Bike helmets are a good idea no matter what cars are doing. You can die from a stationary fall from a bike by hitting your head on the pavement without a helmet. Happened to a person in my friend circle. Girl died on the fucking sidewalk after falling off her bike with no helmet.
Yes, helmets are good. I wear one so that when I am thrown from the hood of a car, there is less of a chance of my head opening up when it hits the asphalt.
With that said, I think one of the concepts of this article is that enforcing helmet laws shifts the blame of people getting injured/killed by people operating motor vehicles onto the person on the bicycle. In reality, even with a helmet, being hit by a motor vehicle at 50mph is likely fatal and there are too many examples of drivers killing people on bicycles and then just driving away.
Helmet laws “protect” people on bicycles. Sinces there’s a system to protect them, (helmets) the discussion of safety can end instead of continue on the dangers of road design and motor vehicles themselves. Essentially, the problem of people getting killed/injured on bicycles is a problem with motor vehicles, not helmets.
Falling and hitting your head isn’t exclusive to bicycles or even more likely on bicycles than other activities. You’re most likely to get a head injury by falling in the shower, tripping while walking, or being a passenger in a car crash.
@ProgrammingSocks@RaoulDook
Me, too. In any contest between asphalt and skull, asphalt always wins. In my case, it was 60 stitches across my forehead at age 13 & luckily no TBI or spinal cord injuries.
@RaoulDook@salarua Worth mentioning per distance walked you are most likely to die walking than cycling but if someone tried to introduce a law requiring pedestrians to wear a helmet they would be ridiculed. I assume there is an air quote because helmet laws do not protect cyclists, they actively make things more dangerous
You’re missing the point of the article and the discussion.
Wearing a helmet only adds a hurdle to something where the very core concepts of which is supposed to be the accessibility and freedom it offers.
For the statistical likelihood of a helmet saving someone’s life or from serious injury, is it really worth the spotlight that is constantly placed on them?
Ironically, all they seem to be used for is as a weapon for battering the idea of making cycling easier for the masses around the head.
The amount of comments I’ve seen from absolute meat heads who can’t bear the idea of not driving their cars literally everywhere justifying their behaviour towards a bike rider or that one is somehow responsible for an incident that wasn’t their fault because they didn’t wear a helmet is fucking barmy.
Cycling is a method of transport no different to any other. You don’t have to cart around bulky, awkward and fairly fragile items with you when you get to your destination in your car, on the bus or via train. Why mandate it for the cleanest form of transport beside walking?
Bluntly put, you can fall over, hit your head and die without a bike at all. Should you have to wear a helmet all the time in your day to day? Silly notion and simply an appeal to emotion/but sometimes fallacy.
Edit: to those downvoting, please explain how you feel my comment hasn’t added to the discussion, since that’s what it’s for. It isn’t a ‘disagree’ button.
Really just seems like a dumb thing to be opposed to. You anti-car weirdos have a lot of issues with a lot of things, and not really much in the way of logistically viable solutions.
In reality, how many instances have you or anyone reading this seen of anyone being cited by police or hassled by anyone about not wearing a helmet? I don’t think it’s stopping anyone. I never wear a helmet when I ride my mountain bike. I ride all over the place in town, on the sidewalks or what the fuck ever I want to do. Nobody cares. Police have better things to worry about, like how to find some drugs or steal somebody’s money.
I’m anti car? Sure thing buddy.
Excellent assumption there given that I’m a big petrol head.
But because I also believe that they’re not the solution to 99% of urban mobility that means I’m anti-car?
There are a multitude of viable alternatives to car reliance, many of which are currently already in application and shown to be incredibly effective already.
But of course that doesn’t fit your narrative of trying to make out that cars are the only way to get around.
Remember that American cities were demolished for cars in the post war era. If you can demolish to make room for cars, then you can build to accommodate people.
Bike helmets are a good idea no matter what cars are doing. You can die from a stationary fall from a bike by hitting your head on the pavement without a helmet. Happened to a person in my friend circle. Girl died on the fucking sidewalk after falling off her bike with no helmet.
