Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(TreeHugger)   More people suffer serious head injuries in car accidents than in bike accidents. So why do all the mandatory helmet laws only target bicyclists?   (treehugger.com ) divider line
    More: Stupid, bicycle accident, mountain biker, moving violation  
•       •       •

3170 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 May 2014 at 9:06 AM (1 year ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



169 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2014-05-18 02:37:15 AM  
*facepalm*
Just get in the corner and stay there, subby.
 
2014-05-18 02:56:51 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: *facepalm*
Just get in the corner and stay there, subby.


I don't have the citations on hand (it's Saturday night, cut me some slack) but a car and a bicycle are equally likely to give you a head injury per mile traveled, and a bicycle helmet would prevent a lot of head injuries in cars, but we dismiss the idea as ridiculous for cultural reasons.

I always wear a helmet when I ride on the streets, mostly because my brother had his life saved by a helmet when he was young and I think it models good behavior for kids. But really, requiring people to wear helmets in cars makes as much sense as requiring them to wear them on bikes.

Now, motorcycle head injuries are way beyond car/bicycle head injuries, and I definitely support mandatory helmet laws for them.
 
2014-05-18 03:23:55 AM  
I think riders of two wheeled vehicles should always ride in nothing but a thong
 
2014-05-18 03:32:19 AM  
Perhaps they address them by seatbelt laws....
 
2014-05-18 03:41:09 AM  
People should be required to wear helmets when going to the toilet.

/snark
 
2014-05-18 04:42:00 AM  
I don't understand why helmets are required for adults. Yes, you could be seriously hurt and brain damaged from a fall off of a bike. Then again, you could just as easily choose to stay home and drink Draino. So much in this world COULD happen, why should we mandate that certain events be safeguarded against while others which are equal or greater risks are not?
 
2014-05-18 04:43:33 AM  
If Michael Schumacher hadn't been wearing a helmet while skiing, he'd probably be dead now instead of in a coma.
 
2014-05-18 07:05:29 AM  
More people suffer serious head injuries in car accidents than in bike accidents.

Ah, another lesson in how to lie with statistics.

How many car accidents occur every year?  How many multiple-passenger cars are there?  In the USA alone, hundreds of thousands, if not millions?  How many bicycle accidents? A few thousand?  So does it stand to reason that there are more head injuries in car accidents than head injuries in bike accidents?

Why am I bothering to type this since you're just trolling anyway.
 
2014-05-18 07:49:21 AM  
One of my Facebook "friends" posted a link to this the other day. He's always "that guy". He's a vegan, anti-GMO, anti global warming, anti bike lane (I don't quite get how that works but apparently they make cycling more dangerous through some twisted logic).

A while back he posted an excellent piece about how a lot of people believe things that aren't scientifically factual and since then he hasn't posted a single thing about GMO. Pretty sure I heard an audible *click*.

It's kind of a shame because for the longest time all I ever had to do to know the right answer to something was to pick the opposite of what he was saying. Oh well, all good things and all that.

/csb
 
2014-05-18 07:59:59 AM  

doglover: I don't understand why helmets are required for adults. Yes, you could be seriously hurt and brain damaged from a fall off of a bike. Then again, you could just as easily choose to stay home and drink Draino. So much in this world COULD happen, why should we mandate that certain events be safeguarded against while others which are equal or greater risks are not?


My inner libertarian tends to agree, but on the other hand you know we're all paying for these idiots who crack their skulls open and have to undergo tens of thousands of dollars worth of medical treatment.
 
2014-05-18 08:49:07 AM  
You sir are dumb, and your will never stop being dumb.

Shese.
 
2014-05-18 08:51:04 AM  

Earguy: More people suffer serious head injuries in car accidents than in bike accidents.

Ah, another lesson in how to lie with statistics.

How many car accidents occur every year?  How many multiple-passenger cars are there?  In the USA alone, hundreds of thousands, if not millions?  How many bicycle accidents? A few thousand?  So does it stand to reason that there are more head injuries in car accidents than head injuries in bike accidents?

Why am I bothering to type this since you're just trolling anyway.


Yeah, this.
 
2014-05-18 09:08:22 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: *facepalm*


Clearly, some sort of face protection is necessary. And -- depending on how delicate your hand is -- maybe gloves.
 
2014-05-18 09:11:15 AM  

baka-san: You sir are dumb, and your will never stop being dumb.

Shese.


1/10 or 10/10.

I just can't tell any more.
 
2014-05-18 09:11:29 AM  
A couple months ago, I saw a guy wearing an open face motorcycle helmet while driving his car on the highway. Was on my way to work, and I suppose he was to. Was the only time I can remember seeing that outside of a motorcar race.

/csb
 
2014-05-18 09:11:46 AM  
Treehugger...of course.

Here's subby's helmet:

i.imgur.com
 
2014-05-18 09:12:01 AM  

nekom: doglover: I don't understand why helmets are required for adults. Yes, you could be seriously hurt and brain damaged from a fall off of a bike. Then again, you could just as easily choose to stay home and drink Draino. So much in this world COULD happen, why should we mandate that certain events be safeguarded against while others which are equal or greater risks are not?

My inner libertarian tends to agree, but on the other hand you know we're all paying for these idiots who crack their skulls open and have to undergo tens of thousands of dollars worth of medical treatment.


We're paying for everyone eventually anyway.
 
2014-05-18 09:14:27 AM  
Hah, I'm just picturing guys in hummers driving around with retard helmets on and it's making me happy.
 
2014-05-18 09:16:08 AM  
Maybe I'm clueless, but where in the world is it required that an adult wear a helmet to ride a bicycle?  I ride a lot and sometimes go without a lid.  My reasoning is I want to feel the wind blow through my hair once more, before it's gone.
 
2014-05-18 09:17:47 AM  
Well, let's see here:

It used to be that most life threatening injuries in car accidents could be prevented by simply wearing seat belt.  So we mandated that.  The most common life threatening injuries on a bike could be solved by wearing helmets, so we started mandating that too.

You're never going to eliminate ALL risk to anything ever.  But I think we can try to fix the obvious ones.

/oh, and there are a lot more people in cars than there are riding bikes, thus a larger number of injured
//but that's too obvious to say, right Subby?
 
2014-05-18 09:18:11 AM  
if you need a law to get you to wear a helmet...it may be too late
 
2014-05-18 09:18:23 AM  

doglover: We're paying for everyone eventually anyway.


I haven't heard that one before. It's not really a good show-stopper comeback, though, since there is a difference between "we all pay for everyone's last ambulance ride" and "we all pay for sixty years of this dipshiat as a parapalegic because FREEDOM"
 
2014-05-18 09:19:15 AM  
I think everyone should be required to wear a helmet at all times, no matter what they're doing.

That would be hilarious.
 
2014-05-18 09:21:59 AM  
I think mandatory helmet laws (for motorcycles) suck.

Having said that, I've had three low speed dumps - I wouldn't go so far as to say crashes - and hit my head each time.  I don't even remember hitting my head but the scratches on my helmet told me I did.  So i almost always wear my helmet.  The only exception is very short rides where it's legal.
 
2014-05-18 09:22:18 AM  

oa330_man: Maybe I'm clueless, but where in the world is it required that an adult wear a helmet to ride a bicycle?  I ride a lot and sometimes go without a lid.  My reasoning is I want to feel the wind blow through my hair once more, before it's gone.


I know in a lot of places in Europe while I lived there required helmets.  Though it was mostly in the cities.  You get outside the city, although I'm sure the laws still sad you were supposed to I think a lot less people cared.  But then, the cops in the cities could give less than a shiat about any of that anyway. As long as you weren't actively killing a person or a gypsy, they would just wave and walk on by.
 
2014-05-18 09:24:56 AM  

Shadowknight: As long as you weren't actively killing a person or a gypsy,


This came off unfortunately wrong.  I didn't mean that gypsies weren't people.  I meant that police saw a gypsy, or someone they deemed to be gypsy-like, and they were immediately treated with suspicion.  Spain was a weird place sometimes.

/that bit of racism aside, I loved the country and their bike-friendly ways
 
2014-05-18 09:26:09 AM  

loser0: doglover: We're paying for everyone eventually anyway.

I haven't heard that one before. It's not really a good show-stopper comeback, though, since there is a difference between "we all pay for everyone's last ambulance ride" and "we all pay for sixty years of this dipshiat as a parapalegic because FREEDOM"


Helmets don't really prevent spinal injuries.

They're more to make sure that, if you survive, your brains aren't scrambled.
 
2014-05-18 09:27:26 AM  

Barfmaker: One of my Facebook "friends" posted a link to this the other day. He's always "that guy". He's a vegan, anti-GMO, anti global warming, anti bike lane (I don't quite get how that works but apparently they make cycling more dangerous through some twisted logic).

A while back he posted an excellent piece about how a lot of people believe things that aren't scientifically factual and since then he hasn't posted a single thing about GMO. Pretty sure I heard an audible *click*.

It's kind of a shame because for the longest time all I ever had to do to know the right answer to something was to pick the opposite of what he was saying. Oh well, all good things and all that.

/csb


No. Not a cool story. It went from bicycles to GMOs for no rhyme or reason. Does Monsanto issue you your paychecks?
 
2014-05-18 09:27:38 AM  
yea?  you shouldn't have to wear a helmet.

 and when you crack your skull, the taxpayer shouldn't have to treat you.
 
2014-05-18 09:28:16 AM  
I ain't getting any head injury when I'm stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic.

On the flip side, I regularly biked to work in Japan where the streets are narrower, and never thought much of it.  Yet when I climb on a bicycle here in America I feel completely defenseless.  Not only is there often nowhere to go, it's just how the cars move -- I can tell nobody's paying attention.  I definitely wear a helmet every time I climb on a bike and even then I feel it's not enough.

American drivers are bad.
 
2014-05-18 09:32:39 AM  

Nick Nostril: A couple months ago, I saw a guy wearing an open face motorcycle helmet while driving his car on the highway. Was on my way to work, and I suppose he was to. Was the only time I can remember seeing that outside of a motorcar race.

/csb


There are post-op rehab helmets some people have to wear for a while after accidents or brain surgery.

Or he was just odd.
 
2014-05-18 09:33:25 AM  
They should wear condoms too.  For protection.
 
2014-05-18 09:35:26 AM  
If you're going to ask that question, then stop calling car drivers "cagers".
 
2014-05-18 09:35:53 AM  

neongoats: Hah, I'm just picturing guys in hummers driving around with retard helmets on and it's making me happy.



I did a GIS for "retard helmet" and came up with, well...

weaselzippers.us
 
2014-05-18 09:37:03 AM  

oa330_man: Maybe I'm clueless, but where in the world is it required that an adult wear a helmet to ride a bicycle?


