Forgot my helmet

horizon26

I have always always used my helmet.Last week in my hurry completely forgot to wear one.It was only when i was about a mile out I realized what I had done.To lazy to turn back I carried on it felt great not to have one on.I have now gone out 3 times without one, while I enjoy cycling much more I also feel much more vulnerable and probably wont make a habit of it.But if felt so good sorry for this silly thought.:o:o:o

blorg

I think the risks are overrated... I always wear one in a race or mountain biking but apart from that I do not always. Often do on a group cycle though, or when I have my exploding wheels. Having said that it is no bad habit to get into and I would never deter anyone from wearing one at all times if they are happy to do so.

biomed32

commuting to work in the evening i usually forget my helmet but on my racer i tent to never leave without it as i actually feel safer with it on

petethedrummer

Careful though, there's some guy called Darwin going round killing cyclists with no helmets.

Húrin

blorg wrote: »

I think the risks are overrated... I always wear one in a race or mountain biking but apart from that I do not always. Often do on a group cycle though, or when I have my exploding wheels. Having said that it is no bad habit to get into and I would never deter anyone from wearing one at all times if they are happy to do so.

I disagree. I think that seeing cyclists going around town with helmets on just makes cycling look like something that some strange "other" sort of person does, rather than as transport for anyone. As you have pointed out, it is in all our interests to maximise the number of people cycling.

Dr.Millah

Helmets will be the seat belts of the future.

Lumen

Dr.Millah wrote: »

Helmets will be the seat belts of the future.

Both should be optional for adults.

Jawgap

Lumen wrote: »

Both should be optional for adults.

Bit early in the week for trolling!!!!:)

Maybe this thread should be locked until Friday then everyone can pile in.

Whatever about helmets - seatbelts work, except on bikes obviously.

As for Mr Darwin he's only picking off the weak cyclists - those that are left will be the strongest.

Lumen

Jawgap wrote: »

Whatever about helmets - seatbelts work, except on bikes obviously.

I'm not trolling. I didn't bring up seatbelts, was just responding to the point. I would wear a seatbelt even if it wasn't mandatory, but I still don't support compulsion.

Freedom FTW.

Raam

Lumen wrote: »

I'm not trolling. I didn't bring up seatbelts, was just responding to the point. I would wear a seatbelt even if it wasn't mandatory, but I still don't support compulsion.

Freedom FTW.

Any others that you follow but don't agree should be compulsary? Driving on the left hand side of the road maybe?

Jawgap

Lumen wrote: »

I'm not trolling. I didn't bring up seatbelts, was just responding to the point. I would wear a seatbelt even if it wasn't mandatory, but I still don't support compulsion.

Freedom FTW.

I take your point and accept I mis-read the thrust of your argument.

I'm all for freedom of choice and giving two fingers to the nanny state, but in the case of seatbelts, I think there's a strong enough argument for compulsion.

Cycle helmets / listening to radios on the bike are up to the individual.

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

Any others that you follow but don't agree should be compulsary? Driving on the left hand side of the road maybe?

I think people should be allowed to take informed decisions which are not in their best interests, provided that they do not substantially and directly affect other people. I also don't buy any argument of the "what about the children" flavour, including impact on the next of kin.

I am therefore in favour of de-criminalised crack smoking (except in enclosed public spaces) and legal compulsion of rear seatbelts.

blorg

Raam wrote: »

Any others that you follow but don't agree should be compulsary? Driving on the left hand side of the road maybe?

That one is related to the safety of other road users.

Jawgap

helmets......helmets......helmets......


I now feel like it's Friday - this has screwed up timing for the week:)

Blowfish

Lumen wrote: »

I think people should be allowed to take informed decisions which are not in their best interests, provided that they do not substantially and directly affect other people. I also don't buy any argument of the "what about the children" flavour, including impact on the next of kin.

I am therefore in favour of de-criminalised crack smoking (except in enclosed public spaces) and legal compulsion of rear seatbelts.

I would have thought that seatbelts do affect other users. The last thing you'd want in a crash at 100kmh+ is someone without a seatbelt bouncing around the car.

[edit] Beaten to it by a minute

niceonetom

I went through a little phase (about a week or so) of no helmet, fcuk the lights, fcuk maintaining any pretence of cordiality with drivers and general high speed lawlessness. I endangered myself and, on occasion, others.

