Jump to content

      



























Photo

Repeal bike helmet legislation!


  • Please log in to reply
317 replies to this topic

#301 zinkerled

zinkerled
  • Member
  • 138 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 03:08 PM

I don't follow you - there were infinite arguments against the seatbelt laws, mostly that the government had no business interfering in my personal decision whether or not to protect myself. I'd say helmet laws, for both motorized and non-motorized two-wheeled vehicles, are exactly analogous. The only person I'm hurting is myself by not using a seatbelt.

Of course, if you are against the government regulating against deleterious health effects, you are also likely opposed to alcohol and cigarette taxes, and certainly criminalization of various drugs.

I'm just not so libertarian. All things equal, helmets save lives, and if you can get people to use them, then all the better.


I'm definitely against the criminalization of drugs. Do you know anyone who wants heroin but can't get it because it's illegal? How about weed? Of course not. All the laws do is make quality control impossible which is what causes most 'overdoses', and when it does happen nobody wants to call an ambulance because they don't want to get in trouble. It's also the reason most violent street gangs exist.

Helmet laws bother people for all the reasons already given to the point that they don't ride bikes. This obviously isn't true of seat belts, Mike's dress shirt wrinkles aside.

#302 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 82,943 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 04:13 PM

I wonder though if people who are bothered by helmet laws because they mess up their hair, or what have you, would actually ride if given the choice not to wear one?

You get sweaty when riding, the wind messes up your hair, and not all garments make bike riding easy, let alone purses or tote bags constantly shifting on you. I really think that those folks who say they don't ride because a helmet is not their thing wouldn't ride much anyway.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#303 sebberry

sebberry

    Resident Housekeeper

  • Moderator
  • 21,502 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 29 September 2013 - 04:21 PM

People who want to ride will ride, those who don't won't.

Helmet laws may have a some impact on the numbers of people who ride, but overall I don't think it would be a big percentage.

Once again everyone compares us to Europe where the infrastructure supports cycling in an entirely different way.

Victoria current weather by neighbourhood: Victoria school-based weather station network

Victoria webcams: Big Wave Dave Webcams

 


#304 sdwright.vic

sdwright.vic

    Colwood

  • Member
  • 6,676 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 04:47 PM

:whyme: How does this thread keep getting bumped back into action.

:rolleyes:
Predictive text and a tiny keyboard are not my friends!

#305 pherthyl

pherthyl
  • Member
  • 2,209 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 06:36 PM

I don't follow you - there were infinite arguments against the seatbelt laws, mostly that the government had no business interfering in my personal decision whether or not to protect myself. I'd say helmet laws, for both motorized and non-motorized two-wheeled vehicles, are exactly analogous. The only person I'm hurting is myself by not using a seatbelt.


The key difference is that seatbelt laws are a proven net positive for the health of society. Wearing a helmet protects cyclists, but it also dissuades some from riding, thereby losing the exercise benefits thereof. Hard to measure, but overall it certainly not far from a wash.

#306 Dimitrios

Dimitrios
  • Member
  • 316 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 06:39 PM

I wonder though if people who are bothered by helmet laws because they mess up their hair, or what have you, would actually ride if given the choice not to wear one?


It's my understanding that one big demographic has been shown to be very sensitive to this factor in surveys: young women (say, 18-35). Anecdotally, I have known a number of women who either have not wanted to ride bicycles because of helmet laws (and perceived safety risk) or who have ridden and chosen not to wear a helmet because of the 'hair mess' factor.

#307 jklymak

jklymak
  • Member
  • 3,514 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 07:05 PM

It's my understanding that one big demographic has been shown to be very sensitive to this factor in surveys: young women (say, 18-35). Anecdotally, I have known a number of women who either have not wanted to ride bicycles because of helmet laws (and perceived safety risk) or who have ridden and chosen not to wear a helmet because of the 'hair mess' factor.


I've found the "hair mess" demographic tends to stay in shape regardless of the mode. I'm dubious that it greatly affects health outcomes if they ride bikes or not.

#308 http

http

    Data Sans Practicality

  • Member
  • 1,029 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 07:49 PM

Helmet laws may have a some impact on the numbers of people who ride, but overall I don't think it would be a big percentage.


It seems like ICBC and Highways don't seem to want to get accurate data on this matter, leaving it to medical epidemiologists. If it's just that my google-fu is weak, I'd welcome a pointer to their surveys.

Is a 9% drop not big? (table 2).

I suspect the largest difficulty in getting sane numbers about it is that there's been a huge push in building better cycling infrastructure overall in BC in the past two decades.
"Who are those slashdot people? They swept over like Mongol-Tartars." - F. E. Vladimirovna

#309 zinkerled

zinkerled
  • Member
  • 138 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 08:10 PM

The helmet law made me stop riding. I used to ride casually about 15-20 times per year. When the law was announced I never bought a helmet due to a combination of not caring too much about cycling, being slightly miffed at being told what to do, and not wanting to be inconvenienced.
I think overall that is why cycling has declined - the people who were serious riders or who ride to work/school every day went out and got helmets, while most casual riders never bothered and just lost interest in riding.

