Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is because there is a lack of a bicycle infrastructure. With a real bicycle infrastructure in place and lots of people biking, it becomes more practical and much safer for people to commute by bike.
There are limits on that, I don't think most people live in bicycle range of work(in my experience) or are in an position to do so(i.e. Need to drop kids off ect..).
There are limits on that, I don't think most people live in bicycle range of work(in my experience) or are in an position to do so(i.e. Need to drop kids off ect..).
The average commute distance is 16 miles each way for a commute, that means there are a large number of people who live within a bicycle range to work. This is something that is much easier for people who live within 10 miles from their work.
Also, biking to work isn't right for everyone, but there are lots of people who commute to and from work that don't need to do any of the "buts" tasks that you are referring to on a daily basis. Also, having a bicycle infrastructure in place is inexpensive and helps encourage people to bike for their commutes, none of this forces anyone to bike if they don't want to, it just creates a realistic option for people who wish to bike for commuting.
I agree with her. We act like somehow riding your bike with a helmet is going to be the end all be all of promoting bike safety when that is not the case. The problem with acting like helmets are going to magically make people on bikes safe means we won't spend time on the stuff outside of helmets that increase safety (like safe infrastructure and everyone being more attentive on the road). Plenty of people wearing helmets on bikes still get killed. How do we solve that problem?
I haven't actually said anything one way or the other on my usage of helmets. But since I have nodded in agreement about how helmets can detract from the acceptance of cycling you have lumped me into the "whacks" and "urbanists sheep" category.
I never said she was a "helmet hater". I also never used the term "urbanist sheep".
HOWEVER, it is Stupid, with a capital "S" to not wear a helmet. Yes, I think it's appropriate to use that word. This isn't a personal preference issue like "is blue a prettier color than red", or "thick crust (pizza) or thin" (a common pick-up line in Champaign IL, the pizza capital of the world, so it seems). It's a question with one correct answer, like "Does the sun come up in the east or west" (ignoring those who will try to tell us it doesn't come up at all!), or "What is the sum of 1+1".
Ms. Blue makes no compelling arguments. I've heard the same nonsense, and that's what it is, about seat belt use, and from the pro-smoking crowd. Her "history" of helmet laws discussed exactly two states, the big two, CA and NY. Here is a table of helmet laws for bikes and motorcycles, for all 50 states, DC, the Northern Marianas Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. All state and territorial laws apply only to children, sometimes only to children under 12 years old. State Motorcycle and Bicycle Helmet Laws
So helmet laws lead to fewer people biking? Show me. That's a similar argument to the smoking bans causing bars to lose business. Turned out, that wasn't true, either. And so what if it is true? Shouldn't wearing a helmet be part and parcel of biking? It's probably also true that requiring a driver's license deters some people from driving. So what? I'm sure requiring a doctor's license deters some people from doing surgery w/o any training. Again, so what?
The "equity" law is the same nonsense that was bandied about when infant car seat laws were being enacted into law in the early 80s. "Poor people can't afford them", yada, yada. Well, these same poor people can afford the car and the bikes, why not a car seat and helmets? It's funny how most people, except for the very, very poor, who likely have neither a car or a bike, can afford some of the things they want to afford. And adult helmet can be bought for $17.99. https://www.google.com/search?q=cost...icial&tbm=shop
If these people like Ms. Blue were so darned concerned about these poor people, they could start a helmet drive, instead of advocating for no helmets. Look at these "economy" helmets: Economy Bike Helmets at $3.95 Each - ProRider Inc. Starting at $3.95 for large quantities. Less than a pair of shoes, even from Payless!
The "personal choice" stance, even for adults, does not compute. Head injury accidents are very costly to society, both in the cost of actually treating these individuals, plus their loss of earnings power, possibly forever.
Of course helmets are only one piece of bike safety. That doesn't mean they are unnecessary.
I don't understand this issue. Here in L(l)ibertarian Colorado (both capital and small "L"), it's not even on the radar, AFAIK. And this is a state with one of the highest immunization opt-out rates, along with Ms. Blue's Oregon and others. Oh, you'll see people riding w/o helmets, but the vast majority do wear helmets. Most organized bike rides require them; they don't want the liability.
So go ahead and ride helmet-less for solidarity. Then go volunteer at a rehab unit.
That is because there is a lack of a bicycle infrastructure. With a real bicycle infrastructure in place and lots of people biking, it becomes more practical and much safer for people to commute by bike.
