Helmets - yes or no?

I have always worn my helmet, and will continue to wear it.I had an accident recently and my helmet saved me from serious injury.

Today I was definitely wearing a woolly hat!!

mercsport wrote:

To vote , I have to post ?
O.K. , I've never worn a helmet . Must also confess to having had a few falls and bopped my noggin a time or two : scars to remind me . I appreciate the fact that a lot of the helmet wearers here on this forum aren't prissy and righteous about it one way or the other . Yeah , each to their own .
But when the day arrives - as I fear it surely will - when some clot successfully pursues their agenda for the compulsory wearing of helmets ( after all it makes sense doesn't it ? ) through parliament , I would suppose that would be the day I give up cycling .

I wouldn't give up cycling - that means the nannies have won. There are ways round every type of stupid legislation.

I remember reading somewhere about a cyclist in New Zealand (the original nanny state where helmets are compulsory) who never wore a helmet - just kept one in his panier. Over a period of several years he was only stopped by the police once, and said 'oh sorry officer I forgot to put it on'.

The other idea would be to get round what legally constitutes a helmet - some kind of reinforced flat cap for example.

Or you could just become a Sikh...

Whilst I'm not familiar with those arguments or the details, the fact here is that there is a lot of FUD about cycle helmets, and lots of studies that show that helmets and/or mandatory helmet laws bring no overall benefits in terms of deaths and serious injuries.

Cyclegent wrote:

mercsport wrote:

To vote , I have to post ?
O.K. , I've never worn a helmet . Must also confess to having had a few falls and bopped my noggin a time or two : scars to remind me . I appreciate the fact that a lot of the helmet wearers here on this forum aren't prissy and righteous about it one way or the other . Yeah , each to their own .
But when the day arrives - as I fear it surely will - when some clot successfully pursues their agenda for the compulsory wearing of helmets ( after all it makes sense doesn't it ? ) through parliament , I would suppose that would be the day I give up cycling .

I wouldn't give up cycling - that means the nannies have won. There are ways round every type of stupid legislation.

I remember reading somewhere about a cyclist in New Zealand (the original nanny state where helmets are compulsory) who never wore a helmet - just kept one in his panier. Over a period of several years he was only stopped by the police once, and said 'oh sorry officer I forgot to put it on'.

The other idea would be to get round what legally constitutes a helmet - some kind of reinforced flat cap for example.

Or you could just become a Sikh...

Well , yes , you're right really . " Don't let the bastards grind you down " , but , in a sense , that chap in NZ was beaten into carrying around , for years , a lid he wasn't interested in wearing at all . It may have been just as O.K. if he'd left out carrying the cursed thing altogether and just uttered " Damn ! Forgot ! " when he was fingered by the law .
Unfortunately that truism ' What comes around , comes around ' ( ..is that right ? ) is about today with the fact that we all seem to be in thrall to the self righteous again ( think : our masters in government ! ) , and it doesn't seem so far fetched to expect ' The Inquisition ' ( ..I've got to think Monty Python here ) to resurface in one form or another .
When that Sikh won his case and got exempted , years ago , after the compulsory wearing of helmets for motorcyclists came to be , heck ! that was some achievement . Full kudos to the chap .
But that was an age ago , ( and , come to think of it , about the time I flogged off my last motorcycle ) . I don't think I could put up with being confrontational on a daily basis ( likely ) with some hatchet faced constable dangling a sub-machine gun ( likely ) asking why it is I prefer the breeze in my hair to the energy sapping , breeze trap , that is a helmet .
P.S. As I was typing this last , a thought , ... it must be equivalent to putting a pound or two of weight onto your hugely expensive machine wearing a helmet , mustn't it ? The aerodynamic inefficiency , drag , and all that .
I expect there have been studies I'm unaware of .

'Bikers46' , thought you said " I'm finished with this thread. " ?
Also : " I couldn't give a flying f**k what the 'gov' wants, safety gear is better than no safety. " That's a fact is it ? :?

Gambatte wrote:

bikers46 wrote:

I'm finished with this thread.

As Vic used to say "You wouldn't let it lie!"

You're right. I'll take my helmet, my soap box and my yankee 'arse' and go.

I've got a contract on the table and shouldn't be playing around in here, anyway.

Merry Christmas, gang. TTYL.

Damn these alerts.

I will reiterate, I don't care what studies, the government, health officials, and any other entities say, I'll stick with the helmet. I have never felt it to be inconvenient, uncomfortable or otherwise offending to me.

I am not watching this thread, but the site thinks I am. I've turned it off twice now.

I don't want to drop BR from my newsfeed, so....... !@#$%^&*()_+!!!!

Merry Christmas.

I don't know really, from this view point it seems quite the other way around. It's the pro helmet camp that seems to be loudest, with plenty of FUD, shouts of "Think of the children" "You CAN'T go against safety", and that sort of thing.

I'm just glad cycling isn't nearly dangerous enough to be worrying about a helmet, and that safety is a state of mind, not something you can buy. Learn your cyclecraft as much as you can, because that's by far the best bet for reducing your chances of a crash.