Most municipalities... in other words, most places that people (in the USA) live.
 
2014-05-18 09:40:18 AM  
My inner libertarian tends to agree, but on the other hand you know we're all paying for these idiots who crack their skulls open and have to undergo tens of thousands of dollars worth of medical treatment.

Just think of how much money we could save if we forced fatties to diet, avoiding the huge medical costs of their cancer/diabetes/cardiac issues, and prevented people who can't afford kids to not have them, thus reducing juvenile delinquency problems, and so forth.

Helmet/seatbelt laws are the thin edge of the wedge. The TOP of the Slippery Slope. Establishing the right of the government to control your personal behavior for the indirect benefit of society. Because of that, these laws should be vigorously opposed and eliminated. Not because seatbelts and helmets are bad ideas (they aren't), but because of the dangers presented by the precedent  of letting the government regulate behavior by individuals that do not directly affect anybody else's rights or privileges.

Where does the slope stop? Government review/approval of all your life choices? After all, your success in life indirectly impacts the rest of society. Society benefits from productivity, and pays for your mistakes.

/Wore seatbelts as soon as they became available in 1965
//my dad looked at me and said "What? You don't trust my driving?"
///I don't wear a helmet while bike riding, and I wear a Top Hat whilst Foxhunting, 'cause I live for danger
 
2014-05-18 09:42:34 AM  
We already have seatbelt laws, which are the car equivalent to helmet laws.  I'd be interested to see if seatbelts and helmets save money, I've always heard the anecdotal evidence that they can cause more money spent, as people without helmets (specifically motorcycles) and seatbelts are more likely to die and not need critical care.  No idea if true, but I'm ok with it being a personal choice/risk.
 
2014-05-18 09:44:50 AM  
You mean airbags? Some cars have 8 or more.
 
2014-05-18 09:45:54 AM  
RYE OR DIE

i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2014-05-18 09:47:50 AM  

Nick Nostril: A couple months ago, I saw a guy wearing an open face motorcycle helmet while driving his car on the highway. Was on my way to work, and I suppose he was to. Was the only time I can remember seeing that outside of a motorcar race.

/csb


I see those a lot, and I always wonder about bugs in teeth. Because ew.
 
2014-05-18 09:49:54 AM  

GDubDub: baka-san: You sir are dumb, and your will never stop being dumb.

Shese.

1/10 or 10/10.

I just can't tell any more.


Quickly typed and submitted apparently with the need to check what little was written.  Probably done in hopes of instigating a response (i.e. troll) rather than vitriol.

In short, the type of person who needs to wear a helmet while type.  You can never be too safe.
 
2014-05-18 09:51:36 AM  

KidneyStone: I think mandatory helmet laws (for motorcycles) suck.

Having said that, I've had three low speed dumps - I wouldn't go so far as to say crashes - and hit my head each time.  I don't even remember hitting my head but the scratches on my helmet told me I did.  So i almost always wear my helmet.  The only exception is very short rides where it's legal.


So did this guy.
 
2014-05-18 09:53:17 AM  

CruJones: We already have seatbelt laws, which are the car equivalent to helmet laws.  I'd be interested to see if seatbelts and helmets save money, I've always heard the anecdotal evidence that they can cause more money spent, as people without helmets (specifically motorcycles) and seatbelts are more likely to die and not need critical care.  No idea if true, but I'm ok with it being a personal choice/risk.


It's complicated..depending how you look at the problem,

http://www.cycle-helmets.com/results.html

Of course the is the land down under. Where just about everything is out to kill you.
 
2014-05-18 09:54:46 AM  

Day_Old_Dutchie: CruJones: We already have seatbelt laws, which are the car equivalent to helmet laws.  I'd be interested to see if seatbelts and helmets save money, I've always heard the anecdotal evidence that they can cause more money spent, as people without helmets (specifically motorcycles) and seatbelts are more likely to die and not need critical care.  No idea if true, but I'm ok with it being a personal choice/risk.

It's complicated..depending how you look at the problem,

http://www.cycle-helmets.com/results.html

Of course the is the land down under. Where just about everything is out to kill you.


Yeah they need to legislate power armor suits in that place.
 
2014-05-18 09:54:49 AM  
When they started using steel helmets in WW1, head/brain injuries were more prevalent.
 
2014-05-18 09:55:15 AM  
A five point harness and a roll cage would probably save a few lives, too.
 
2014-05-18 09:58:14 AM  
They should just put seatbelts on bikes, that should save a lot of injuries.
 
2014-05-18 10:00:47 AM  
doglover:
We're paying for everyone eventually anyway.

Absolutely true.  So the question I guess is whether it's right for society to make certain idiotic things illegal to mitigate overall cost, or whether individual liberty trumps that.  Clearly neither extreme seems proper, so it's a question of where the middle ground is.
 
2014-05-18 10:02:18 AM  
Any law that has to do with personal safety only and won't affect anyone else should just be dropped, then we can let survival of the fittest take over. Helmets and seatbelts mostly. I mean if they don't wear them they are only hurting themselves. The idiots that die because they dont wear them? Oh well, so sad.... Those smart enough to wear them will live on. Same with all sorts of stuff like safety glasses, hard hats, respirators..... They don't wanna wear them fine. Ain't gonna effect me none. That's why the world is going to hell is because of all these laws protecting stupid people and now said stupid people get to live on to make more stupid people. These laws are messing with the natural order of things and have to stop.
 
2014-05-18 10:04:17 AM  

Shadowknight: Shadowknight: As long as you weren't actively killing a person or a gypsy,

This came off unfortunately wrong.  I didn't mean that gypsies weren't people.  I meant that police saw a gypsy, or someone they deemed to be gypsy-like, and they were immediately treated with suspicion.  Spain was a weird place sometimes.

/that bit of racism aside, I loved the country and their bike-friendly ways


The first one was much, much funnier, the Gypsy Anti-Defimation League not withstanding.
 
2014-05-18 10:05:27 AM  
Incorporate football helmets into your lovemaking.

Trust me on this, it's intensely gratifying.
 
2014-05-18 10:06:19 AM  

mark12A: Helmet/seatbelt laws are the thin edge of the wedge. The TOP of the Slippery Slope. Establishing the right of the government to control your personal behavior for the indirect benefit of society.


I'm pretty sure that all laws are designed to restrict personal behavior for the (direct or indirect) benefit of society.  That's kind of the definition of a law.

/oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?
 
2014-05-18 10:07:34 AM  
In 2012 I skidded and rolled my pickup on black ice. It ended up rolling onto the passenger's side in the ditch, and the driver's side window hit me in the head so motherfarking hard I suffered a serious concussion and to this day I don't remember the accident's aftermath because I was in a blackout...stone cold sober. All the glass in my 2000 Toyota Tacoma pickup was intact after the rollover, with the exception of the window that bashed me in the head.

If I'd had a helmet on, the whole episode would have been less traumatic. Unfortunately, I never wear a helmet in the car because that'd be silly. Fortunately, I always wear my seatbelt, and my seatbelt saved my life. My ten year old daughter was with me at the time, and her seatbelt saved her life too. Her only "injury" was a bruise on her neck where the seatbelt restrained her.

/CSB
 
2014-05-18 10:08:19 AM  

brap: Incorporate football helmets into your lovemaking.

Trust me on this, it's intensely gratifying.


But which face guard- place kicker or lineman?
 
2014-05-18 10:12:01 AM  

CruJones: We already have seatbelt laws, which are the car equivalent to helmet laws.  I'd be interested to see if seatbelts and helmets save money, I've always heard the anecdotal evidence that they can cause more money spent, as people without helmets (specifically motorcycles) and seatbelts are more likely to die and not need critical care.  No idea if true, but I'm ok with it being a personal choice/risk.


Life > Money

The first person to reply with a smartass "Life = Money" should know that I'm picturing myself smacking you upside the head.
 
2014-05-18 10:16:05 AM  
Study says that per-hour travel by bike, foot and cycle have similar levels of head injuries, but doesn't say whether those cyclists were helmeted. Head injuries might be higher if the cyclists weren't wearing helmets, but we can't tell from the data TFA cites, so kinda pointless to speculate.

/Doesn't wear a helmet when riding bikeshare bikes, otherwise does.
//Feel safe enough on those bikes because they're so slow.
 
2014-05-18 10:16:40 AM  
From TFA: It turns out that so many people are turned off cycling by helmets that the the lives saved through the exercise and health benefits of cycling among people is greater than the number of lives saved through helmet use.

Do you know of ANYONE who has said to himself "well, I would ride my bike, if it weren't for that darn helmet taking all the fun out of it?"

Bicycling helmets are so unobtrusive.  The five seconds it takes to make sure I'm not wearing the pointy end out front like an idiot, then snapping the snap under my chin isn't even a blip in the "ride/no-ride" decision.  I'd say weather is the bigger dissuading factor, followed closely by the fact that I'm an old fat guy who avoids exercise at any cost.
 
2014-05-18 10:17:35 AM  

nekom: Clearly neither extreme seems proper


I dunno. Laws are meaningless little scribbles of ink on paper written by people like Rick Santorum and John Boehnerto suck up to people like Maud Flanders. I don't trust lawmakers not to fark things up for short term political gain, thus I don't trust a government that allows lawmakers to actually make laws governing certain spheres.

My objection to helmet laws is that personal safety is first and foremost personal. I have no objections to helmets, especially on kids, but I have huge reservations in letting people like Santorum and Boehner have that kind of control over my life. It's simply none of the government's business what an individual citizen does to themselves alone.
 
2014-05-18 10:17:54 AM  

Mad Scientist: brap: Incorporate football helmets into your lovemaking.

Trust me on this, it's intensely gratifying.

But which face guard- place kicker or lineman?


Go with the Lineman's dense bar configuration - for HER pleasure.
 
2014-05-18 10:18:00 AM  
Because bicyclists are idiot menaces and need to be regulated since they're apparently too stupid to follow traffic laws.
 
2014-05-18 10:18:16 AM  

bagumpity: From TFA: It turns out that so many people are turned off cycling by helmets that the the lives saved through the exercise and health benefits of cycling among people is greater than the number of lives saved through helmet use.

Do you know of ANYONE who has said to himself "well, I would ride my bike, if it weren't for that darn helmet taking all the fun out of it?"

Bicycling helmets are so unobtrusive.  The five seconds it takes to make sure I'm not wearing the pointy end out front like an idiot, then snapping the snap under my chin isn't even a blip in the "ride/no-ride" decision.  I'd say weather is the bigger dissuading factor, followed closely by the fact that I'm an old fat guy who avoids exercise at any cost.


