Bike helmets

facade

Silver-Surfer wrote: »

So you're one of the few who actually has a permit?

I do still have one somewhere* , but the need for one expired in 2012, when British Waterways ceased to exist, and the Canal & River Trust took over.
You no longer need a permit

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/enjoy-the-waterways/cycling


Actually, there is still a link to the old pass on here

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/1091433

Keep_pedalling

Tyler119 wrote: »

That is not exactly what I said...

To hep the pedantic individuals of the nation....should the law be changed so that not wearing a safety helmet ; which conforms to British Standards and while travelling on public highways be enforced through measures such as fines and or mandatory road safety courses.

Staying in pedant mode, what his this got to do with motoring?

If you wanted to start a discussion on making a change to the law for cyclists, you could have made that clear in you original post and posted it in the appropriate forum.

I do usually wear a helmet, but It is pointless bringing in another law that is not going to be enforced. We already have many of those which is why you continually see cyclist jumping red lights and motorists on mobile phones.

missile

I believe in free choice. Do we really need the nanny state rules to tell us how to live our lives?

Who would deny the safety value of a helmet? Same people who would argue smoking never hurt me? However it is their life and should be free to make their choices.

facade

The Canal & River trust have the answer to my problem in their FAQs

Pedestrians wear headphones so when I ring my bell they don’t move. What should I do?
Pedestrians are generally the most vulnerable and have priority at all times, so whilst it’s a good idea to let others know you are there by ringing a bell or calling out, this shouldn’t be a demand. This is especially important when considering people who may have impaired hearing.

Must be a Government department then, answer a completely different question to the one asked

Johno100

missile wrote: »

I believe in free choice. Do we really need the nanny state rules to tell us how to live our lives?

Who would deny the safety value of a helmet? Same people who would argue smoking never hurt me? However it is their life and should be free to make their choices.

Quite agree, if they want to take the chance it's up to them.

MEM62

Tyler119 wrote: »

should the law be changed so that not wearing a safety helmet ; which conforms to British Standards and while travelling on public highways be enforced through measures such as fines and or mandatory road safety courses.

No, it should be a matter of choice.

(Slightly different mode of transport but look up a guy called Fred Hill)

Johno100

MEM62 wrote: »

No, it should be a matter of choice.

Yes, as long as you and your loved ones are prepared to accept a reduced compensation payment when you are left being fed through a tube because your choice is viewed by the courts as contributory negligence.

Marvel1

Tyler119 wrote: »

I have also started to see cyclists just tear it through red lights which on a few occasions has meant a car had to make an emergency stop.

When yu drive through streets/built up areas, you will see many casual bikers just ride out of junctions etc.

I need to get a dash cam.

Silver-Surfer_2

wongataa wrote: »

The jury is out on whether bicycle helmets actually help in the scheme of things. In some crashes they can help. In some crashes they can cause additional issues. In some crashes it doesn't matter as the head was not involved. The standards they have to meet are also not very realistic of what sort of impacts they may need to protect against.

In places where helmets have become compulsory levels of cycling have dropped which causes general health issues as the population gets less exercise.

In big cycling places such as Denmark and the Netherlands very few people on bikes wear helmets and the incidents of head injuries while cycling are very very low.

Maybe vastly improved cycling infrastructure and motorist education about cyclists would benefit more in the long run.

I see no issues with the current situation. If you think it better to wear a bicycle helmet then do so (I do) but if you prefer not to then don't.

I'm struggle to think how they cause additional issues, maybe you can evidence that?

Hermione_Granger

bigjl wrote: »

Yes I think cycle helmets should be compulsory.

One life saved is enough to justify this change in the law

Why not go all the way and ban pork pies:
http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/9243349.Inquest_hears_man_died_after_choking_on_pork_pie/

Cheeseburgers:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-35490011

Kebabs:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/this-food-die-for-charity-2337988

And lobster:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/news/1179548/pub-diner-chokes-to-death-on-her-lobster-moments-after-giving-the-thumbs-up-to-say-she-was-enjoying-it/