It was brilliant.

But I've gone back to my law-abiding and helmet-wearing ways. It's less fun, but I'm less likely to end up in a box / in a wheelchair / being "the defendant" after a nasty incident.

I might give myself a week off a year though. In the summer.

I agree with Lumen on the freedom thing btw - laws should protect us from each other not from ourselves.

blorg

Húrin wrote: »

I disagree. I think that seeing cyclists going around town with helmets on just makes cycling look like something that some strange "other" sort of person does, rather than as transport for anyone. As you have pointed out, it is in all our interests to maximise the number of people cycling.

Not sure what part of my post you disagree with. Are you saying we should actively attempt to discourage people happy to wear a helmet from doing so?

Raam

niceonetom wrote: »

laws should protect us from each other not from ourselves.

Oh dear!

Lumen

niceonetom wrote: »

But I've gone back to my law-abiding and helmet-wearing ways. It's less fun, but I'm less likely to end up in a box / in a wheelchair / being "the defendant" after a nasty incident.

Famous People that use Wheelchairs.

Also consider Ernst Stavro Blofeld, Charles Francis Xavier, Robert T. Ironside and Andy from Little Britain.

Now, tell me you don't want a wheelchair.

tomasrojo

Jawgap wrote: »

I'm all for freedom of choice and giving two fingers to the nanny state, but in the case of seat belts, I think there's a strong enough argument for compulsion.

A lot of these initiatives have unintended consequences. Helmet promotion reducing the number of commuting cyclists, for example. In the case of seat belts, there seems to have been more pedestrian and cyclist injuries after compulsion, possibly due to drivers travelling with less care as they felt more safe. Essentially, the injuries didn't disappear from the population, but were transferred to more vulnerable groups.

--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_belt_legislation#Non-car_road_users
From the very beginning in Australia[15], and subsequently New Zealand[16], there had been indications that seat belt laws might produce increases in deaths and injury among those outside cars such as motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians[17]. Isles found that in Europe the predominant effect of seat belt legislation was of increased numbers of injuries to non-car users
--

In terms of saving the lives of motorists the results were also rather disappointing in the first decade or so after compulsion. Injuries definitely did go down, but not as much as was hoped.

Jawgap

tomasrojo wrote: »

A lot of these initiatives have unintended consequences. Helmet promotion reducing the number of commuting cyclists, for example. In the case of seat belts, there seems to have been more pedestrian and cyclist injuries after compulsion, possibly due to drivers travelling with less care as they felt more safe. Essentially, the injuries didn't disappear from the population, but were transferred to more vulnerable groups.

--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_belt_legislation#Non-car_road_users
From the very beginning in Australia[15], and subsequently New Zealand[16], there had been indications that seat belt laws might produce increases in deaths and injury among those outside cars such as motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians[17]. Isles found that in Europe the predominant effect of seat belt legislation was of increased numbers of injuries to non-car users
--

In terms of saving the lives of motorists the results were also rather disappointing in the first decade or so after compulsion. Injuries definitely did go down, but not as much as was hoped.

We're wandering off topic but as I feel like it's Friday, I'm going to keep wandering.

I'm not sure it's possible to link increased seat belt usage with increased pedestrian / cyclist injuries especially as the number of cars on the roads has increased as has the number of kilometres travelled, not to mention the physical design of cars has also changed and newer and better safety devices (ESP, ABS, air bags, side impact protection etc) have all been introduced.

Drivers may well feel safer and therefore feel inclined to travel faster or take more risks (the "Volvo" effect) but not all of that can be attributed to safety belts when so much else has also changed in cars in the last few years.

One thing is for sure my helmet doesn't compel me to go faster, I'm already belting along as fast as I can!

ednwireland

petethedrummer

Helmet should be compulsory

Húrin

niceonetom wrote: »

I went through a little phase (about a week or so) of no helmet, fcuk the lights, fcuk maintaining any pretence of cordiality with drivers and general high speed lawlessness. I endangered myself and, on occasion, others.

Not wearing a helmet and not using lights on your bike at night are a world apart from each other in terms of irresponsibility, politeness and legality.

niceonetom

Húrin wrote: »

Not wearing a helmet and not using lights on your bike at night are a world apart from each other in terms of irresponsibility, politeness and legality.