Helmets are a pain in the ass when you're OFF the bike. If you're riding from home to work and back, they're fine, but if you're going out to eat or shop or be a tourist, not so much, because you have to carry the stupid thing around.
 
2014-05-18 10:18:23 AM  
About a month ago I got into a bicycle accident where I fractured my left radial bone. I still have about two more weeks of healing. I was very happy that I was wearing my helmet because I very well could have fell on my head. If other people don't want to wear helmets I couldn't care less though I think it's a dumb decision. As far as I'm concerned I'll happily wear a seatbelt in the car and use a helmet while biking.

I just think the people making a big deal about those laws requiring either because the Gubmint is encroaching on my freedoms are going overboard. Those laws are asking you to do something simple that may save your life someday. The Goverment does worse things than that.
 
2014-05-18 10:18:30 AM  
I'm a proponent of not forcing people to wear helmets or seat belts. If you aren't wearing one, however, your insurance (life or property) company should be to deny any claims if you die or are injured in a wreck. You should be a mandatory organ donor in those instances, too.
 
2014-05-18 10:20:08 AM  
What I want is real bike helmets back.  The soft shell pieces of crap they make today are just shiat compared to what they were a few years back.  Bring back the Bell Tour Lite or Bell II.
 
2014-05-18 10:30:34 AM  
A person should be completely able to ride/drive whatever thy want without a helmet, provided it is well documented that if you do not follow the minimal suggested safety procedures that you waive all right to public assistance if you happen to fark yourself over.

Independent action, independent consequences. I'm all for libertarianism provided those libertarians don't expect other people to pay for their dumb choices.
 
2014-05-18 10:30:51 AM  

Day_Old_Dutchie: CruJones: We already have seatbelt laws, which are the car equivalent to helmet laws.  I'd be interested to see if seatbelts and helmets save money, I've always heard the anecdotal evidence that they can cause more money spent, as people without helmets (specifically motorcycles) and seatbelts are more likely to die and not need critical care.  No idea if true, but I'm ok with it being a personal choice/risk.

It's complicated..depending how you look at the problem,

http://www.cycle-helmets.com/results.html

Of course the is the land down under. Where just about everything is out to kill you.


Helmets aren't going to help them if they crash into a pool of wallaby venom or get hit with a barrage of poisonous kola quills.
 
2014-05-18 10:31:29 AM  

nekom: doglover: I don't understand why helmets are required for adults. Yes, you could be seriously hurt and brain damaged from a fall off of a bike. Then again, you could just as easily choose to stay home and drink Draino. So much in this world COULD happen, why should we mandate that certain events be safeguarded against while others which are equal or greater risks are not?

My inner libertarian tends to agree, but on the other hand you know we're all paying for these idiots who crack their skulls open and have to undergo tens of thousands of dollars worth of medical treatment.


We shouldn't be paying for people's injuries like that.  This is the problem with getting the government involved.... It goes from, "Ehh...You want to fark yourself up?  Go right ahead... whatever, it's a free country" to "Wrap yourself in bubble wrap because your body now belongs to the state, instead of yourself."
 
2014-05-18 10:40:06 AM  

LazyMedia: Study says that per-hour travel by bike, foot and cycle have similar levels of head injuries, but doesn't say whether those cyclists were helmeted. Head injuries might be higher if the cyclists weren't wearing helmets, but we can't tell from the data TFA cites, so kinda pointless to speculate.

/Doesn't wear a helmet when riding bikeshare bikes, otherwise does.
//Feel safe enough on those bikes because they're so slow.


Yes. All the stats in TFA could possibly be evidence that bike helmets WORK! Just think of how high the percentage would be fire bikes if people weren't wearing helmets.
 
2014-05-18 10:42:05 AM  

HeartBurnKid: /oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?


Hahahahaha.

Oh, you're serious?  Let me laugh even harder.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
 
2014-05-18 10:45:23 AM  

06Wahoo: HeartBurnKid: /oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?

Hahahahaha.

Oh, you're serious?  Let me laugh even harder.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


I've never seen somebody so amused by their own ignorance.
 
2014-05-18 10:47:57 AM  

K3rmy: GDubDub: baka-san: You sir are dumb, and your will never stop being dumb.

Shese.

1/10 or 10/10.

I just can't tell any more.

Quickly typed and submitted apparently with the need to check what little was written.  Probably done in hopes of instigating a response (i.e. troll) rather than vitriol.

In short, the type of person who needs to wear a helmet while type.  You can never be too safe.


While type? huh.

-Motorcycles are just dangerous and the risk ratio is too high for any kind of benefit. Motorcycles should just be banned or slowly squeezed out I production.
-cars also carry a risk, but not as large. However considering the number of fatalities, we should issue a law that within the next 10 years to block and kind if job that doesn't require personal appearance and have the people work from home.


/sorry about the haphazard thoughts, too many motorcycle crashes
//second idea is actually amusing in a "what if" scenario
///sudden slashies
 
2014-05-18 10:48:00 AM  
Because bycyclists are more valuable to society and actually have brains to protect. Unlike motorists.
 
2014-05-18 10:51:11 AM  
Author heading for a high noon showdown with Darwin. Darwin's shot may be slow but it is straight and never misses a target.
 
2014-05-18 10:55:19 AM  
I've already mentioned that the average IQ I see on Fark appears to drop on a yearly basis, This thread is a very good example of that.
 
2014-05-18 11:04:18 AM  

Dirty J1: Any law that has to do with personal safety only and won't affect anyone else should just be dropped, then we can let survival of the fittest take over. Helmets and seatbelts mostly. I mean if they don't wear them they are only hurting themselves. The idiots that die because they dont wear them? Oh well, so sad.... Those smart enough to wear them will live on. Same with all sorts of stuff like safety glasses, hard hats, respirators..... They don't wanna wear them fine. Ain't gonna effect me none. That's why the world is going to hell is because of all these laws protecting stupid people and now said stupid people get to live on to make more stupid people. These laws are messing with the natural order of things and have to stop.


In addition, I'm not saying we shouldn't push safety items on people. We still need to at least suggest them so we can say we told ya so and avoid legal confrontation because they weren't aware of said safety items. And also need to give incentive. Not sure if it already works like this, but let insurance companies deny coverage at their discretion for those injured/dead from not wearing recommended safety devices. So for a smart person like me, I would heed the safety warnings and use the devices, and i sure as hell would knowing my insurance can deny me if I don't. Now those left that do die because they don't wear their seatbelt kind of help society.
Less stupid people and lower insurance rates!
 
2014-05-18 11:09:09 AM  

KidneyStone: I think mandatory helmet laws (for motorcycles) suck.

Having said that, I've had three low speed dumps - I wouldn't go so far as to say crashes - and hit my head each time.  I don't even remember hitting my head but the scratches on my helmet told me I did.  So i almost always wear my helmet.  The only exception is very short rides where it's legal.


I'm okay with letting motorcycle riders go helmetless, but they  should be forced to post a bond to covers all medical bills related to head injuries.

/we used to have a helmet law in PA
//Motorcycling morons got it repealed
///Surprise! Head injuries shot up after the repeal
 
2014-05-18 11:09:29 AM  

RainDawg: Because bycyclists are more valuable to society and actually have brains to protect. Unlike motorists.


Lmfao really? Bicyclists are more valuable? Most of the cyclists i see commuting to work dont appear to be the "save the environment and excercise" type, but more the "I've had way too many DUIs and lost my license again" types.
 
2014-05-18 11:10:31 AM  

Resident Muslim: K3rmy: GDubDub: baka-san: You sir are dumb, and your will never stop being dumb.

Shese.

1/10 or 10/10.

I just can't tell any more.

Quickly typed and submitted apparently without the need to check what little was written.  Probably done in hopes of instigating a response (i.e. troll) rather than vitriol.

In short, the type of person who needs to wear a helmet while type typing.  You can never be too safe.

While type? huh.

-Motorcycles are just dangerous and the risk ratio is too high for any kind of benefit. Motorcycles should just be banned or slowly squeezed out I production.
-cars also carry a risk, but not as large. However considering the number of fatalities, we should issue a law that within the next 10 years to block and kind if job that doesn't require personal appearance and have the people work from home.


/sorry about the haphazard thoughts, too many motorcycle crashes
//second idea is actually amusing in a "what if" scenario
///sudden slashies


FTFM

My grammar is bad due to the fact that I am a product of US public schooling.  I do not wear a helmet as a courtesy to the rest of humanity in the hopes that when, not if, I do something stupid, I won't survive it thus taking myself out of the gene pool.

Now hold my beer and watch this. . .
 
2014-05-18 11:19:29 AM  

HeartBurnKid: mark12A: Helmet/seatbelt laws are the thin edge of the wedge. The TOP of the Slippery Slope. Establishing the right of the government to control your personal behavior for the indirect benefit of society.

I'm pretty sure that all laws are designed to restrict personal behavior for the (direct or indirect) benefit of society.  That's kind of the definition of a law.

/oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?


You'll notice the OP only noted an objection to laws restricting personal behavior for the indirect benefit of society.

Almost everyone who tries to cite the slippery slope as a fallacy (including yourself) is doing it wrong. It is only a fallacy if it is clearly claimed that "A must necessarily lead to B". There is nothing fallacious at all about "A may lead to B", or even "A will probably lead to B", and of course there are many instances in politics and in life where such concerns are valid.
 
2014-05-18 11:21:21 AM  

Shadowknight: oh, and there are a lot more people in cars than there are riding bikes, thus a larger number of injured
//but that's too obvious to say, right Subby?


This is one of those times where someone is trying to be clever and hope nobody notices the huge flaw in what they are trying to slip past people who have other thing on their minds and simply scan instead of read. Subby may be a troll but the author of the piece (if he actually believes what he wrote) needs a "Special" helmet all his own and should be on a short bus instead of riding a bike.
 
2014-05-18 11:22:39 AM  
i.chzbgr.com
 
2014-05-18 11:24:48 AM  

Dwight_Yeast: KidneyStone: I think mandatory helmet laws (for motorcycles) suck.

Having said that, I've had three low speed dumps - I wouldn't go so far as to say crashes - and hit my head each time.  I don't even remember hitting my head but the scratches on my helmet told me I did.  So i almost always wear my helmet.  The only exception is very short rides where it's legal.

I'm okay with letting motorcycle riders go helmetless, but they  should be forced to post a bond to covers all medical bills related to head injuries.

/we used to have a helmet law in PA
//Motorcycling morons got it repealed
///Surprise! Head injuries shot up after the repeal


Ha! That reminds me of all the hoopla when, 3yrs after that law was repealed and 2yrs after he signed with the Steelers, Roethlisberger crashed his motorcycle without a helmet on.

