Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Bicycle Helmets Kill

Jump to new
The main reason for helmets is because of the cars that can hit people rendering them dead or worse.

If we drop the city roadspeed to 30klm an hour or have dedicated cycling roadway we could relatively safely drop helmet laws - outside of these safer areas helmets certainly save lifes ...

I also find it amusing that people dont ride bikes because of helmets - are we saying because of vanity ? They dont like the look?
 
numbercruncher said:
The main reason for helmets is because of the cars that can hit people rendering them dead or worse.

If we drop the city roadspeed to 30klm an hour or have dedicated cycling roadway we could relatively safely drop helmet laws - outside of these safer areas helmets certainly save lifes ...

I also find it amusing that people dont ride bikes because of helmets - are we saying because of vanity ? They dont like the look?
Click to expand...

There are 3 reasons I don't wear a bicycle helmet.

1. they are uncomfortable.
2. they are unnecessary, as I cycle and don't race in lycra.
3. bystanders cannot admire my flowing locks.

gg
 
Garpal Gumnut said:
There are 3 reasons I don't wear a bicycle helmet.

1. they are uncomfortable.
2. they are unnecessary, as I cycle and don't race in lycra.
3. bystanders cannot admire my flowing locks.

gg
Click to expand...

GG

1. Are you sure you are not putting the helmet on back to front?
2. You don't have to be racing or wearing lycra to crash. You could just as easily fall off your bike slipping on a Cane Toad
3. Hope they're 'thick flowing locks' when you do bang your scone on the ground
 
Good find Gav, full of quotable quotes, "helmet-lax" Dublin with more than three times the take up of Melbourne. Cycling in Australia like "riding with the bulls". Garpal would love it.
 
I'm surprised that this ridiculous thread is still going.

The thread topic still has not been proven yet. Bicycle helmets have yet to kill anyone.......
 
The helmet wearing and lycra clad cycling ideologues are now pursuing Shane Warne, a Cricketing Hero and safe driver for his road safety campaign.

When will this all end?

I myself am confined to my house for unpaid fines for not wearing a bloody helmet when I have never ever fallen off a sedately ridden bike.

These lycra jokers need to be banned from our roads and confined to skate parks.

From the SMH.

A paper not friendly to sedate bike riders with many metrosexual lycra clad and helmet wearing readers.

http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/cyclists-in-spin-over-warnes-tac-role-20121219-2bmph.html

gg
 
Maybe I am just really lucky.. But I have never hit my head when I come off my bike. Ever since I was a kid, I have always had the reflex of doing everything possible to keep my head up when I come off. I've even managed to be sitting on top of my bike whilst it's falling to the side and when I hit the ground, I was literally sitting on the side of my bike. Don't ask me how I did it though, it happened so fast I was a little confused and more worried about the bike! Generally I take the skin off of my shoulder/arm/hand to avoid my head hitting the ground. Oh and yes, the majority of these weren't slow paced rides either, generally around the 30 - 40km/hr speeds.

Now I've said that, I would also like to say I think the helmets do help you more than not when you crash and happen to hit your head. I mean you might look odd with one, but hey, protection is protection. Maybe helmets should be a choice thing, but if you chose not to wear a helmet and you injure your head without one, Medicare shouldn't cover a thing when it comes to the doctors bill. Also, children under the age of 18 should be forced to wear a helmet, after that age then I guess they're old enough to make their own decisions. People over the age of 18 have the right to become drunks and kill themselves over the years through alcohol poisoning, so I can see the no helmet discussion having some merit to the argument.
 
Uncle Festivus said:
I'm surprised that this ridiculous thread is still going.

The thread topic still has not been proven yet. Bicycle helmets have yet to kill anyone.......
Click to expand...

Surprise is good for you Uncle, it clears out the cobwebs.

The central tenet of my argument is, and this is proven, that less people are riding bicycles than in the 50's and 60's.

This has contributed to a sedentary life style for the majority.

There has been a co-incidental rise in Australia, of fast and furious bicycle riders travelling in packs wearing lycra and helmets. They need both, for safety and self esteem. The former because of the speeds they reach and the latter because all groups of self-righteous people need a uniform for identity. Many of these jokers mow down pedestrians on shared recreational paths. Perhaps you believe that as a result walkers should be obliged to wear armour when they share these paths.

On the other hand, slow riders on traditional bicycles such as I, are hounded by the constabulary for refusing to wear a helmet.

More worryingly many people of my ilk find a helmet a bother, uncomfortable to wear and are dissuaded from riding by fascist laws.

Thus bicycle helmets kill by discouraging the Australian population from availing of a safe, clean and enjoyable mode of transport. they become fat and lazy, drive Camry's and die early either from cholesterol or the shame of having to drive such a ridiculous motor car.

gg
 
Thankfully another bikeshop chain is in trouble.

They need to cater for people who want just to ride a bike, not break 90kph in a peleton, if they want to make a quid.

http://www.smh.com.au/small-business/managing/hard-to-brake-even-as-another-bike-store-struggles-20130104-2c8bd.html

Once this silly law about helmets is removed there will be a resurgence in bike riding, for the relaxed, those who like to sachet with a Winfield in their mouth, riding to buy a battered fish with a half scoop of chips, comfortable and happy with the world.

Now it is confined to aggressive peleton riders with challenged balls and monthly visits to their doctors for injections.

gg
 
At a favourite holiday haunt last week, I noticed they're building a cycleway via public subscription, using embedded sponsorship tiles. With his sponsorship, GG appears to have stolen a march on the helmet overlords, and his message is clearly resonating with the cycling public.
GG_BikePath_2.jpgGG_HelmetRights_2.jpg
 
Garpal Gumnut said:
Surprise is good for you Uncle, it clears out the cobwebs.