I know that, thanks. The lights I'm alluding to are these
:mad:



not these


I don't find riding around in the dark sans bike lights fun at all - I don't bike lights becuase they're legally mandated, I use them because I don't want someone to run me over. I never stopped using them, even in RLJing mode. I think you and I more or less agree on the helmet thing too; personal choice.

rubadub

petethedrummer wrote: »

Helmet should be compulsory

Thank god the people with a some say rejected it being compulsory recently. (I see you are on about some band)

AMontague wrote: »

in Dublin City Council on Monday night. Cllr. Pat Crimmins proposed that cycle helmets be made compulsory. He's an occasional cyclist and he believes that compulsory helmets will improve safety in the city.

The City Manager pointed out that Dublin City Council does not have the power to introduce compulsory helmets, so Cllr. Crimmins suggested altering the motion to write to the Minister for Transport asking him to introduce compulsory helmets.

I spoke against the motion. I believe that Cllr. Crimmins had good intentions but I pointed out that the best way to improve safety for cyclists is to increase the number of people cycling. Compulsory helmets would lead to an immediate drop in the numbers cycling and so would have the opposite effect to what Cllr. Crimmins wanted to achieve. A few other councillors backed me up and the motion was defeated.

Regards
Cllr Andrew Montague
Chair of Dublin City Council's Cycling Forum

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/we-dont-want-a-law-forcing-us-to-wear-helmets-say-cyclists-1658481.html

Raam

rubadub wrote: »

Thank god the people with a some say rejected it being compulsory recently. (I see you are on about some band)





http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/we-dont-want-a-law-forcing-us-to-wear-helmets-say-cyclists-1658481.html

Handy to have someone like Andrew Montague in there

GreeBo

blorg wrote: »

I always wear one in a race .....but apart from that I do not always.

Just wondering why you think its more important to wear one in a race than say commuting for example?

Raam

GreeBo wrote: »

Just wondering why you think its more important to wear one in a race than say commuting for example?

more likely to crash. You cycle at speed with other cyclists centimeters in front/behind/to the side of you

GreeBo

Raam wrote: »

more likely to crash. You cycle at speed with other cyclists centimeters in front/behind/to the side of you

erm kerbs, peds, cars, buses, trucks?

Raam

GreeBo wrote: »

erm kerbs, peds, cars, buses, trucks?

I don't cycle centimeters from any of those things when commuting!

zzzzzzzz

GreeBo wrote: »

erm kerbs, peds, cars, buses, trucks?

Yes - you have to deal with these while racing too.

Anyway... seeing as it's friday...

http://www.copenhagenize.com/2009/08/walking-helmet-is-good-helmet.html

blorg

@GreeBo- if you have ever raced you would understand why the perceived crash risk is higher (and at significant speed, with several other cyclists and their bikes plowing into you.)

I can't believe, it is Monday and we have TWO helmet threads on the go simultaneously. Thank god for dual monitors.

GreeBo

blorg wrote: »

@GreeBo- if you have ever raced you would understand why the perceived crash risk is higher (and at significant speed, with several other cyclists and their bikes plowing into you.)

Yeah I get this totally, its just that in the middle of a peloton the other riders are at least aware and thinking of you. During a commute you are pretty much on your own with all the other maniacs.

When Im commuting Im often going at >20mph, while not as fast as a downhill, I think its impressive enough to crash at.

blorg wrote: »

Thank god for dual monitors.

lol

petethedrummer

GreeBo wrote: »

When Im commuting Im often going at >20mph, while not as fast as a downhill, I think its impressive enough to crash at.

Slow down a bit then.

GreeBo

petethedrummer wrote: »

Slow down a bit then.

Do you often miss the point of should I feel special?

blorg

GreeBo wrote: »

Yeah I get this totally, its just that in the middle of a peloton the other riders are at least aware and thinking of you. During a commute you are pretty much on your own with all the other maniacs.

When Im commuting Im often going at >20mph, while not as fast as a downhill, I think its impressive enough to crash at.

I can assure you bike racing is riskier than commuting at whatever speed, there really isn't any comparison. You are pushing yourself absolutely on the edge (this has an effect on your concentration) and riding very close to lots of other riders... The vast majority of races are also on open roads and so there are the usual hazards.