THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)

On 10/29/2012 6:20 PM, Curtis wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote

"It is a risible myth that your average American is a tall-walking free
?individual untrammeled by government: he is in fact just as much
?constricted as a European soft-socialist consumerist or Japanese
?collective citizen, though it is true that the American is controlled ?in
different areas of his activity than the European or the Japanese."

Unfortunate truth, control from the nanny state.

"To some the uncontrolled areas of American life, for instance the ability
to own and use firearms, smacks of barbarism rather than liberty. "

And that "smacks" of STUPIDITY from those willing to endure tyranny for a
FALSE sense of security.


Nanny state my arse - the goal of the US government is to destroy the
country and turn it into 3rd world status - has been since 12:30 CST on
November 22, 1963. Get back to me in 10 years if you disagree.

If you think the war for US independence ended with Cornwallis
surrendering, you have been played for a fool.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W
Post Free or Die!

On 11/3/2012 6:24 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Saturday, November 3, 2012 3:56:13 PM UTC, Dieter Britz wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:55:13 -0700, Andre Jute wrote:



THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW




(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)






by Andre Jute

[...]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmet_laws



According to studies in Australia and New Zealand, there has not

been any reduction in cyclists' deaths that can be attributed to

the introduction of mandatory wearing of helmets. Check the graphs,

there is a gradual reduction in deaths, but with not correlated

with helmet wear.



I can't find a link at the moment, but my son (who must wear a

helmet in Sydney) has found evidence that helmets can even cause

injuries to the neck in falls, where the helmet edge hits the

ground.



I am fortunate in not having to wear a helmet here in Denmark.

I have done so in winter when there is ice on the roads, in case

a car loses control and hits me, but this has never happened,

and this winter I will not wear one - and have a warmer head.

The times when I have slid on ice, I have never hit my head, and

the only injury has been to my (expensive) jacket from sliding

along the road.

--

Dieter Britz

Hello, Dieter: That's why the headline to my post is
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)

The numbers make an American case. The situation in Europe is different. Probably in Australia and New Zealand too. But there is no doubt in my mind that the New York study directs the unbiased analyst towards the conclusion that a compulsory helmet law in the States will save lives.

Andre Jute

Dude,

In case you have not noticed, most people in the US do not live in the
hell-hole of NYC.

HTHBKIW

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W
Post Free or Die!

On Sunday, November 4, 2012 2:37:49 PM UTC-5, Dan O wrote:
On Nov 4, 11:06 am, wrote:

On Sunday, November 4, 2012 12:13:06 AM UTC-4, Jay Beattie wrote:



Descending sled runs even on studs warrants wearing a helmet.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGVA-x3SEnU



I've seen those videos before. Seems to me that putting on an 8 ounce bike helmet and riding a bike in those conditions constitutes an excellent example of risk compensation. Or really, risk over-compensation.





(Haven't looked at the videos, but... ) Are you saying we should...

what? Park the bike and take the car?

Watch the video.

- Frank Krygowski

On 11/4/2012 4:02 PM, wrote:
On Sunday, November 4, 2012 2:37:49 PM UTC-5, Dan O wrote:
On Nov 4, 11:06 am, wrote:

On Sunday, November 4, 2012 12:13:06 AM UTC-4, Jay Beattie wrote:



Descending sled runs even on studs warrants wearing a helmet.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGVA-x3SEnU



I've seen those videos before. Seems to me that putting on an 8 ounce bike helmet and riding a bike in those conditions constitutes an excellent example of risk compensation. Or really, risk over-compensation.





(Haven't looked at the videos, but... ) Are you saying we should...

what? Park the bike and take the car?

Watch the video.

- Frank Krygowski


That video had hills.
Check out flat Nederlands:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSZGkMfARUg

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Nov 4, 11:06*am, wrote:
On Sunday, November 4, 2012 12:13:06 AM UTC-4, Jay Beattie wrote:

Descending sled runs even on studs warrants wearing a helmet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGVA-x3SEnU

I've seen those videos before. *Seems to me that putting on an 8 ounce bike helmet and riding a bike in those conditions constitutes an excellent example of risk compensation. Or really, risk over-compensation.

- Frank Krygowski

It's not risk compensation . . . it's called riding home from work.
These conditions can develop in a matter of minutes with a freezing
rain shower, and they are very localized and can occur at night when
it is hard to see what's what.

An eight ounce helmet can prevent a curb or bollard or fender or what-
have-you from making meatloaf out of your scalp. If you crash on ice,
you can slide around like a hockey puck -- sometimes harmlessly and
sometimes not.

Gene, I don't have an elevation profile, and when I'm riding home on a
rare snow day, I probably only do about 600-700 feet. I don't know,
you roll up and down on Terwilliger, ending with the sled run down to
the light. http://www.flickr.com/photos/asplund/3120318902/ I have
to do 380 mandatory because that is the elevation difference between
downtown and my house.