Yes, helmets are good. I wear one so that when I am thrown from the hood of a car, there is less of a chance of my head opening up when it hits the asphalt.
With that said, I think one of the concepts of this article is that enforcing helmet laws shifts the blame of people getting injured/killed by people operating motor vehicles onto the person on the bicycle. In reality, even with a helmet, being hit by a motor vehicle at 50mph is likely fatal and there are too many examples of drivers killing people on bicycles and then just driving away.
Helmet laws “protect” people on bicycles. Sinces there’s a system to protect them, (helmets) the discussion of safety can end instead of continue on the dangers of road design and motor vehicles themselves. Essentially, the problem of people getting killed/injured on bicycles is a problem with motor vehicles, not helmets.
@lntl @RaoulDook
Falling and hitting your head isn’t exclusive to bicycles or even more likely on bicycles than other activities. You’re most likely to get a head injury by falling in the shower, tripping while walking, or being a passenger in a car crash.
Helmets dehumanise cyclists increasing risk of aggression from drivers.
https://aus.social/@[email protected]/110706628290956567
Yep. After I had a pretty bad fall without a helmet I will now on always wear a helmet no matter how short the trip.
@ProgrammingSocks @RaoulDook
Me, too. In any contest between asphalt and skull, asphalt always wins. In my case, it was 60 stitches across my forehead at age 13 & luckily no TBI or spinal cord injuries.
@RaoulDook @salarua Worth mentioning per distance walked you are most likely to die walking than cycling but if someone tried to introduce a law requiring pedestrians to wear a helmet they would be ridiculed. I assume there is an air quote because helmet laws do not protect cyclists, they actively make things more dangerous
https://www.cyclinguk.org/briefing/cycle-helmets
That’s hardly a fair comparison. People are going to travel much greater distances on bike than on foot.
@ch00f “per distance”
I can’t read good
You’re missing the point of the article and the discussion.
Wearing a helmet only adds a hurdle to something where the very core concepts of which is supposed to be the accessibility and freedom it offers.
For the statistical likelihood of a helmet saving someone’s life or from serious injury, is it really worth the spotlight that is constantly placed on them?
Ironically, all they seem to be used for is as a weapon for battering the idea of making cycling easier for the masses around the head.
The amount of comments I’ve seen from absolute meat heads who can’t bear the idea of not driving their cars literally everywhere justifying their behaviour towards a bike rider or that one is somehow responsible for an incident that wasn’t their fault because they didn’t wear a helmet is fucking barmy.
Cycling is a method of transport no different to any other. You don’t have to cart around bulky, awkward and fairly fragile items with you when you get to your destination in your car, on the bus or via train. Why mandate it for the cleanest form of transport beside walking?
Bluntly put, you can fall over, hit your head and die without a bike at all. Should you have to wear a helmet all the time in your day to day? Silly notion and simply an appeal to emotion/but sometimes fallacy.
Edit: to those downvoting, please explain how you feel my comment hasn’t added to the discussion, since that’s what it’s for. It isn’t a ‘disagree’ button.
Really just seems like a dumb thing to be opposed to. You anti-car weirdos have a lot of issues with a lot of things, and not really much in the way of logistically viable solutions.
In reality, how many instances have you or anyone reading this seen of anyone being cited by police or hassled by anyone about not wearing a helmet? I don’t think it’s stopping anyone. I never wear a helmet when I ride my mountain bike. I ride all over the place in town, on the sidewalks or what the fuck ever I want to do. Nobody cares. Police have better things to worry about, like how to find some drugs or steal somebody’s money.
I’m anti car? Sure thing buddy. Excellent assumption there given that I’m a big petrol head.
But because I also believe that they’re not the solution to 99% of urban mobility that means I’m anti-car?
There are a multitude of viable alternatives to car reliance, many of which are currently already in application and shown to be incredibly effective already. But of course that doesn’t fit your narrative of trying to make out that cars are the only way to get around.
Remember that American cities were demolished for cars in the post war era. If you can demolish to make room for cars, then you can build to accommodate people.