"Bill Z." wrote in message
...
"Steven M. Scharf" writes:

The key to defeating MHLs is not to babble like Frank and Roger, it is
to
formulate a position based on factual information. You will never
convince
politicians to listen to you, as opposed to listening to ER and trauma
physicians, in regards to the statistics on the severity of injuries of
helmeted versus non-helmeted patients; you have no data only
speculation.

If you use the personal freedom argument they'll counter with the seat
belt
argument. ...

One I used was that we had people riding very short distances on quiet
residential streets to reach a train station, and that whether they
used a helmet or not, their commute (which was mostly by train) would
be safer than driving. Meanwhile there were not enough bike lockers
to go around, leaving the helmet tied to the bike was risky due to a
vandalism problem, and carrying it into work (without a bike) was
simply awkward.

It sounds like Toronto is hell-bent on putting this law into place, and from
what I read on-line in the Toronto star, there are no people putting forth
sound arguments like this. You have two camps, both hardline, which makes
for bad laws.