I've always wondered if wearing a helmet was put into Big Sports contracts after that happened, it sure was a topic of conversation around here.

I cringe everytime I see a helmetless motorcycle rider. I've known too many who have been in accidents WITH a helmet.
 
2014-05-18 11:25:01 AM  

Fark like a Barsoomian: [i.chzbgr.com image 492x528]


I bet that seemed like a good idea after a case of beer.
 
2014-05-18 11:27:35 AM  

oa330_man: Maybe I'm clueless, but where in the world is it required that an adult wear a helmet to ride a bicycle?  I ride a lot and sometimes go without a lid.  My reasoning is I want to feel the wind blow through my hair once more, before it's gone.


Your state of Mexico for starters.

http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/helmet_laws.html

or more specifically

http://www.cdc.gov/injury/pdfs/ss/NewMexico_helmet-a.pdf

Yes you are clueless.
 
2014-05-18 11:29:31 AM  

CaptSS: oa330_man: Maybe I'm clueless, but where in the world is it required that an adult wear a helmet to ride a bicycle?  I ride a lot and sometimes go without a lid.  My reasoning is I want to feel the wind blow through my hair once more, before it's gone.

Your state of Mexico for starters.

http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/helmet_laws.html

or more specifically

http://www.cdc.gov/injury/pdfs/ss/NewMexico_helmet-a.pdf

Yes you are clueless.


That should read "Your state of New Mexico." I hate nor being able to edit a post.
 
2014-05-18 11:32:14 AM  
For those who didn't bother to actually read the article,

Stromberg shows that even looking at the number of injuries per hour of travel, which compensates for the fact that there are a lot more drivers than cyclists, the rate of head injuries is not significantly different between walking, cycling or driving.

I know of a brain surgeon who refuses to wear a cycle helmet as the injuries that he sees from such incidents tend to be from a twisting nature caused by the streamlined design which snags in fixed objects. Twisting injuries are much worse than sudden stops - at normal cycle speeds.

He, not I, reckons that only round basin type helmets should be allowed.
 
2014-05-18 11:33:34 AM  

Dirty J1: Any law that has to do with personal safety only and won't affect anyone else should just be dropped, then we can let survival of the fittest take over. Helmets and seatbelts mostly. I mean if they don't wear them they are only hurting themselves. The idiots that die because they dont wear them? Oh well, so sad.... Those smart enough to wear them will live on. Same with all sorts of stuff like safety glasses, hard hats, respirators..... They don't wanna wear them fine. Ain't gonna effect me none. That's why the world is going to hell is because of all these laws protecting stupid people and now said stupid people get to live on to make more stupid people. These laws are messing with the natural order of things and have to stop.


I am guessing this is sarcasm, but either way, do you think that helmet/seatbelt laws are about additional revenue and more reasons for legal searches or about safety?
 
2014-05-18 11:35:36 AM  
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-05-18 11:48:31 AM  

roc6783: Dirty J1: Any law that has to do with personal safety only and won't affect anyone else should just be dropped, then we can let survival of the fittest take over. Helmets and seatbelts mostly. I mean if they don't wear them they are only hurting themselves. The idiots that die because they dont wear them? Oh well, so sad.... Those smart enough to wear them will live on. Same with all sorts of stuff like safety glasses, hard hats, respirators..... They don't wanna wear them fine. Ain't gonna effect me none. That's why the world is going to hell is because of all these laws protecting stupid people and now said stupid people get to live on to make more stupid people. These laws are messing with the natural order of things and have to stop.

I am guessing this is sarcasm, but either way, do you think that helmet/seatbelt laws are about additional revenue and more reasons for legal searches or about safety?


I'm not really being sarcastic, but you make a good point. I'm sure it's just as much about revenue and searches as it is safety, and that's unfortunate. In a perfect world it would be all about the safety but thats really not the case is it? Still I think society should forego the revenue and make it a personal safety option. Making everything about money is making things worse than they need to be.
 
2014-05-18 11:50:09 AM  

HeartBurnKid: mark12A: Helmet/seatbelt laws are the thin edge of the wedge. The TOP of the Slippery Slope. Establishing the right of the government to control your personal behavior for the indirect benefit of society.

I'm pretty sure that all laws are designed to restrict personal behavior for the (direct or indirect) benefit of society.  That's kind of the definition of a law.

/oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?


Yeah. just ask the smokers.
 
2014-05-18 11:50:18 AM  
lunkhed:
I know of a brain surgeon who refuses to wear a cycle helmet as the injuries that he sees from such incidents tend to be from a twisting nature caused by the streamlined design which snags in fixed objects. Twisting injuries are much worse than sudden stops - at normal cycle speeds.

Most bicycle helmets - or Little Foam Hats - are pretty good at stopping injuries at low speeds. Like falling off your bike while stopped or doing a couple of miles per hour.

They're pretty much useless at higher speed impacts (hit by a car, for example), and can cause other issues, such as overheating in hot climates.
 
2014-05-18 11:53:01 AM  

Skyrmion: HeartBurnKid: mark12A: Helmet/seatbelt laws are the thin edge of the wedge. The TOP of the Slippery Slope. Establishing the right of the government to control your personal behavior for the indirect benefit of society.

I'm pretty sure that all laws are designed to restrict personal behavior for the (direct or indirect) benefit of society.  That's kind of the definition of a law.

/oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?

You'll notice the OP only noted an objection to laws restricting personal behavior for the indirect benefit of society.


So he only has an issue with 99% of the laws on the books, rather than all of them, then?

Almost everyone who tries to cite the slippery slope as a fallacy (including yourself) is doing it wrong. It is only a fallacy if it is clearly claimed that "A must necessarily lead to B". There is nothing fallacious at all about "A may lead to B", or even "A will probably lead to B", and of course there are many instances in politics and in life where such concerns are valid.

Except that he uses it as "A must necessarily lead to B".  He says the government shouldn't make people wear helmets because it'll lead inevitably to all kinds of other restrictions.  What if... and I know, I'm just talking crazy here... we let them regulate helmets, and then stop them from doing the really crazy stuff?
 
2014-05-18 11:53:27 AM  

Carousel Beast: HeartBurnKid: mark12A: Helmet/seatbelt laws are the thin edge of the wedge. The TOP of the Slippery Slope. Establishing the right of the government to control your personal behavior for the indirect benefit of society.

I'm pretty sure that all laws are designed to restrict personal behavior for the (direct or indirect) benefit of society.  That's kind of the definition of a law.

/oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?

Yeah. just ask the smokers.


cf067b.medialib.glogster.com
They keep saying "WHOOOSH," with the occasional "GLUB."
 
2014-05-18 11:53:44 AM  

Carousel Beast: HeartBurnKid: mark12A: Helmet/seatbelt laws are the thin edge of the wedge. The TOP of the Slippery Slope. Establishing the right of the government to control your personal behavior for the indirect benefit of society.

I'm pretty sure that all laws are designed to restrict personal behavior for the (direct or indirect) benefit of society.  That's kind of the definition of a law.

/oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?

Yeah. just ask the smokers.


Yes, yes, I know, banning smoking in restaurants is going to lead to a wholesale ban on smoking any day now.  I get it.
 
2014-05-18 11:55:26 AM  

Linux_Yes: yea?  you shouldn't have to wear a helmet.

 and when you crack your skull, the taxpayer shouldn't have to treat you.


Aren't you the socialist?
 
2014-05-18 11:58:53 AM  

LazyMedia: bagumpity: From TFA: It turns out that so many people are turned off cycling by helmets that the the lives saved through the exercise and health benefits of cycling among people is greater than the number of lives saved through helmet use.

Do you know of ANYONE who has said to himself "well, I would ride my bike, if it weren't for that darn helmet taking all the fun out of it?"

Bicycling helmets are so unobtrusive.  The five seconds it takes to make sure I'm not wearing the pointy end out front like an idiot, then snapping the snap under my chin isn't even a blip in the "ride/no-ride" decision.  I'd say weather is the bigger dissuading factor, followed closely by the fact that I'm an old fat guy who avoids exercise at any cost.

Helmets are a pain in the ass when you're OFF the bike. If you're riding from home to work and back, they're fine, but if you're going out to eat or shop or be a tourist, not so much, because you have to carry the stupid thing around.


Can't you lock it to the bike?
 
2014-05-18 11:59:12 AM  
HeartBurnKid:
/oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?

It can be - but it's actually a form of useful logic which CAN become a fallacy if taken to silly extremes.

In this case, "if you allow the government to assume some control, they'll take more" is a use of this logic - and is backed up by, basically, the entire history of the human race.

It's mostly seen as the Law of Unintended Consequences.

In this case, "if we allow the government to require seat belts, they'll end up requiring more regulations."

"Don't be silly, this is just about seat belts. Oh, by the way, car makers have to start designing cars to be safer, so you need air bags. And crumple zones."

"See?"

"Don't be silly. Oh, by the way, cars will be required to have backup cameras in a couple of years."
 
2014-05-18 12:03:36 PM  

Pattuq: CruJones: We already have seatbelt laws, which are the car equivalent to helmet laws.  I'd be interested to see if seatbelts and helmets save money, I've always heard the anecdotal evidence that they can cause more money spent, as people without helmets (specifically motorcycles) and seatbelts are more likely to die and not need critical care.  No idea if true, but I'm ok with it being a personal choice/risk.

Life > Money

The first person to reply with a smartass "Life = Money" should know that I'm picturing myself smacking you upside the head.


Actually, money > life. Why else would so many people risk their lives to make money?

Or, why are those with money be able to wage war, putting those without money in harm's way?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that life is cheap, and money is very important.
 
2014-05-18 12:04:37 PM  

Triumph: If Michael Schumacher hadn't been wearing a helmet while skiing, he'd probably be dead now instead of in a coma.


Not necessarily.

I'm a big believer in helmets, since a bicycle helmet saved my life in the 90's, but this logic is just flat out wrong. Risk homeostasis theory is well established, and states that an organism will stay at a certain level of risk, so if Schumacher weren't wearing the helmet, he might have been more careful and never been in the crash in the first place.

When I'm rock climbing and take a fall 300ft off the ground, it's tempting to say "if I weren't using a rope, I'd be dead right now". But the fact remains that if I were free soloing, I would be much more focussed and much more cognizant of each individual move.
 
2014-05-18 12:05:06 PM  
Having passenger seats facing backwards in all vehicles (cars, busses, planes, etc.) would  avoid many serious injuries and save many lives, especially in the case of a plane crash. Will it ever happen? No.
 
