RM
Because we should be free to choose. Notwithstanding that helmets are not pleasant to wear, any attempt to make them compulsory will harm efforts to encourage people, especially children, to take up cycling. This itself would devastate the anti-obesity drive (something I have little time for as it's motivated by a desire to save the NHS money, rather than altruistic reasons).
Seat belts should be a matter of choice also.
Playing devil's advocate here.... Maybe reminding people why helmets are a good idea, wouldn't dissuade people from wearing helmets? Just like drink-driving campaigns and seat-belt campaigns? What about wearing helmets for motorcyclists? Should that be choice too?
Laws to make motorcyclists wear helmets and motorists to wear seatbelts hasn't dissuaded people from using cars or motorbikes has it?
Preventing serious head injuries or death by head injuries is more important than preventing obesity I would have thought. Obesity can be combatted in other ways other than cycling-- it isn't the only form of exercise!
Passing a law for compulsory helmet-wear would make people think twice about wearing a helmet possibly. There's a saying that goes: "A good shock is usually better than good advice". A "shock" from the law would be far better than a "shock" from having your skull caved in, I would say.
"Not pleasant to wear"
-- well surely wearing an "uncomfortable" helmet for a bike ride is far more comfortable than head injuries, or living with brain damage for the rest of your life. It is certainly more pleasant than death I would guess. A helmet is a lot tougher than a skull after all-- ask Headway.
Anyway rant over!
tvarksouthwest posted:
Roger Mellie posted:
Why would you oppose a legal requirement for helmets? No different from motorcycle helmets or seatbelts in cars surely?
Because we should be free to choose. Notwithstanding that helmets are not pleasant to wear, any attempt to make them compulsory will harm efforts to encourage people, especially children, to take up cycling. This itself would devastate the anti-obesity drive (something I have little time for as it's motivated by a desire to save the NHS money, rather than altruistic reasons).
Seat belts should be a matter of choice also.
Playing devil's advocate here.... Maybe reminding people why helmets are a good idea, wouldn't dissuade people from wearing helmets? Just like drink-driving campaigns and seat-belt campaigns? What about wearing helmets for motorcyclists? Should that be choice too?
Laws to make motorcyclists wear helmets and motorists to wear seatbelts hasn't dissuaded people from using cars or motorbikes has it?
Preventing serious head injuries or death by head injuries is more important than preventing obesity I would have thought. Obesity can be combatted in other ways other than cycling-- it isn't the only form of exercise!
Passing a law for compulsory helmet-wear would make people think twice about wearing a helmet possibly. There's a saying that goes: "A good shock is usually better than good advice". A "shock" from the law would be far better than a "shock" from having your skull caved in, I would say.
"Not pleasant to wear"
-- well surely wearing an "uncomfortable" helmet for a bike ride is far more comfortable than head injuries, or living with brain damage for the rest of your life. It is certainly more pleasant than death I would guess. A helmet is a lot tougher than a skull after all-- ask Headway.
Anyway rant over!
Flippin 'eck
