Cyclists without helmets on..

[Writerwannabe83]

Am I the only one who gets really annoyed about this?

If it is the law that us drivers have to wear seatbelts why is their safety choice an optional one?

IF we knocked a cyclist of his bike and he suffered irreparable brain damage or death as a result of a head injury it is us who would have to live with that guilt, even though they made the choice not to wear a helmet.

And then you see some parents out with their children on bikes and although the children always have helmets on, not all the parents do. It is great they are protecting their children, but why do they think their own brains don't matter? I don't mind cyclists on the road at all, but I wish they would wear helmets and keep themselves safe.

Maybe I'm just overly anxious about hitting one....or do they think it will never happen to them?

if the helmet debate is too trying for you micro off you pop then.

It takes one to know one doesn't it Micro. But perhaps not in your case.

ha!

I find wear a helmet when I cycle to work as it messes up my hair.
Though this decision sounds vein, the long term health benefits to me for cycling over my driving colleagues massively outweigh the slight chance of head injury.

Sedentary lifestyles are a massive, public health, slow motion car crash.

HomicidalPsycho Pan, of course it would not involve more collisions, but if someone pulled out in front of you without signalling or looking, and you hit them, and killed them, and had to live with the awareness that this had destroyed their families lives completely, then how would it be just or fair for you to also be labelled at fault and possibly face a prison sentence?

Do you understand the word "presumption"? A presumption of guilt is a legal doctrine that can be overturned. Normally in criminal law, the onus of proof lies upon the Prosecution to prove the case. However this presumption can be reversed, and in certain cycle-friendly countries, this is done so that those who cause accidents due to what in this country would be termed dangerous, negligent or careless driving have to prove that they are not at fault.

Think about what this means - it means those genuinely not at fault would not be criminally liable.

Now, as a driver, you should be aware that other road users may do unexpected things. Usually this is other drivers. Your hazard awareness should prevent the usual excuse of "I didn't see you", which in my mind, is not really a satisfactory excuse for taking someone's life.

Reversing the burden of proof for such accidents is though to be for the greater good. It means, in countries like The Netherlands, you can have infrastructure such as cycle paths which cross roads and the cyclists have priority, so that drivers of cars automatically look for other road users before crossing. It brings down urban speeds as well, and the sanction that they will automatically be found guilty under criminal law of causing an accident if they hit a cyclist, unless the contrary is proven, is effective.

You are also aware I hope that civil law is a different branch of law and that there are moves in this country for strict liability for such accidents under civil law, again as in many Northern European countries.

I am sorry, but I am really shocked as I thought most people were aware of such things as part of their general knowledge.

Helmets save lives. It's bloody obvious and belligerent suggesting otherwise. Clearly some people don't want to be controlled and told what to do, fine but don't discredit helmets.

Yes, sometimes a doctor might suggest someone was right to wear a helmet when they didn't...(?) don't know the details surrounding that incident, but doesn't make helmets les safe.

Sometimes a well packed teapot might not break before a loose helmet flying through a car (?) doesn't make helmets unsafe. They're suppose to break up to take force before your head does.

A lot of horseshit on this thread, can't really see why and I thought MNers were more intelligent that this.

Yes, a helmet won't help you if a lorry crushes you, or you get your head chopped off, or you break your neck or many many other things. It's supposed to give you more of a chance with a head injury. And I've seen first hand, thank fuck that it does.

And Pan and Toad, what are you, twelve? Pathetic playground insulting.

A law change would force reckless drivers to think again before squeezing past us, or cutting across at lights, or cutting up generally ( happened to me last week - only sharp braking by me saved an incident). It's that sort of daily shit that it would cut down on. Thankfully.

Rizzo Helmets save lives. It's bloody obvious and belligerent suggesting otherwise. Clearly some people don't want to be controlled and told what to do, fine but don't discredit helmets

Don't overcredit helmets either. As I have already pointed out, they are far too flimsy to do much good in a serious accident. They are not as effective as motorcycle helmets or riding hats. And they can cause neck and upper spinal injuries in certain types of falls.

I think it would be more accurate to comment that some people don't want to be patronised, particularly by those with less experience of being active and outdoors than them.

Yes, there really is a lot of horseshit on this thread. Please don't lead some of the more psychotic, irresponsible drivers out there to believe that they can drive more carelessly because a cycling helmet will save a cyclist from serious injury should they hit them.

14. and a half. Actually.

And she started it!

If micro is so ill-informed and insulting about people/issues she knows nothing about then it isn't a surprise when her contribution isn't valued.

Rizzo, you are getting a hard time because you have clearly not read the rest of the thread, especially lessmissabs posts. Also you haven't added anything very useful or informative.