2014-05-18 12:11:09 PM  

Earguy: More people suffer serious head injuries in car accidents than in bike accidents.

Ah, another lesson in how to lie with statistics.

How many car accidents occur every year?  How many multiple-passenger cars are there?  In the USA alone, hundreds of thousands, if not millions?  How many bicycle accidents? A few thousand?  So does it stand to reason that there are more head injuries in car accidents than head injuries in bike accidents?

Why am I bothering to type this since you're just trolling anyway.


The article addresses that.
 
2014-05-18 12:13:50 PM  
There's already a head accel standard for airbags and pillars in cars as part if the NHTSA regs.
 
2014-05-18 12:15:30 PM  
I'm an adult.

The government that we all fund with our tax dollars should certainly put together reports/collect data on traffic accidents.  It should be available to the public and if doctors or helmet manufactures want to advertise the dangers - cool.  I can run the numbers and see if I agree whether the difference of likelihood from an accident with vs. without a helmet is worth the associated costs to me.

But please stop passing retarded f***ing laws.
Please.

The annoying ass tickets and harassment from the cops will cause more damage than the danger you are trying to legislate away.
 
2014-05-18 12:16:31 PM  

dryknife: Having passenger seats facing backwards in all vehicles (cars, busses, planes, etc.) would  avoid many serious injuries and save many lives, especially in the case of a plane crash. Will it ever happen? No.


You were saying?

gomotors.net

They manufactured these for 15 years.
 
2014-05-18 12:17:58 PM  
How many of those head injuries are cracked skulls?  Because that's the only thing a helmet does a good job of preventing, as we've seen with all the concussions and CTE in helmeted sports.  Don't get me wrong, preventing cracked skulls is a fantastic thing, but I wouldn't think many of them happen in cars with tons of air bags versus falling off bikes onto concrete.
 
2014-05-18 12:18:39 PM  

HeartBurnKid: Carousel Beast: HeartBurnKid: mark12A: Helmet/seatbelt laws are the thin edge of the wedge. The TOP of the Slippery Slope. Establishing the right of the government to control your personal behavior for the indirect benefit of society.

I'm pretty sure that all laws are designed to restrict personal behavior for the (direct or indirect) benefit of society.  That's kind of the definition of a law.

/oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?

Yeah. just ask the smokers.

Yes, yes, I know, banning smoking in restaurants is going to lead to a wholesale ban on smoking any day now.  I get it.


CVS stopped selling cigarettes.
Just sayin'.

/don't care, quit
 
2014-05-18 12:19:10 PM  
Next up: helmet laws for showering.
 
2014-05-18 12:20:36 PM  

HeartBurnKid: Carousel Beast: HeartBurnKid: mark12A: Helmet/seatbelt laws are the thin edge of the wedge. The TOP of the Slippery Slope. Establishing the right of the government to control your personal behavior for the indirect benefit of society.

I'm pretty sure that all laws are designed to restrict personal behavior for the (direct or indirect) benefit of society.  That's kind of the definition of a law.

/oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?

Yeah. just ask the smokers.

Yes, yes, I know, banning smoking in restaurants is going to lead to a wholesale ban on smoking any day now.  I get it.


It's just a no-smoking section, it's not like we're banning smoking in restaurants.
...or in bars
..or in all buildings
...or your home
..or outside

And I've never even smoked

/But please, do go on with your "slippery slope is a fallacy" drivel
 
2014-05-18 12:21:00 PM  

sendtodave: Linux_Yes: yea?  you shouldn't have to wear a helmet.

 and when you crack your skull, the taxpayer shouldn't have to treat you.

Aren't you the socialist?



Democratic Socialist to be more precise.  i've seen and heard enough of crony capitalism and its talent for buying off our Legislators and funneling the nation's wealth up to the upper 2%. and when it needs a bailout, goes running to the government.   it's gotten old after 20/30 years.
 
2014-05-18 12:22:24 PM  
cirby:  Oh, by the way, cars will be required to have backup cameras in a couple of years."

Yes and I agree with this, because rear window visibility sucks in many newer cars.
 
2014-05-18 12:23:06 PM  

lindalouwho: Nick Nostril: A couple months ago, I saw a guy wearing an open face motorcycle helmet while driving his car on the highway. Was on my way to work, and I suppose he was to. Was the only time I can remember seeing that outside of a motorcar race.

/csb

There are post-op rehab helmets some people have to wear for a while after accidents or brain surgery.

Or he was just odd.


Ah so.

/ I always tell the kids, when we see someone riding a bike sans helmet, that the rider doesn't have any brains to protect anyway, thus, no helmet required.
 
2014-05-18 12:24:01 PM  
Helmets for everyone. I ride full coverage on my hog. Think about 3/4 maybe not
 
2014-05-18 12:28:38 PM  

Nick Nostril: lindalouwho: Nick Nostril: A couple months ago, I saw a guy wearing an open face motorcycle helmet while driving his car on the highway. Was on my way to work, and I suppose he was to. Was the only time I can remember seeing that outside of a motorcar race.

/csb

There are post-op rehab helmets some people have to wear for a while after accidents or brain surgery.

Or he was just odd.

Ah so.

/ I always tell the kids, when we see someone riding a bike sans helmet, that the rider doesn't have any brains to protect anyway, thus, no helmet required.


I just realized I missed the "while driving his car" part of that Weeners time I read it. I thought it strange, because I see open faced motorcycle helmets all the time.

Yeesh. Moar coffee.
 
2014-05-18 12:33:49 PM  

Linux_Yes: sendtodave: Linux_Yes: yea?  you shouldn't have to wear a helmet.

 and when you crack your skull, the taxpayer shouldn't have to treat you.

Aren't you the socialist?


Democratic Socialist to be more precise.  i've seen and heard enough of crony capitalism and its talent for buying off our Legislators and funneling the nation's wealth up to the upper 2%. and when it needs a bailout, goes running to the government.   it's gotten old after 20/30 years.


Ok, well, uh, shouldn't everyone have to pay for stupid people, then?
 
2014-05-18 12:34:59 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-05-18 12:37:49 PM  

nekom: doglover: I don't understand why helmets are required for adults. Yes, you could be seriously hurt and brain damaged from a fall off of a bike. Then again, you could just as easily choose to stay home and drink Draino. So much in this world COULD happen, why should we mandate that certain events be safeguarded against while others which are equal or greater risks are not?

My inner libertarian tends to agree, but on the other hand you know we're all paying for these idiots who crack their skulls open and have to undergo tens of thousands of dollars worth of medical treatment.


As someone who works for a company that specializes various therapies for head injury survivors..
You estimates of costs are low.
Factor in therapies, SSDI income, food stamps, housing assististance and assistive tech needs. The cost of a regular working guy suffering a head injury is astronomical. Many TBI survivors also end up in prison. Unfortunately - prison also not a cost effective solution.
 
2014-05-18 12:46:57 PM  

Shadowknight: Shadowknight: As long as you weren't actively killing a person or a gypsy,

This came off unfortunately wrong.  I didn't mean that gypsies weren't people.  I meant that police saw a gypsy, or someone they deemed to be gypsy-like, and they were immediately treated with suspicion.  Spain was a weird place sometimes.

/that bit of racism aside, I loved the country and their bike-friendly ways


Well, there's racism and there's objective recognition of reality. The line is blurrier than it should be in a perfect world.
 
2014-05-18 12:48:59 PM  

Day_Old_Dutchie: CruJones: We already have seatbelt laws, which are the car equivalent to helmet laws.  I'd be interested to see if seatbelts and helmets save money, I've always heard the anecdotal evidence that they can cause more money spent, as people without helmets (specifically motorcycles) and seatbelts are more likely to die and not need critical care.  No idea if true, but I'm ok with it being a personal choice/risk.

It's complicated..depending how you look at the problem,

http://www.cycle-helmets.com/results.html

Of course the is the land down under. Where just about everything is out to kill you.


women glow and men plunder!
 
2014-05-18 12:53:25 PM  

Linux_Yes: yea?  you shouldn't have to wear a helmet.

 and when you crack your skull, the taxpayer shouldn't have to treat you.


That used to be my argument until my wife, who worked many years as an ER nurse, explained that when a person arrived with trauma no one made sur that they had insurance (or was wearing protective gear). They just treated them.
 
2014-05-18 12:54:14 PM  
Preemptive anti-zombie strike.
 
2014-05-18 12:58:53 PM  

Linux_Yes: yea?  you shouldn't have to wear a helmet.

 and when you crack your skull, the taxpayer shouldn't have to treat you.


The citizens of pretty much every first world nation other than the US would disagree with you on that.
 
2014-05-18 01:00:04 PM  

Radioactive Ass: dryknife: Having passenger seats facing backwards in all vehicles (cars, busses, planes, etc.) would  avoid many serious injuries and save many lives, especially in the case of a plane crash. Will it ever happen? No.

You were saying?

[gomotors.net image 500x375]

They manufactured these for 15 years.


My brother had one of those.  That was back when nobody in the US had ever heard of Subaru.  Another oddity I remember is instead of some crazy coded number for the paint it had a sticker under the hood that said "Paint No. 15"
 
2014-05-18 01:09:14 PM  

Ima4nic8or: What I want is real bike helmets back.  The soft shell pieces of crap they make today are just shiat compared to what they were a few years back.  Bring back the Bell Tour Lite or Bell II.


Protip: If you like a product very intensely, buy enough to last you natural life.  Companies love to change shiat nowadays.

This is why I have an arsenal of Jarts
 
2014-05-18 01:09:22 PM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: demaL-demaL-yeH: *facepalm*
Just get in the corner and stay there, subby.

I don't have the citations on hand (it's Saturday night, cut me some slack) but a car and a bicycle are equally likely to give you a head injury per mile traveled, and a bicycle helmet would prevent a lot of head injuries in cars, but we dismiss the idea as ridiculous for cultural reasons.

I always wear a helmet when I ride on the streets, mostly because my brother had his life saved by a helmet when he was young and I think it models good behavior for kids. But really, requiring people to wear helmets in cars makes as much sense as requiring them to wear them on bikes.

Now, motorcycle head injuries are way beyond car/bicycle head injuries, and I definitely support mandatory helmet laws for them.


I have a motorcycle, bicycle, and car. I do not, and will not, wear a helmet on any of them. fark you and people like you telling me what I should and shouldn't do. It's my god-damned body. If I want to get an abortion, my call. If I want to get a tattoo, my call. If I want to put any drug I want in my system, my call. If I want to kill myself, my call. And if I want to ride around without a helmet, my call. People who want to control other people's bodies, like yourself, are sickening.
 
