On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 22:39:32 +0100, Tom Crispin
wrote:

There are many people here who will not answer a very simple question:

Do you think on balance that a cycle helmet is more likely to reduce
the risk of injuries to the head in case of an accident, or do you
think that it would increase the risk of injuries?

I must admit I do not know why they cannot answer this question.

That's because it's the wrong question to ask: it's too narrow.

At a whole population level, do you think that a manatory helmet law
for cyclists would have a positive or negative effect on the health of
the nation?

I think it would have a positive effect.


Others may have a better way to phrase the question, but I think that
I have caught the essence of what should be asked. In answering that
broader question other questions may need to be asked, including your
question above, but your question alone will lead to a Straw Man - but
you know this already. It is a credit to this group that *everyone*
has seen through it and no one will fall for it. It is a discredit to
you that you have so far been unable to set up a Straw Man that works.
But keep trying... some of us, at least, are amused by your
incompetent efforts.


Keep wriggling and do not answer the question then - I know that you
do not like answering them - odd attitude for a "teacher".

Child to Mr Crispin (the teacher) "Please sir - is it better that I
wear a cycle helmet when I ride to school rather than not wear one.

Mr Crispin: You are asking the wrong question - it is too difficult
for me.

Child: It is a simple question.

Mr Crispin: No - sorry - you are asking the wrong person - ask your
mother when you get home.


No wonder schools are going down the pan with this attitude from
"teachers"

--

"Primary position" the middle of a traffic lane. To take the "primary position" : to ride a bike in the middle of the lane in order to obstruct other road vehicles from overtaking.

A term invented by and used by psycholists and not recognised in the Highway Code.