sidewalk, and it turned into manslaughter.

Bob Falfa: How about this: get rid of all bicycle & motorcycle helmet laws, then let Darwin do his thing.
It will sort itself out.

Actually, I think we should take advantage of the stupid. Make it so if you are a registered organ donor, you get an exemption from helmet laws.

I'm against helmet laws, but I think if you ride without a helmet, you should be required by law to be an organ donor.

eiger: Wasn't there some study in the Netherlands that found that, counter-intuitively, requiring helmets actually increased fatalities? Something about wearing them made bicyclists less cautious. It was a few years ago, and I'm too lazy to google it on a Saturday morning.

It also makes cycling less accessible, and thus reduces numbers, which in turn causes other vehicle operators complacent in the idea that everyone outside their vehicle is in a safety cage and thus they don't get used to things like driving at a speed you can react to something slower ahead, passing at a safe distance, etc.

Bronzed War God: Bob Falfa: How about this: get rid of all bicycle & motorcycle helmet laws, then let Darwin do his thing.
It will sort itself out.

Fine with me. Add in seat belt laws too.

I'm not a fan of getting rid of the seatbelt laws.  Last thing I want to have happen is to survive getting hit head on by an idiot, only to get killed by his body flying through my windshield...

This whole "car" thing seems poorly thought out. It's like, "Hey, lets have a system where giant glass and steel boxes hurtle at unnatural speeds in opposite directions of each other separated only by a painted yellow line! And you know what else? Let's build all of our pedestrian footpaths right next to these thoroughfares with no kind of barrier or protection whatsoever! What could possibly go wrong!"

spyderqueen: Bob Falfa: How about this: get rid of all bicycle & motorcycle helmet laws, then let Darwin do his thing.
It will sort itself out.

Actually, I think we should take advantage of the stupid. Make it so if you are a registered organ donor, you get an exemption from helmet laws.

I have always thought that there should be no opting out of organ donation.  Your a citizen? you lose all the major organs to the bank upon death, your family can have dibs if they have an immediate need since they will be less likely to reject them.  The organs themselves should be free, your wealth should have no influence on if you actually get an organ though.

Yes horribly naive I know, rich people first, second and third and all that.

Most of the arguments against helmets are from lycra Nazis who cherrypick data from unreliable studies to prove their point. It's not rocket science to realise that if you've got something between your head and whatever it is your hitting to absorb the energy you're going to be better off than you would be otherwise. I know a number of cyclists - myself included - that would at BEST be drooling vegetables without bike helmets.

Having said that, the infringement of liberty still might not be worth the medical benefit, no matter how strong that is. That's a value judgement.

Perhaps we should seriously consider that all persons in a car should be wearing a helmet. Nearly all racecar drivers (and their passengers/navigators) wear them. They would certainly save lives.

Ablejack: Perhaps we should seriously consider that all persons in a car should be wearing a helmet. Nearly all racecar drivers (and their passengers/navigators) wear them. They would certainly save lives.

At the very least, folks who own convertibles.

Joggers too.

ReverendJasen: zez: There really isn't any reason not to wear one.

I just find them uncomfortable and don't like them.  That's my reason, and it's good enough for me.

You're now farkied as "Idiot." That way, whenever you say something, I'll have a little reminder than you are an idiot.

Ablejack: Perhaps we should seriously consider that all persons in a car should be wearing a helmet. Nearly all racecar drivers (and their passengers/navigators) wear them. They would certainly save lives.

You don't think that maybe it is because those race cars are traveling at 100+ an hour, a speed which a civilian really can't legally achieve?

LoneWolf343: Ablejack: Perhaps we should seriously consider that all persons in a car should be wearing a helmet. Nearly all racecar drivers (and their passengers/navigators) wear them. They would certainly save lives.

You don't think that maybe it is because those race cars are traveling at 100+ an hour, a speed which a civilian really can't legally achieve?

No. I think it's because they are driving at the edge. They are more likely to be in an accident even though they are much better drivers than you and I. Anyway I am sure we both have traveled at speeds that could easily kill us. In fact, people do (too often) die from head injuries in accidents at legal speeds. Furthermore, we are in a much greater risk of head on collisions which racecar drivers would rarely be involved in.

Ablejack: Anyway I am sure we both have traveled at speeds that could easily kill us.

Your odds of survival in a wreck at 30 MPH or greater are 50% or less.  So I spend a good amount of my day at speeds that should kill me if I were to be catastrophically decelerated.

Ablejack: LoneWolf343: Ablejack: Perhaps we should seriously consider that all persons in a car should be wearing a helmet. Nearly all racecar drivers (and their passengers/navigators) wear them. They would certainly save lives.

You don't think that maybe it is because those race cars are traveling at 100+ an hour, a speed which a civilian really can't legally achieve?

No. I think it's because they are driving at the edge. They are more likely to be in an accident even though they are much better drivers than you and I. Anyway I am sure we both have traveled at speeds that could easily kill us. In fact, people do (too often) die from head injuries in accidents at legal speeds. Furthermore, we are in a much greater risk of head on collisions which racecar drivers would rarely be involved in.

Well, that is true, but if you are wearing your seat belt, your head really shouldn't be hitting anything, and if it does, the helmet as probably not going to protect you anyway.