2014-05-18 01:10:56 PM  

sendtodave: Linux_Yes: sendtodave: Linux_Yes: yea?  you shouldn't have to wear a helmet.

 and when you crack your skull, the taxpayer shouldn't have to treat you.

Aren't you the socialist?


Democratic Socialist to be more precise.  i've seen and heard enough of crony capitalism and its talent for buying off our Legislators and funneling the nation's wealth up to the upper 2%. and when it needs a bailout, goes running to the government.   it's gotten old after 20/30 years.

Ok, well, uh, shouldn't everyone have to pay for stupid people, then?


ah, yes.  except big business and the wealthy don't think so.  if everyone paid the costs, the costs would be low for everyone.

when the middle/working class pays for everything, the burden is much higher for them and the Beautiful People get a free ride.
 
2014-05-18 01:12:48 PM  

Devil's Playground: Linux_Yes: yea?  you shouldn't have to wear a helmet.

 and when you crack your skull, the taxpayer shouldn't have to treat you.

That used to be my argument until my wife, who worked many years as an ER nurse, explained that when a person arrived with trauma no one made sur that they had insurance (or was wearing protective gear). They just treated them.



that is her job.   and everyone gets to pay for it because numbnuts didn't think he looked cool enough wearing a helmet. ignorance can be bliss, for awhile anyway.....
 
2014-05-18 01:16:44 PM  

CaptSS: oa330_man: Maybe I'm clueless, but where in the world is it required that an adult wear a helmet to ride a bicycle?  I ride a lot and sometimes go without a lid.  My reasoning is I want to feel the wind blow through my hair once more, before it's gone.

Your state of Mexico for starters.

http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/helmet_laws.html

or more specifically

http://www.cdc.gov/injury/pdfs/ss/NewMexico_helmet-a.pdf

Yes you are clueless.


I don't have children and am old enough to worry about losing my hair so those laws don't apply to me unless I move to the Virgin Islands.  Since I'm an alpine skier, that's not going to happen anytime soon.  I lived in Germany up to 2005 and rarely saw a cyclist wear a helmet. Like DWI on a bicycle, it's rarely enforced unless the cop is bored or having a bad day.

Another "think of the childrens!" law.
 
2014-05-18 01:21:32 PM  

namegoeshere: LazyMedia: bagumpity: From TFA: It turns out that so many people are turned off cycling by helmets that the the lives saved through the exercise and health benefits of cycling among people is greater than the number of lives saved through helmet use.

Do you know of ANYONE who has said to himself "well, I would ride my bike, if it weren't for that darn helmet taking all the fun out of it?"

Bicycling helmets are so unobtrusive.  The five seconds it takes to make sure I'm not wearing the pointy end out front like an idiot, then snapping the snap under my chin isn't even a blip in the "ride/no-ride" decision.  I'd say weather is the bigger dissuading factor, followed closely by the fact that I'm an old fat guy who avoids exercise at any cost.

Helmets are a pain in the ass when you're OFF the bike. If you're riding from home to work and back, they're fine, but if you're going out to eat or shop or be a tourist, not so much, because you have to carry the stupid thing around.

Can't you lock it to the bike?


Not if you're using a bikeshare bike, where you drop it off at the rental stand and get a different bike when you get back on. It's not that easy to fit a good cable or lock through a bike helmet in a secure way; the holes aren't that big in the plastic, and the strap just unbuckles.
 
2014-05-18 01:30:26 PM  

ZeroPly: Triumph: If Michael Schumacher hadn't been wearing a helmet while skiing, he'd probably be dead now instead of in a coma.

Not necessarily.

I'm a big believer in helmets, since a bicycle helmet saved my life in the 90's, but this logic is just flat out wrong. Risk homeostasis theory is well established, and states that an organism will stay at a certain level of risk, so if Schumacher weren't wearing the helmet, he might have been more careful and never been in the crash in the first place.

When I'm rock climbing and take a fall 300ft off the ground, it's tempting to say "if I weren't using a rope, I'd be dead right now". But the fact remains that if I were free soloing, I would be much more focussed and much more cognizant of each individual move.


The point I was making is the helmet did him virtually no good. He's brain dead.
 
2014-05-18 01:45:38 PM  
Only time I actually needed a helmet was jogging on a snowy rails to trails, slipped, fell back, and slammed the back of my head into the asphalt directly.   Almost passed out for a second.  So I guess, since the possibility exists that you can smash your skull jogging, we should mandate helmets for jogging.
 
2014-05-18 02:02:40 PM  
cdn3.whatculture.com
 
2014-05-18 02:15:41 PM  
It's all about the clean up, you know, keeping kid blood off the sidewalks and all.
 
2014-05-18 02:16:45 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-05-18 02:57:43 PM  

That Guy Jeff: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: demaL-demaL-yeH: *facepalm*
Just get in the corner and stay there, subby.

I don't have the citations on hand (it's Saturday night, cut me some slack) but a car and a bicycle are equally likely to give you a head injury per mile traveled, and a bicycle helmet would prevent a lot of head injuries in cars, but we dismiss the idea as ridiculous for cultural reasons.

I always wear a helmet when I ride on the streets, mostly because my brother had his life saved by a helmet when he was young and I think it models good behavior for kids. But really, requiring people to wear helmets in cars makes as much sense as requiring them to wear them on bikes.

Now, motorcycle head injuries are way beyond car/bicycle head injuries, and I definitely support mandatory helmet laws for them.

I have a motorcycle, bicycle, and car. I do not, and will not, wear a helmet on any of them. fark you and people like you telling me what I should and shouldn't do. It's my god-damned body. If I want to get an abortion, my call. If I want to get a tattoo, my call. If I want to put any drug I want in my system, my call. If I want to kill myself, my call. And if I want to ride around without a helmet, my call. People who want to control other people's bodies, like yourself, are sickening.


The only way your system of "It's my decision, I'll live with the consequences" works is if society at large adopts a harsh "well, you asked for it" stance on (not) helping people based on their decisions and... no. That's an undo burden that you do not get to levy on everyone else. Your offer is not accepted and your decision not valuable enough to justify upending the prevailing way of life.
 
2014-05-18 03:01:26 PM  
Barfmaker: anti bike lane (I don't quite get how that works but apparently they make cycling more dangerous through some twisted logic).

I can explain it.  In edge-case scenarios, largely low-traffic tertiary streets and residential streets where, in both cases, making it a bike boulevard would be a more appropriate treatment, adding bike lanes tends to put cyclists in the riskiest parts of the street, out of the main sightlines and in the door zones.  Which is why these streets tend to become bike boulevards instead of getting bike lanes if the city engineers know their shiat at all.

That said, on major streets, bicycle lanes do improve the situation for both cyclists and faster traffic alike, for obvious reasons.  Though why the Federal Highway Administration only expects a 4-foot-wide minimum for bicycle lanes adjacent to faster traffic is, literally, incomprehensible; Oregon and Oklahoma get it right by requiring six foot minimums on bike lanes adjacent to a motor vehicle lane in the same direction or any lane in the opposite direction, with both states tending to prefer a 7 foot width for bike lanes.
 
2014-05-18 03:09:46 PM  

HeartBurnKid: /oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?


Yes, it's a logical fallacy.  Trouble is, life isn't a philosophy classroom, and people aren't logical entities.

Your post suggests that your education has surpassed your intelligence, or at least your life experience.  Your mental model of human nature is either defective, immature, or simply nonexistent.  You should feel bad but you probably don't.
 
2014-05-18 03:16:31 PM  

Man On Pink Corner: HeartBurnKid: /oh, and you know the Slippery Slope is a fallacy, right?

Yes, it's a logical fallacy.  Trouble is, life isn't a philosophy classroom, and people aren't logical entities.


That is true, and it's proven by every single person in this thread not only behaving as if the Slippery Slope Fallacy is how things work and must work in the real world.  Including you.

Man On Pink Corner: Your mental model of human nature is either defective, immature, or simply nonexistent. You should feel bad but you probably don't.


Right back at you, babe.
 
2014-05-18 03:20:20 PM  

KidneyStone: I think mandatory helmet laws (for motorcycles) suck.

Having said that, I've had three low speed dumps - I wouldn't go so far as to say crashes - and hit my head each time.  I don't even remember hitting my head but the scratches on my helmet told me I did.  So i almost always wear my helmet.  The only exception is very short rides where it's legal.


Meanwhile, in Oklahoma, where we only got mandatory insurance laws since I've been living here (and I've been in Oklahoma 4 years as of June 20), we still don't have mandatory helmet laws, and the frequency I see motorcyclists wearing a helmet is about the same frequency as I find picnic plazas on the turnpikes (they just took all of them out recently, and they're in the process of closing down the concessions plazas now, for some godawful reason, meaning you'll be paying toll for a 100+ mile drive with no services whatsoever; kind of wish HoJo's would make a comeback and take over the concessions plazas again).

That said, I can't fathom why anybody would ride 30+ MPH without a full helmet, or 50+ without leathers, but I see people riding 70+ barefoot in cutoffs and a t-shirt, no helmet, all the time on the highways here.  It's like they hate life or something...
 
2014-05-18 03:25:05 PM  

doglover: I don't understand why helmets are required for adults. Yes, you could be seriously hurt and brain damaged from a fall off of a bike. Then again, you could just as easily choose to stay home and drink Draino. So much in this world COULD happen, why should we mandate that certain events be safeguarded against while others which are equal or greater risks are not?


Because we're tired of keeping the veggies watered? It's costly to those that aren't stupidly hurting themselves.
 
2014-05-18 03:25:20 PM  

HeartBurnKid: That is true, and it's proven by every single person in this thread not only behaving as if the Slippery Slope Fallacy is how things work and must work in the real world. Including you.


Q to the ED, then, broheim.
 
2014-05-18 03:28:03 PM  

itsaidwhat: It's all about the clean up, you know, keeping kid blood off the sidewalks and all.


That's why the cops keep Coca-Cola syrup in their trunks.


/Read it on the internets
 
2014-05-18 03:28:22 PM  

dragonchild: American drivers are bad.


And I have to trust my life to them when I'm on the job!  I bike when I'm not working and I drive on the job every day.  One reason to love middle America, and the Ozarks in particular:  People ride horses on the highway, the Amish drive horsecarts on the highway, and Arkansas in general tends to be bike friendly (especially towns the size of Hot Springs or Fort Smith and larger).  Bike boulevards often wind up on low-traffic multilane streets (easily identifiable because you're on a 4-6 lane street and all lanes have sharrows on them), except in Arkansas where they say "fark it" and generously post "BICYCLES HAVE PRIORITY" and/or "BICYCLES MUST TAKE FULL LANE" signs every block (extremely common in Hot Springs).  So, there's a bit of a network immunity effect in play thanks to slow moving vehicles or animals already being commonplace on the road.
 
