one show now.

Lancslad

piece on helmets!

15peter20

that fat lass wasn't a very good advert for cycling. Plus her saying discount research?!?!'

Crapaud

I saw this show. Very disappointed at Cracknel advocating mandatory lid laws.

inkyfingers

Crapaud wrote:

I saw this show. Very disappointed at Cracknel advocating mandatory lid laws.

I'm not in favour of compulsory helmet laws but I can understand Cracknell advocating them given his recent experiences.

Crapaud

inkyfingers wrote:

Crapaud wrote:

I saw this show. Very disappointed at Cracknel advocating mandatory lid laws.

I'm not in favour of compulsory helmet laws but I can understand Cracknell advocating them given his recent experiences.

I can understand it as well, it doesn't make it right though. I accept that there are circumstances where a helmet could indeed save your life or from debilitating injuries, but the numbers are so small that a MHL's most significant result would be to criminalise non-helmet wearing cyclists. Legislation is not a solution, IMO.

inkyfingers

I'm against compulsory helmet laws as I think it would reduce the number of people cycling which is not what the world needs and also i'm against there being more laws generally.

Having said that I always wear my helmet and every ride and have done for about 5 years. I used to wear it sometimes and not others until I came off on a wet and leafy descent slid across the road and smacked my head into a brick wall. Luckily I was wearing my helmet, if I hadn't I would have almost certainly have hurt my head quite badly (the helmet cracked down the middle but it did it's job).

Teach

This is an argument that can go on and on, my question is where do you stop?I do wear a helmet when cycling.
My uncle died falling don the stairs, he lost his footing and hit his head on the wall at the bottom. It killed him instantly. I also wonder how many people die of head injuries in car crashes. Should we now be wearing helmets in at all times?
I'm not making light of this, this was my uncle who dies, but where do we stop. Whilst we have lost a much loved member of the family, we haven't all started to wear helmets at all times. Unfortunately accidents do happen.
I also go mountain climbing. Out of the group I am the one who puts the helmet on first. Just a choice, but I'd hate to be told I've to wear it all the time on a mountain, but if you look at a lot of mountain rescue reports they involve head injuries, and usually and not when people are doing extreme climbing, but on easy paths on the descent.

Pross

They used to have a helmet on there every night until he got a contract with ITV

giant_man

The risk of travelling on a bike is very different from travelling in a car, with protective metal all around you. You are very open on a bike and as such I always wear a helmet. It surely comes down to common sense.

I'm very much with Cracknell on this, and I do think a mandatory law for under 15s to wear a helmet is very overdue. That is my opinion and I'm sure some will not agree.

EX DH

After riding DH for around 8 years, knocking my self out three times and wacking my head numerous other times i will never ride a bike with out a helmet again.
There are a lot more stationary things in the woods to stop you. I dont fancy meeting an on coming car doing 40mph and not have a skid lid on!

Just in case is better than no hope at all.

Ollieda

I always wear a helemt but disagree they should be mandatory - putting aside the argument of if they do any good in crashes or not (cause that will go on forever!) I worry that there are quite a few people who just wont bother cycling as much due to the formality of wearing a helmet, the ease of use of a bike - just being able to hop on and go, is a clear advantage for many and having to bother carrying a helmet round with you all the time would make many think twice. Also how would it work for hire bikes? Can't see many people carrying a helmet with them just in case they need to use a boris bike.

My other worry is pricing - this can go one of two ways, either the market becomes flooded with people offering cheap helmets as the demand is there (many companies will try to drive the costs as low as possible and saftey may become an issue) OR the helmet suppliers will have a increased demand and as such will increase prices again putting people off getting a helmet and therefore getting on their bikes

Stewie Griffin

Crapaud wrote:

I saw this show. Very disappointed at Cracknel advocating mandatory lid laws.

Someone should point out to him that he was on a fecking motorway (freeway/highway whichever) which is far more idiotic than not wearing a helmet really.

Pross

EX DH wrote:

After riding DH for around 8 years, knocking my self out three times and wacking my head numerous other times i will never ride a bike with out a helmet again.
There are a lot more stationary things in the woods to stop you. I dont fancy meeting an on coming car doing 40mph and not have a skid lid on!
Just in case is better than no hope at all.

Yep, cos a piece of polystyrene gives magical powers against a ton of metal travelling at 40mph. This is my biggest gripe with the helmet debate, people think they are some sort of magical force field that protects you against everything. I wear one, it may minimise injury in a low speed fall - it may even protect against death in exterme situations - but I'm under no illusion of the likely outcome if I hit the deck at high speed or get hit by a vehicle. The other thing is so many people wear helmets incorrectly (too far back on their head, straps too loose etc.).

Teach

If it was to happen how do you think it would be policed? Would we all need to carry ID?
I think making young cyclist wear a helmet is no bad thing, but I'm not sure it is manageable to police.
I'm sure someone can post a photo on here, but there are plenty of people who wear helmets that would do no good as they wear them so far back on their head or as I've seen on here somewhere they even wear them backwards!

Ollieda

Stewie Griffin wrote:

Crapaud wrote:

I saw this show. Very disappointed at Cracknel advocating mandatory lid laws.

Someone should point out to him that he was on a fecking motorway (freeway/highway whichever) which is far more idiotic than not wearing a helmet really.

I think it was on the I40 - Granted normally a road like that is probably best to avoid but its not exactly in an area where he could just go on the B road, unless your comming off that road to go into one of the little towns its pretty much the interstate or dirt tracks.

Stewie Griffin

Ollieda wrote:

Stewie Griffin wrote:

Crapaud wrote:

I saw this show. Very disappointed at Cracknel advocating mandatory lid laws.

Someone should point out to him that he was on a fecking motorway (freeway/highway whichever) which is far more idiotic than not wearing a helmet really.

I think it was on the I40 - Granted normally a road like that is probably best to avoid but its not exactly in an area where he could just go on the B road, unless your comming off that road to go into one of the little towns its pretty much the interstate or dirt tracks.

They advised that his support vehicle couldn't drive behind him due to the minimum speed limit for Motor Vehicles on this particular road (or stretch of it). That would have made me think that I shouldn't be on that road either. I would have gone with my support vehicle rather than ride down such a road at night.

Ollieda

wasn't aware there was a minimum speed limit out there. I can see the clear argument as to why not to cycle that road, but when looking at the bigger picture of the ride i can also see why he wanted to take the risk. I probably wouldn't do it though! (probably wouldn't do the ride across america though lol)