Yes, and that, more than no bike helmets, is what will encourage people to bike more.
There are two factors risk and the number of time one does it. Biking isn't practical for most people to commute with and so they don't take the risk daily like they do with driving. I personally would not feel safe riding a bike on many streets. Too easy to get hit by a car/truck/bus or run into an opening car door.
In an alley, on an bike path or on less busy streets sure, but not most through streets.
I was too scared as well. Commuting is too far for me but the grocery store isn't. We started getting more lanes and more people on bikes so cars and buses are more aware. I've biked on quiet streets and semi busy ones. San Francisco on the other hand is out of the question.
Yesterday i biked to the eye doctor, coffee shop, drug store and picked up take out. In my car the same journey would have sucked because each place was in a different neighborhood and I would have parked 3 times in some of the busiest parts of town.
The "equity" law is the same nonsense that was bandied about when infant car seat laws were being enacted into law in the early 80s. "Poor people can't afford them", yada, yada. Well, these same poor people can afford the car and the bikes, why not a car seat and helmets? It's funny how most people, except for the very, very poor, who likely have neither a car or a bike, can afford some of the things they want to afford. And adult helmet can be bought for $17.99. https://www.google.com/search?q=cost...icial&tbm=shop
If these people like Ms. Blue were so darned concerned about these poor people, they could start a helmet drive, instead of advocating for no helmets. Look at these "economy" helmets: Economy Bike Helmets at $3.95 Each - ProRider Inc. Starting at $3.95 for large quantities. Less than a pair of shoes, even from Payless!
No poor people get pulled over and fined for not having helmets. Which doesn't encourage helmet use. (The same thing happens with lights)
Since this equity thing disproportionately impacts black and brown people we are likely to be pulled over and fined (or worse and I do know someone who had the worse part) for something that should come with a warning and a phone number to a nonprofit handing out lights and helmets.
Mandatory helmeting makes it difficult to get bike sharing systems off the ground. Shared bikes don't come with helmets and people don't keep helmets in their pockets. A small form factor helmet that fits in a normal sized bag would be great.
No poor people get pulled over and fined for not having helmets. Which doesn't encourage helmet use. (The same thing happens with lights)
Since this equity thing disproportionately impacts black and brown people we are likely to be pulled over and fined (or worse and I do know someone who had the worse part) for something that should come with a warning and a phone number to a nonprofit handing out lights and helmets.
Mandatory helmeting makes it difficult to get bike sharing systems off the ground. Shared bikes don't come with helmets and people don't keep helmets in their pockets. A small form factor helmet that fits in a normal sized bag would be great.
Where is the bold happening? NO STATE requires helmets for anyone over 18. Your state requires them for children under 18. The article used the example of Nevada, which doesn't even have a bike helmet law! How do you know someone is poor by looking at them on a bike? Lots of people wear causal clothes when biking, and lots of people have older bikes. It was common in Champaign, IL for people to keep a "beater bike" to ride on campus where bike theft was rampant. That, more than any helmet law, which Illinois doesn't have in any event, deters biking.
Bike helmets should be an integral part of biking. You've used that "joke" about not keeping a helmet in your pocket before. Bike share programs should come with a helmet. It's irresponsible for them to promote biking w/o helmets.
No poor people get pulled over and fined for not having helmets. Which doesn't encourage helmet use. (The same thing happens with lights)
Since this equity thing disproportionately impacts black and brown people we are likely to be pulled over and fined (or worse and I do know someone who had the worse part) for something that should come with a warning and a phone number to a nonprofit handing out lights and helmets.
Mandatory helmeting makes it difficult to get bike sharing systems off the ground. Shared bikes don't come with helmets and people don't keep helmets in their pockets. A small form factor helmet that fits in a normal sized bag would be great.
Actually it is much cheaper to purchase helmet for biking than paying for a car or transit. Though I don't think a mandatory helmet law is unnecessary for adults.
Actually it is much cheaper to purchase helmet for biking than paying for a car or transit. Though I don't think a mandatory helmet law is unnecessary for adults.
Heck, yeah! A round-trip transit run here on a local route costs $4.50 cash. You can buy a helmet for that, according to the ads I found.
You know, my inner libertarian balks at having to pay for the treatment and life-long support of some of these people who are injured in accidents that could have been mitigated by wearing a helmet.
Since this the urban planning forum and not the bicycling or health forum, I think we've had enough helmet related posts. Let's stick to the bicycling topics the OP listed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Rant