2014-05-18 03:30:23 PM  
I don't understand why helmets are required for adults. Yes, you could be seriously hurt and brain damaged from a fall off of a bike. Then again, you could just as easily choose to stay home and drink Draino. So much in this world COULD happen, why should we mandate that certain events be safeguarded against while others which are equal or greater risks are not?

For the same reason that seat belts are mandatory. I pay higher insurance rates because of the more extensive injuries suffered by idiots who don't wear seatbelts. his is just another example of everyone else having to pay for the stupidity of others. It would be far more equitable if injuries incurred when not wearing a seat belt weren't covered, an idea that casualty companies have been discussing for some time.
 
2014-05-18 03:35:25 PM  

StopDaddy: Independent action, independent consequences. I'm all for libertarianism provided those libertarians don't expect other people to pay for their dumb choices.


Then you hate libertarianism.  It's all about outsourcing the risk to the public while privatizing the benefit.
 
2014-05-18 03:37:57 PM  
Some numbers I found interesting, some related and some only Baconly related:

* In 2009, cycling was also the leading cause of sports-related head injuries, causing 85,389 injuries; football, in second, caused 46,948. Overall, cycling caused over 20% of all head injuries. (Link)

* About 90 percent of bicyclists killed in the United States in 2009 were not wearing helmets. (Link)

* It is estimated that 85% of head injuries in bicycle accidents can be prevented by wearing a helmet (Link)

* 51% of TBI (traumatic brain injuries) are caused by Motor Vehicle Accidents (Link)

* Motorcycles make up ~3% of all registered vehicles in the United States and account for only ~0.4% of all vehicle miles traveled. However, motorcycle crashes accounted for ~10% of all motor vehicle crash fatalities and, per mile traveled, are ~37 times more lethal than automobile crashes. Head injuries were estimated to be the cause of death in >50% of these fatalities. It is estimated that only 50% of motorcyclists routinely wear helmets. (Link)

* In 1975 there were 1,384 passenger vehicle occupant deaths and 2,078 combined pedestrian and bicyclist deaths; in 2004, 1,165 passenger vehicle occupant deaths and 372 combined pedestrian and bicyclist deaths. (Link)

* In 2013, it was stated that the motor vehicle death rate was 13.8 per 100,000 people, and 1.3 100 million vehicle miles traveled (Link)

* Pedal cyclist deaths on public roads: 0.24 deaths per 100,000 (Link)
 
2014-05-18 03:44:13 PM  
www.clarksvilleonline.com

Why should soldiers exclusively have driving helmets?  That they get for free?

Demand free government driving helmets for everyone. Contact your congressman today!
 
2014-05-18 03:51:46 PM  
This article makes a great test!

If you didn't immediately spot the intentional misrepresentation in his very first chart, you need to take a statistics class.

/Not a joke. I'm dead serious.
 
2014-05-18 03:55:24 PM  

RainDawg: Because bycyclists are more valuable to society and actually have brains to protect. Unlike motorists.


You say that, but here's my reaction when I see a cyclist interpret the Idaho Stop to mean they can lanesplit to the front (illegal) and are allowed to run a red light without looking (also illegal, even with the idaho stop law in place) at an intersection like 71st and Memorial...

i.imgur.com
 
2014-05-18 03:56:42 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: * In 2009, cycling was also the leading cause of sports-related head injuries, causing 85,389 injuries; football, in second, caused 46,948. Overall, cycling caused over 20% of all head injuries


Unless we're talking BMX, pump track or velodrome accidents, I'd categorize cycling as a transportation mode, not a sport, since that's why the vast majority of people, even in the US, bicycle.
 
2014-05-18 04:01:59 PM  
I've seen many people, in years past, suffer the consequences of not wearing a helmet. Some are paralyzed, some are quads, and some off kilter by more than a bit. I think the most profound time I can remember, was a middle aged, paunchy guy run a stop sign in our neighborhood, saw a truck going a different direction almost stop, then hit the gas. Guy was maybe 5 feet from truck, bounced off the front of it, it was like "crack the whip" the whip part being the guys head. His arms just folded up when he hit the ground. Was pretty horrific for me to see, but I had my young son with me, he saw it too.
We had a new strip center built about a mile from my house, one day, cutting through it, my bike steering wheel shot to one side, and before I knew it, was on the pavement. They had put in the speed bumps, but hadn't painted them yet. Crunched my then new $80 helmet.
Will not think of riding without one. Don't wanna end up a crip, or worse a Busey.
 
2014-05-18 04:11:12 PM  

Frederf: That Guy Jeff: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: demaL-demaL-yeH: *facepalm*
Just get in the corner and stay there, subby.

I don't have the citations on hand (it's Saturday night, cut me some slack) but a car and a bicycle are equally likely to give you a head injury per mile traveled, and a bicycle helmet would prevent a lot of head injuries in cars, but we dismiss the idea as ridiculous for cultural reasons.

I always wear a helmet when I ride on the streets, mostly because my brother had his life saved by a helmet when he was young and I think it models good behavior for kids. But really, requiring people to wear helmets in cars makes as much sense as requiring them to wear them on bikes.

Now, motorcycle head injuries are way beyond car/bicycle head injuries, and I definitely support mandatory helmet laws for them.

I have a motorcycle, bicycle, and car. I do not, and will not, wear a helmet on any of them. fark you and people like you telling me what I should and shouldn't do. It's my god-damned body. If I want to get an abortion, my call. If I want to get a tattoo, my call. If I want to put any drug I want in my system, my call. If I want to kill myself, my call. And if I want to ride around without a helmet, my call. People who want to control other people's bodies, like yourself, are sickening.

The only way your system of "It's my decision, I'll live with the consequences" works is if society at large adopts a harsh "well, you asked for it" stance on (not) helping people based on their decisions and... no. That's an undo burden that you do not get to levy on everyone else. Your offer is not accepted and your decision not valuable enough to justify upending the prevailing way of life.


The entirety of society is effected by every single thing anyone decides to do or not do. Get an abortion? That's a million dollars of raising money that isn't going into the those industries, plus one fewer future workers. Have sex? There's a risk you might get a disease, or create a baby, or cause a future abortion, so that's no-go too. Like hiking? Oops, might cost society too much. Like sitting on the couch? Woops, might cost society too much. The idiotic world you want to live in is a distopia where every single action or inaction has to be analysed and controlled for the good of the whole. fark that noise. I prefer a free society, where whatever incidental costs or effects you have on society through your actions are just part of the overall cost of having a free society. fark your system, fascist.

// Just got back from a great ride
// No helmet, wind in my hair
// suck it
 
2014-05-18 04:23:24 PM  

Tax Boy: [www.clarksvilleonline.com image 640x427]

Why should soldiers exclusively have driving helmets?  That they get for free?

Demand free government driving helmets for everyone. Contact your congressman today!


I want one of the new air conditioned models.
a57.foxnews.com

/because it's hot...
 
2014-05-18 04:52:02 PM  

That Guy Jeff: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: demaL-demaL-yeH: *facepalm*
Just get in the corner and stay there, subby.

I don't have the citations on hand (it's Saturday night, cut me some slack) but a car and a bicycle are equally likely to give you a head injury per mile traveled, and a bicycle helmet would prevent a lot of head injuries in cars, but we dismiss the idea as ridiculous for cultural reasons.

I always wear a helmet when I ride on the streets, mostly because my brother had his life saved by a helmet when he was young and I think it models good behavior for kids. But really, requiring people to wear helmets in cars makes as much sense as requiring them to wear them on bikes.

Now, motorcycle head injuries are way beyond car/bicycle head injuries, and I definitely support mandatory helmet laws for them.

I have a motorcycle, bicycle, and car. I do not, and will not, wear a helmet on any of them. fark you and people like you telling me what I should and shouldn't do. It's my god-damned body. If I want to get an abortion, my call. If I want to get a tattoo, my call. If I want to put any drug I want in my system, my call. If I want to kill myself, my call. And if I want to ride around without a helmet, my call. People who want to control other people's bodies, like yourself, are sickening.


24.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-05-18 04:58:57 PM  

nekom: doglover: I don't understand why helmets are required for adults. Yes, you could be seriously hurt and brain damaged from a fall off of a bike. Then again, you could just as easily choose to stay home and drink Draino. So much in this world COULD happen, why should we mandate that certain events be safeguarded against while others which are equal or greater risks are not?

My inner libertarian tends to agree, but on the other hand you know we're all paying for these idiots who crack their skulls open and have to undergo tens of thousands of dollars worth of medical treatment.


And this again.
 
2014-05-18 05:17:32 PM  

Errk: I think riders of two wheeled vehicles should always ride in nothing but a thong


Backwards. The thong, not riding the bike.
 
2014-05-18 05:27:44 PM  

proteus_b: oa330_man: Maybe I'm clueless, but where in the world is it required that an adult wear a helmet to ride a bicycle?

Most municipalities... in other words, most places that people (in the USA) live.


This is demonstrably false. Adults are not required to wear helmets anywhere that I know of in the USA.

If your reply isn't a troll for suckers like me to correct you, then you're extremely ignorant, and probably don't venture out of your mom's basement very much.
 
2014-05-18 05:28:02 PM  
Motorists already wear a protective "helmet" called "the frame of the car".
 
2014-05-18 05:30:40 PM  

poot_rootbeer: Motorists already wear a protective "helmet" called "the frame of the car".


And except in circumstances where the individual should die anyway, you rarely suffer head injuries from falling OFF of your car.
 
2014-05-18 05:41:01 PM  
No kidding, I've been driving past the university area, on occasion, and have had the assumed "students" on bikes at night, no reflectors, lights, helmets, or any other type of safety equipment ride in front of me, and act  as if I'm anti- bike" for complaining about it. Hey, I' as pro bike as the next guy, but if and when I smear one, sure, I may feel bad about it, for a while, but will be submitting a bill for repairs to the deceased estate.
Sure I ride a motorcycle and ride bikes as well, and a big point on wearing a helmet is not so much to make sure you try to stay safe, but to help safeguard you from others who may be inattentive.
 As far as refusing to wear a helmet, based on some type of defective logic, hopefully before they've had kids. Or add some chlorine to that gene pool.
I'm not
 
2014-05-18 06:02:16 PM  
ArcadianRefugee:
* It is estimated that 85% of head injuries in bicycle accidents can be prevented by wearing a helmet (Link)

Well... maybe.