#310 pherthyl

pherthyl
  • Member
  • 2,209 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 08:16 PM

Once again everyone compares us to Europe where the infrastructure supports cycling in an entirely different way.


Yes but why do they have the infrastructure? It wasn't that they built it in the hopes that people would start cycling. At least in germany there was a huge wave of cycling popularity in the 70s before there was all the infrastructure for it. In response the government started building out the cycling infrastructure.

As for how much helmet laws reduce ridership:

"helmet laws produced modest but statistically significant reductions in youth bicycling participation of 4-5 percent." http://freakonomics....rage-bicycling/

This researcher says they don't reduce ridership, but says also no evidence they reduce injuries: http://www2.macleans...injuries-study/

"Average hours cycled per person reduced by 51%"
http://www.cycle-hel...clarke-2012.pdf

#311 zinkerled

zinkerled
  • Member
  • 138 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 08:21 PM

It should also be noted that with much higher gas prices and loss of interest in cars among young people, cycling rates should naturally have risen dramatically in the last 15 years, therefore the effect of the helmet laws is probably much larger than just the nominal reduction in cycling rates.

#312 pherthyl

pherthyl
  • Member
  • 2,209 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 08:27 PM

Good to remember that the topic of this thread is bike helmet legislation.

Wearing a helmet can be a good idea at the same time as helmet legislation being a bad idea.

#313 sebberry

sebberry

    Resident Housekeeper

  • Moderator
  • 21,502 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 29 September 2013 - 10:54 PM

It should also be noted that with much higher gas prices and loss of interest in cars among young people, cycling rates should naturally have risen dramatically in the last 15 years


Most people I know simply absorb the increased cost to operate a car. They might drive less or alter their routes, but a more economical car, etc... but I don't see too many people in my circle of friends and acquaintances parking the car and cycling instead.

Locally, don't forget that every UVic and Camosun student is now required to buy a bus pass with their tuition.

Victoria current weather by neighbourhood: Victoria school-based weather station network

Victoria webcams: Big Wave Dave Webcams

 


#314 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:51 AM

The seat belt law is unique in that it doesn't affect your life in any way.


Try making out while underway... in the back seat of your friends jalopy, circa 1959. No seat belts to get in the way back then. :)

#315 kenjh

kenjh
  • Member
  • 310 posts

Posted 30 September 2013 - 06:33 AM

got two helmet tickets ,,,my bike I used to enjoy for therpy form a motorcycle accident ,yes he blew the stop sign ..helmet did not help the broken leg ..(crushed)the bicycle has not moved in 2 years .. nor has my wife ridden her bike ,no escort (me) so helmets have stopped 100% of this household ..I have over the years been attacked for seatbelt laws (rcmp with spotter scopes on the highway)yet driven hundred's of thousands of miles with no injury or dismemberment from the lack of seatbelt use ..the law is revenue only ..proven every day as deathes have not gone down...remember this is just a personal view from personal experiance ..not a stastistic ...

#316 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 12,685 posts

Posted 30 September 2013 - 11:02 AM

One word: Europe. Are the Dutch, Danish and other cycling country citizens mad because pretty much no one wears a helmet. There are hundreds of cyclists on the road at a time, yet they chance it. If they were forced to wear helmets fewer of them would take that bicycle trip.
.

Well there is a difference in how they ride, in Holland there are thousands and thousands of bikes but 95% of them are the old style bike from 40 years ago. All the people riding bikes with lowered handlebars and people leaning over when driving wear helmets. The rest of the people are sitting upright and never going much over 10kmh, and there are no hills for them to go down and pick up speed. They also smoke, talk on phones, carry kids on handlebars etc. while they are riding. They also don't give way to pedestrians if you stray into one of their bicycle lanes.
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#317 pherthyl

pherthyl
  • Member
  • 2,209 posts

Posted 30 September 2013 - 01:47 PM

Well there is a difference in how they ride, in Holland there are thousands and thousands of bikes but 95% of them are the old style bike from 40 years ago. All the people riding bikes with lowered handlebars and people leaning over when driving wear helmets. The rest of the people are sitting upright and never going much over 10kmh, and there are no hills for them to go down and pick up speed. They also smoke, talk on phones, carry kids on handlebars etc. while they are riding. They also don't give way to pedestrians if you stray into one of their bicycle lanes.


Exactly. And those casual riders are who get deterred by having to wear helmets. The hardcore racers will ride regardless, but the mom taking her kids to school on the bike doesn't want to gear up for the leisurely ride. Victoria has the perfect climate for this kind of casual cycling, but helmet laws don't help.

#318 North Shore

North Shore
  • Member
  • 2,169 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 08:56 PM

Being helmetless doesn't seem to have deterred this guy:
http://unlooker.com/...ngs-bike-lanes/
Say, what's that mountain goat doing up here in the mist?

 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users