Cycling is a normal activity, like walking. In countries where there is a lot of cycling, such as the Netherlands and Germany, helmets are rarely worn.

Shouldn't pedestrians on county lanes also wear them? And runners?

Evidence in favour of helmet wearing is patchy, OP. If you researched the matter, you would see this.
Drive safely and you are unlikely to hit me on my bike, without a helmet. If I have wear helmets I will start driving instead and there will be one more dangerous car on the road. My hair cannot cope with helmets and then a business environment. It goes flat and lank.

Most of the helmets I see on cyclists are incorrectly positioned and would offer no protection at all.
I knowof two people, one very recently, whose lives absolutely were saved by wearing (correctly fitted ) helmets.
Yanbu, btw!

Rizzo I've got to apologize, I got you and another poster mixed up.

yes helmets should have the peak bit over the forehead, not pointing up to the skies. And strapped properly.

and sun glasses are essential.

Pan If micro is so ill-informed and insulting about people/issues she knows nothing about then it isn't a surprise when her contribution isn't valued

This is going to sound horribly conceited, but I generally only take advice from people who are better qualified or more experienced than I am. I find its a guideline that serves me quite well in life.

TrueToWho Most of the helmets I see on cyclists are incorrectly positioned and would offer no protection at all

Really? How fascinating! Are you a helmet-fitting type person then? And you are blind to all those cyclists who race competitively and have aero helmets meeting not only British standards but BTA/British Cycling race rules which are terribly stringent? Amazing!

I knowof two people, one very recently, whose lives absolutely were saved by wearing (correctly fitted ) helmets

What on earth were these helmets made of? To actually make the difference between life and death is remarkable, as opposed to between minor injury and somewhat more serious injury. Theres not actually a lot of difference between dying from a brain injury, being brain damaged or having no long term effects. A lot of it is down to factors such as speed and direction of fall, surface hit and how effective the presence or absence of any helmet is. But if you are unlucky and suffer a catastrophic injury to a certain vulnerable and important part of the brain, and you have any factors which may exacerbate it, such as a history of recreational drug or steroid use, then you may die.

I'm not over-crediting helmets. As I have already said, my friend walk away (eventually, after a coma and much surgery) from a horrible accident that she would have died from if not for her helmet. Her experience amongst others I have known or witnessed is good enough for me and worth more than most of the (mostly speculative) anti-helmet comments here.
If any of you can say that you have experienced the same as her and lived to tell the tale without wearing a helmet I'll shut my mouth.

Also, I drive carefully around a cyclist whether or not they are wearing a helmet, because they are a person!
Ridiculous to suggest people drive recklessly around helmet wearing cyclists. There are many ways to die from being hit in various parts of the body... helmets just protect your head!

"I drive carefully around a cyclist whether or not they are wearing a helmet,"

this is a bit annoying RIZZO tbh. You should always drive carefully. We are not 'special cases'. As i'd said drivers give about 3 feet or so when overtaking cars/trucks etc. So just do the same for cyclists. This should not be a challenge for competent drivers and not something to be proud off.

or of even..

Rizzo, I don't doubt your friends experience. The op started this thread as a motorist with no interest or knowledge of cycling. Helmet use should have no.consequence to the motorist. Which is why I feel the op was bu.

I do Pan. I didn't say I don't drive carefully the rest of the time and you're splitting hairs.

I just said I drive carefully around them either way.

I'm not splitting hairs at all. I appreciate your sentiment totally, but you wouldn't do anything risky when overtaking another car - so it's the same for bikes, surely. No special consideration needed.

Maybe you're right Bear, I don't know about the OP.
When I'm the driver I do think it would be good to know everyone is a protected as poss though in case they did make a mistake and you end up colliding with them for any reason. Nobody's perfect and the road's a dangerous place (even though we're all trying to be safe), and seeing the torment of my DF's family I cannot now see cyclist not wearing helmets and not think of the risks.
Sometimes when you're in a scary place, praying for the life of someone you care so much about, it hits home how fragile we are and you think you would do anything to keep safe and keep your loved ones from pain. I'm a recreational cyclist and never wore a helmet before the accident, I do now.

Obviously this is emotive for me and I come from a particular angle, but it found a lots of comments on this thread flippant yet without knowledge. I'm off to bed.

Jesus Pan, I don't know if you're being facetious but please listen. I was saying I wouldn't give special, or less, consideration to a cyclist. I said a HELMET wouldn't make me drive in any LESS safe a manner.

Can't believe how many simpletons there are here who don't understand how wearing a helmet can protect your head... jesus...

Quite. Night all.