It's an "estimate," sure - but when you start chasing initial citations... you find a lot of numbers that don't usually reach 85%. The studies I've found seem to hover around 67% - but it gets a lot more complicated than that. Some studies show no difference in fatality rates between helmeted and non-helmeted riders involved in accidents, while others claimed a high rate difference.
 
2014-05-18 06:19:26 PM  

Baloo Uriza: StopDaddy: Independent action, independent consequences. I'm all for libertarianism provided those libertarians don't expect other people to pay for their dumb choices.

Then you hate libertarianism.  It's all about outsourcing the risk to the public while privatizing the benefit.


I learn something new every day. I'm a hater. Hate that.
 
2014-05-18 06:23:28 PM  

That Guy Jeff: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: demaL-demaL-yeH: *facepalm*
Just get in the corner and stay there, subby.

I don't have the citations on hand (it's Saturday night, cut me some slack) but a car and a bicycle are equally likely to give you a head injury per mile traveled, and a bicycle helmet would prevent a lot of head injuries in cars, but we dismiss the idea as ridiculous for cultural reasons.

I always wear a helmet when I ride on the streets, mostly because my brother had his life saved by a helmet when he was young and I think it models good behavior for kids. But really, requiring people to wear helmets in cars makes as much sense as requiring them to wear them on bikes.

Now, motorcycle head injuries are way beyond car/bicycle head injuries, and I definitely support mandatory helmet laws for them.

I have a motorcycle, bicycle, and car. I do not, and will not, wear a helmet on any of them. fark you and people like you telling me what I should and shouldn't do. It's my god-damned body. If I want to get an abortion, my call. If I want to get a tattoo, my call. If I want to put any drug I want in my system, my call. If I want to kill myself, my call. And if I want to ride around without a helmet, my call. People who want to control other people's bodies, like yourself, are sickening.


I agree with you ,
 Sign a waiver relieving the state from paying you disbility of any kind above whatever you have in insurance if you crack your skull and become a veg. Your right to do what you want is valid so long as its a right the rest of us dont have to subsidize . Want to breed out of wedlock? knock yourself out ... but dont cry that your babies are hungry and the state is obligated to feed them. The difference between a nation of responsible , load bearing citizens and a nation of parasites is so profound that its literally the difference between survival and extinction.
 I am the state ! And I want my resources to go to keeping the roads in good shape , research , space exploration and defense. NOT to underwriting irresponsible behaviors.
 Want to chain an anvil to your wrist and jump into a pool? go ahead , just dont shackle the rest of us to it as well.

"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country. "
<---Hard to believe that such incandescent words were spoken by a democrat
 
2014-05-18 06:43:09 PM  

kidakita: Barfmaker: One of my Facebook "friends" posted a link to this the other day. He's always "that guy". He's a vegan, anti-GMO, anti global warming, anti bike lane (I don't quite get how that works but apparently they make cycling more dangerous through some twisted logic).

A while back he posted an excellent piece about how a lot of people believe things that aren't scientifically factual and since then he hasn't posted a single thing about GMO. Pretty sure I heard an audible *click*.

It's kind of a shame because for the longest time all I ever had to do to know the right answer to something was to pick the opposite of what he was saying. Oh well, all good things and all that.

/csb

No. Not a cool story. It went from bicycles to GMOs for no rhyme or reason. Does Monsanto issue you your paychecks?


No, I believe in science. Go be fundie somewhere else. Oh look, Jesus is calling, it's for you.
 
2014-05-18 06:58:13 PM  
I commute to work on a bicycle and wear a helmet when doing so. Drivers are too erratic and inattentive to risk it, it's not because of any mandates. The biggest danger you can ever face on a road is the few moments right after a driver feels they have been slighted in some way, even if it didn't involve you.

The "slippery slope" argument here is full-duplex stupid, so I have no interest in getting involved in it.

Regulations are passed in reaction to things that are easy to imagine and very graphic in people's imagination and are thus easy to drum up public support for. Sometimes they are in line with the reality of things and sometimes they aren't. If they aren't, then they  mightbe reviewed, but generally only if they have been causing enough people to make sacrifices. Indifference amongst people who don't feel the impact of regulations is hugely difficult to overcome from regulated "minorities."
 
2014-05-18 09:21:10 PM  
How are cops gonna beat your head in if your wearing a helmet.
 
2014-05-18 09:49:40 PM  
I'm in the 'never wore a helmet ever' category.  I just grew up riding bikes all over Germantown (a central Louisville neighborhood.)  As kids, no one wore helmets, ever.  We were also in the 'avoid cars at all costs' category.  Sidewalks were free little roads that didn't have cars on them.  Once in a while you would have to avoid a pedestrian, but since pedestrians aren't made of steel, it was all good.  The concept of biker equality with cars on the road is foreign to me.  I cringe when I see bikers trying to own a lane on a busy city street.  It's just a bad bet in my experience.  To this day I'll ride on the sidewalk every time when possible.  Write me a ticket.
 
2014-05-19 01:47:27 AM  

That Guy Jeff: Frederf: That Guy Jeff: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: demaL-demaL-yeH: *facepalm*
Just get in the corner and stay there, subby.

I don't have the citations on hand (it's Saturday night, cut me some slack) but a car and a bicycle are equally likely to give you a head injury per mile traveled, and a bicycle helmet would prevent a lot of head injuries in cars, but we dismiss the idea as ridiculous for cultural reasons.

I always wear a helmet when I ride on the streets, mostly because my brother had his life saved by a helmet when he was young and I think it models good behavior for kids. But really, requiring people to wear helmets in cars makes as much sense as requiring them to wear them on bikes.

Now, motorcycle head injuries are way beyond car/bicycle head injuries, and I definitely support mandatory helmet laws for them.

I have a motorcycle, bicycle, and car. I do not, and will not, wear a helmet on any of them. fark you and people like you telling me what I should and shouldn't do. It's my god-damned body. If I want to get an abortion, my call. If I want to get a tattoo, my call. If I want to put any drug I want in my system, my call. If I want to kill myself, my call. And if I want to ride around without a helmet, my call. People who want to control other people's bodies, like yourself, are sickening.

The only way your system of "It's my decision, I'll live with the consequences" works is if society at large adopts a harsh "well, you asked for it" stance on (not) helping people based on their decisions and... no. That's an undo burden that you do not get to levy on everyone else. Your offer is not accepted and your decision not valuable enough to justify upending the prevailing way of life.

The entirety of society is effected by every single thing anyone decides to do or not do. Get an abortion? That's a million dollars of raising money that isn't going into the those industries, plus one fewer future workers. Have sex? There's a risk you might get a disease, or ...


That Guy Jeff: Frederf: That Guy Jeff: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: demaL-demaL-yeH: *facepalm*
Just get in the corner and stay there, subby.

I don't have the citations on hand (it's Saturday night, cut me some slack) but a car and a bicycle are equally likely to give you a head injury per mile traveled, and a bicycle helmet would prevent a lot of head injuries in cars, but we dismiss the idea as ridiculous for cultural reasons.

I always wear a helmet when I ride on the streets, mostly because my brother had his life saved by a helmet when he was young and I think it models good behavior for kids. But really, requiring people to wear helmets in cars makes as much sense as requiring them to wear them on bikes.

Now, motorcycle head injuries are way beyond car/bicycle head injuries, and I definitely support mandatory helmet laws for them.

I have a motorcycle, bicycle, and car. I do not, and will not, wear a helmet on any of them. fark you and people like you telling me what I should and shouldn't do. It's my god-damned body. If I want to get an abortion, my call. If I want to get a tattoo, my call. If I want to put any drug I want in my system, my call. If I want to kill myself, my call. And if I want to ride around without a helmet, my call. People who want to control other people's bodies, like yourself, are sickening.

The only way your system of "It's my decision, I'll live with the consequences" works is if society at large adopts a harsh "well, you asked for it" stance on (not) helping people based on their decisions and... no. That's an undo burden that you do not get to levy on everyone else. Your offer is not accepted and your decision not valuable enough to justify upending the prevailing way of life.

The entirety of society is effected by every single thing anyone decides to do or not do. Get an abortion? That's a million dollars of raising money that isn't going into the those industries, plus one fewer future workers. Have sex? There's a risk you might get a disease, or ...


That is not a logically viable position. You misrepresent my position that all interpersonal effects are forbidden. My position is that interpersonal effects actually exist and in some cases must be considered. To disregard them completely is as arrogant as it is ignorant.

Person A's version of society may conflict with Person B's. The point is that neither is inherently right. You have no more right to your version of reality than the one I stated. Your position of being pigheadedly clutching to some non-existent isolation principle does not give your notion a privileged position. The deduced that these two positions are inherently at odds and one is not free to "do as he pleases" as if it has nothing to do with anyone else. That concept is not neutral in the situation. The conclusion I reached is that your version loses to the one held by more and smarter people.

May you make a less messy road accident than you do a live human being.
 
2014-05-19 04:09:13 AM  

Triumph: ZeroPly: Triumph: If Michael Schumacher hadn't been wearing a helmet while skiing, he'd probably be dead now instead of in a coma.

Not necessarily.

I'm a big believer in helmets, since a bicycle helmet saved my life in the 90's, but this logic is just flat out wrong. Risk homeostasis theory is well established, and states that an organism will stay at a certain level of risk, so if Schumacher weren't wearing the helmet, he might have been more careful and never been in the crash in the first place.

When I'm rock climbing and take a fall 300ft off the ground, it's tempting to say "if I weren't using a rope, I'd be dead right now". But the fact remains that if I were free soloing, I would be much more focussed and much more cognizant of each individual move.

The point I was making is the helmet did him virtually no good. He's brain dead.


Since when? They put him in a medically induced coma, and his condition is still improving. The doctors are still hoping for him to come out of the coma. Brain death is irreversible.
 
2014-05-19 05:22:02 AM  

champu: I commute to work on a bicycle and wear a helmet when doing so. Drivers are too erratic and inattentive to risk it, it's not because of any mandates. The biggest danger you can ever face on a road is the few moments right after a driver feels they have been slighted in some way, even if it didn't involve you.


The main problem here is that helmets won't protect you against most vehicle collisions. 3-4,000 lbs of steel and aluminum has quite a bit of momentum compared to a couple dozen pounds of flesh and bone, and shattered legs are the most common major injury in a bike-vehicle accident. Crumple zones and leg armor would be more useful in that case, but are unlikely to ever be mandated. Helmets mostly protect you from your own stupidity (important in its own right) and an occasional obstacle that jumps out at you suddenly that you hit just right, like dogs and reversing cars. High-speed accidents where you hit something just right so helmets make the difference between brain injury and survival are pretty rare, by several studies.
 
Displayed 169 of 169 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report