Hilly route is through the zoo, down a little and up to Council Crest
and down through Hillsdale -- probably around 1,2000 -- 1,5000 of
climbing. Not epic by any means, but it is nice to pick up some
elevation just riding home. It's really pretty riding through
Washington Park, too. On summer days, you have to look out for dorks
on longboards, though. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIoD-CzgFe0

Big deal today was slippery leaves on 23mm tires. The sun broke out,
so I jumped on my fast bike to see how it is doing, and it is doing
fine. Noises are under control, and everything works. Now its time
to finish up the annual winterization of my commuter bike -- I'm
switching to some Pasellas, putting on a new chain, and I got a 2 watt
blinky that will spot weld retinas from 100 yards away.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 11/4/2012 4:02 PM, wrote:
On Sunday, November 4, 2012 2:37:49 PM UTC-5, Dan O wrote:
On Nov 4, 11:06 am, wrote:

On Sunday, November 4, 2012 12:13:06 AM UTC-4, Jay Beattie wrote:



Descending sled runs even on studs warrants wearing a helmet.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGVA-x3SEnU



I've seen those videos before. Seems to me that putting on an 8 ounce bike helmet and riding a bike in those conditions constitutes an excellent example of risk compensation. Or really, risk over-compensation.





(Haven't looked at the videos, but... ) Are you saying we should...

what? Park the bike and take the car?

Watch the video.

- Frank Krygowski

Should drag those people out of their cages and beat them with a
baseball bat.

Hell, I have ridden a motorcycle down icy hills *without* studs on the
tires and kept it under control.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W
Post Free or Die!

Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W

Post Free or Die!



NYC weather is superb. Heavenly in the 1920's. and a bargain. Suburbs are AAA. people are educated and intelligent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_megalopolis

On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 15:23:15 -0600, "Tom $herman (-_-)"
" wrote:

On 10/29/2012 6:20 PM, Curtis wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote

"It is a risible myth that your average American is a tall-walking free
?individual untrammeled by government: he is in fact just as much
?constricted as a European soft-socialist consumerist or Japanese
?collective citizen, though it is true that the American is controlled ?in
different areas of his activity than the European or the Japanese."

Unfortunate truth, control from the nanny state.

"To some the uncontrolled areas of American life, for instance the ability
to own and use firearms, smacks of barbarism rather than liberty. "

And that "smacks" of STUPIDITY from those willing to endure tyranny for a
FALSE sense of security.


Nanny state my arse - the goal of the US government is to destroy the
country and turn it into 3rd world status - has been since 12:30 CST on
November 22, 1963. Get back to me in 10 years if you disagree.

Somehow, there appears to be a lack of logic here. Why in the world
would the government want to turn the U.S. into a desperately poor 3rd
world nation. After all, poor = fewer with the ability to pay taxes;
fewer paying taxes = less money in the G'ment coffers for programs
that will generate kick-backs = lower income for Bureaucrats.

If you think the war for US independence ended with Cornwallis
surrendering, you have been played for a fool.
--
Cheers,
John B.

On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 19:23:26 +0100, Sepp Ruf
wrote:

Andre Jute:

a compulsory helmet law in the States will save lives.

You collectivists really like the concept of compulsion, don't you?
More than the concept of liberty which undoubtedly is totally foreign
to their Constitution.

Which ignores the basic reason - Jute is a writer; writers get paid by
writing articles and books; controversial articles generate more
interest and frequently result in follow-up articles; argument, pro
and con, regarding bicycle helmets generate controversy. Q.E.D., Andre
makes more money.

On Sunday, November 4, 2012 5:53:17 PM UTC-5, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Nov 4, 11:06*am, wrote:

On Sunday, November 4, 2012 12:13:06 AM UTC-4, Jay Beattie wrote:



Descending sled runs even on studs warrants wearing a helmet.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGVA-x3SEnU



I've seen those videos before. *Seems to me that putting on an 8 ounce bike helmet and riding a bike in those conditions constitutes an excellent example of risk compensation. Or really, risk over-compensation.



- Frank Krygowski



It's not risk compensation . . . it's called riding home from work.

These conditions can develop in a matter of minutes with a freezing

rain shower, and they are very localized and can occur at night when

it is hard to see what's what.



An eight ounce helmet can prevent a curb or bollard or fender or what-

have-you from making meatloaf out of your scalp. If you crash on ice,

you can slide around like a hockey puck -- sometimes harmlessly and

sometimes not.

To explain my point about risk over-compensation: In the conditions shown in those videos, it was apparently impossible to reliably control a four-wheeled vehicle. In those conditions, to put on an 8 ounce helmet and say "Now I'm going to ride my bike" is, by my standards anyway, crazy. Even with studded tires, if you did fall, there's a real chance you'd slide uncontrolled into or under some sliding car.

Yes, the helmet might help if you happened to slide slowly enough, head first into a curb or bollard (and somehow didn't think to use your hands to ward off the head impact); but you have far bigger potential hazards, and a magic hat won't fix them. So trusting the hat to protect you is over compensation.

But it's your choice. Free country and all that.

- Frank Krygowski