Ontario Helmet Law being pushed through

Frank Krygowski writes:

Bill Z. wrote:

Frank Krygowski writes:

If all these helmets are really doing what you believe, the benefits
should be detectable.
There's been an increase in red-light running and other reckless
behavior, plus a huge increase in the average vehicle size, all of
which make cycling more dangerous than before.

Ah. Interesting conjecture. But I see you've posted no evidence to
support it - as usual.

Read the ****ing newspapers.

See http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/12/05/MNW14097.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/examiner/archive/1996/12/31/NEWS8420.dtl
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1996/09/12/MN74703.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1996/09/11/MN57241.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/examiner/archive/1995/11/14/EDITORIAL4921.dtl

The last URL states

"I had worked in San Francisco since 1979, except for one year
in Colorado. I returned to The City in December 1994 and no
longer felt safe here.

"There were so many instances of red-light running. You could
see 50, 60 a day at Sutter and Kearny."

This is a well known problem. I shouldn't have to post "evidence"
for what you should know if you merely kept up with current events.


Now's the time for you to post some evidence of both the increase in
red light running, and the increased cycling danger.

See above, including the cyclist fatalities. Couple that change in
behavior with larger vehicles and the results are simply obvious
to anyone with half a brain.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 06:23:45 +0000, Bill Z. wrote:



Bill, I'm continually astounded that you don't embarrass yourself to
silence.

What you should be embarassed by, Krygowski, is your bald-faced lies
and baseless statements like the above when you really don't have
the facts and are too inept to check for yourself. All you had to
do was to search messages in rec.bicycles.soc whose author is Strobl
and with the phrase x-no-archive. It took a couple of minutes and
is not particularly difficult.

But, your behavior is typical of you, and that is precisely why I
have no respect for you - it is not an error on your part given
how often you do this sort of thing.

Oh, and one other thing - I posted it with the caveat "if I remembered
correctly." It meant what it said. Your statement about "inventing
things" is simply character assassination. You'd fit quite well
in Bush's election campaign - those *******s have the same ethics
you do.

Isn't it funny the way people who don't like a position (that mandatory
helmet laws are harmful and counterproductive) but can't find any facts
to back up their position, attack the person (messenger) instead?
Truth is absolute, and does not depend on the personal characteristics of
the person telling the truth. So if a person attacks me personally I
merely take that as evidence that he (no, it usually isn't a she) can't
find anything wrong with my statements.
What little we hear about the MHL here in NZ is usually against the law.
The pro-law people seem to have gone mute.

Peter

--
If you are careful enough in life, nothing bad -- or
good -- will ever happen to you.

Peter, you are wasting your time. As far as Zaumen is concerned there
are only two types of people in the world: people who agree with him,
and liars.

The former group contains, at last count, exactly one member: Zaumen
himself, and strangely, all the expertise seems to be among the
"liars." Bill has a real talent for unforced errors, gratuitous
ignorance, and arguig himself into a hole. The hole in question being
positioned - well, you can probably guess where ;-)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 21:09:21 GMT, Chris Phillipo
wrote:

It's not a crime. You get a ticket, you don't go to jail.

Are you sure of that? Over here, the pro-speeding lobby love tom
claim that speeding is not a crime because you don't go to jail, but
they are flat wrong. The fact that the state prosecutes the offence
makes it a criminal matter, and it is heard in the criminal courts.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 12:57:50 -0500, "DT"
wrote:

I think many parents and youth are simply unaware of the inherent dangers
of sport and the benefits if wearing helmets as was the cace with
seatbelts. The law will change all.

I think this is a crock of ****. If you look at the percentage of
head injuries in cyclists and pedestrians in NZ, and co-plot against
helemt wearing rates, it is absolutely plain that there is no
measurable effect. You can't guess from the chart which line is peds
and which cyclists.

In the USA, the cyclist head injury rate has risen by 40% in the last
ten years, as helmet use has increased threefold to 50%, with cyclist
numbers reducing by 21%.

As ever with road safety, what is "obvious" is wrong.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 15:25:06 GMT, Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening"
Zaumen wrote:

Wolfgang is back, repeating the same things he's said for years.

Your house a bit short of mirrors, then, Bill?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 17:27:41 GMT, "Ken [NY)"
wrote:

To the fellow who was thinking about fleeing to Canada from
the horrors of Bush's low tax rates, you might want to think about
this proposed law.

LOL! One of your better ones, Ken :-)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 21:46:23 -0500, "Michael"
wrote:

I'm undecided. People who don't wear helmets are stupid plain as day.

If I had a dollar for every helmet zealot who has made this ridiculous
assertion, I could afford to offset the huge amounts the helmet lobby
spend on supporting Handwringers Anonymous to make the claims that the
helmet makers cannot make for legal reasons (the legal reason being:
the claims are bull****).

lemme tell you a small story....

Oh look, a "helmet saved my life" anecdote. Never seen one of those
before, have we?

Since helmets are so effective you will doubtlesss be able to explain
the well-documented 40% increase in cyclist head injury rates in the
USA as helmet use rose from 18% to 50% and cycling dropped by 21%.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Bill Z. wrote:

Frank Krygowski writes:


Bill Z. wrote:



"Krygowski is trying to cover up the fact that Wolfgang has as much of
an anti-helmet agenda as Krygowski does. BTW, if I remember
correctly, he used to post with the x-no-archive flag set, I presume
because he was posting from work, so don't expect to find his
rants on the subject in the archives."

[fk:]

As usual, you're either remembering wrong or inventing things.


See
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=355ca440.54640388%40news.gmd.de&output =gplain
where Wolfgang Strobl said precisely that - that he used the
x-no-archive flag. I don't see why he'd lie about it given that he
was explaining to someone why a search of DejaNews (before Google
bought it) wouldn't work, and seemed to be trying to help that person
out.



My apologies. In the paragraph with the quotes above, I thought the "no
archive" thing was talking about me. The antecedent of "he" wasn't at
all clear. I knew _I_ had never disabled archiving.


What you should be embarassed by, Krygowski, is your bald-faced lies
and baseless statements like the above when you really don't have
the facts and are too inept to check for yourself. All you had to
do was to search messages in rec.bicycles.soc whose author is Strobl
and with the phrase x-no-archive. It took a couple of minutes and
is not particularly difficult.

But, your behavior is typical of you, and that is precisely why I
have no respect for you - it is not an error on your part given
how often you do this sort of thing.

Looks to me like the error was in sentence structure. But no matter.
As always, it's fun reading your posts, Bill. ;-)


--
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com.
Substitute cc dot ysu dot
edu]

"AustinMN" writes:

There are no X characters in my address

Indeed there are none.

Dragan

--
Dragan Cvetkovic,

To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

!!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!