The central tenet of my argument is, and this is proven, that less people are riding bicycles than in the 50's and 60's.

This has contributed to a sedentary life style for the majority.

There has been a co-incidental rise in Australia, of fast and furious bicycle riders travelling in packs wearing lycra and helmets. They need both, for safety and self esteem. The former because of the speeds they reach and the latter because all groups of self-righteous people need a uniform for identity. Many of these jokers mow down pedestrians on shared recreational paths. Perhaps you believe that as a result walkers should be obliged to wear armour when they share these paths.

On the other hand, slow riders on traditional bicycles such as I, are hounded by the constabulary for refusing to wear a helmet.

More worryingly many people of my ilk find a helmet a bother, uncomfortable to wear and are dissuaded from riding by fascist laws.

Thus bicycle helmets kill by discouraging the Australian population from availing of a safe, clean and enjoyable mode of transport. they become fat and lazy, drive Camry's and die early either from cholesterol or the shame of having to drive such a ridiculous motor car.

gg
Click to expand...

GG , It's the addiction to everything carbon fibre and your wife's lady gillette that gets them. Shaving of some hair whilst shaving off some seconds on that run to the Coffee Club for an expresso soy chino latte with 2 equals.
I prefer steel and hairy legs combined with fuax leather panniers whilst I glide down to Salamanca to purchase my organic twice planted cabbages.
I can't believe your Camry comment , I have been wondering about this phenomenon for many years . Why do all old people drive Gold Camry's ? The Silver ones are no better , it now signals to me as a warning sign to steer well clear of these gutter hugging wrinklies. Perhaps MythBusters could investigate the reason why they buy them.
Perhaps another thread could be started ? "Gold Camry sightings and driving stunts".
 
Ijustnewit said:
GG , It's the addiction to everything carbon fibre and your wife's lady gillette that gets them. Shaving of some hair whilst shaving off some seconds on that run to the Coffee Club for an expresso soy chino latte with 2 equals.
I prefer steel and hairy legs combined with fuax leather panniers whilst I glide down to Salamanca to purchase my organic twice planted cabbages.
I can't believe your Camry comment , I have been wondering about this phenomenon for many years . Why do all old people drive Gold Camry's ? The Silver ones are no better , it now signals to me as a warning sign to steer well clear of these gutter hugging wrinklies. Perhaps MythBusters could investigate the reason why they buy them.
Perhaps another thread could be started ? "Gold Camry sightings and driving stunts".
Click to expand...

While generally agreeing with you, I should make some statements.

1. I never comment on Mrs Gumnut's fifty shades of blonde.

2. Camry's are a sign of cognitive deficit, a much better marker than any IQ test. If someone seeks a Camry, their license should be immediately removed.

3. If the fascist rule on bike helmets were removed one would meet a less aggressive cyclist than at present. Cycling now is a haven for frustrated Greens who do not have the availability of, or the capacity to root.

gg
 
Apropos the Lycra Larrikins, I found this article amusing.

Beware the lone wolf in Lycra - 13 Jan 2013
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/beware-the-lone-wolf-in-lycra-20130112-2cmbt.html

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/beware-the-lone-wolf-in-lycra-20130112-2cmbt.html

"..The first thing we have noted is that any cyclist wearing their own - ordinary - clothes is the pedestrian's friend, particularly women who cycle in wide skirts (Mad Men style), sitting bolt upright behind the basket on their handlebars.."

"..No, it is the lone-wolf cyclist dressed to kill (I think literally) in his/her (when fully kitted-out impossible to discern gender) Lycra, bum-padded speed suit that strikes terror into every pedestrian's heart.

Silent, with a seemingly genetic incapacity to ring a bell, they hunch over their weirdly angled handlebars, riding as if invisible hounds from hell are on their tail.
(They may be fleeing magpies. I notice many make their hideous, space-alien helmets look even stranger by affixing vertical plastic straws to them, presumably to ward off the birds. I used to hate magpies; I feel a strange affinity with them now.)
These cyclists appear to regard pedestrians as oddly shaped bollards, our cringing humanity and vulnerable flesh invisible to them.."
Click to expand...
 
Logique said:
At a favourite holiday haunt last week, I noticed they're building a cycleway via public subscription, using embedded sponsorship tiles. With his sponsorship, GG appears to have stolen a march on the helmet overlords, and his message is clearly resonating with the cycling public.
View attachment 50291View attachment 50292
Click to expand...

Logique said:
Apropos the Lycra Larrikins, I found this article amusing.

Beware the lone wolf in Lycra - 13 Jan 2013
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/beware-the-lone-wolf-in-lycra-20130112-2cmbt.html
Click to expand...

Thanks logique,

Keep up with the excellent quotes against this lycra madness

As a public service may I ask you to indicate to your local council that I am available for any ceremonies to make any path, street, road, brothel or other public space, where bicycle helmets are now mandated, helmet free.

gg
 
This joker Armstrong is one of the main proponents of killing by bicycle helmets.

He dopes himself up to the eyeballs and popularises a passtime where idiots with small balls and large wheels, whisk about the countryside and walking paths terrorising others at speed.

The government, as is it's wont, then knee jerks and mandates bicycle helmets for all cyclists.

This discriminates against cyclists like I who sachay with a Winfield twixt my lips to my local newsagent for my copy of the Australian Financial Review of a morning.

I have even had ladies upon my bar without helmets and all enjoyed the experience.

Let us put an end to this silly law, and mandate helmets only for the lycra crew, and druggies like Armstrong.

gg
 
Why are there more cyclists in Amsterdam than Brisbane?

Answer me that, you lycra clad doped up 85kph indigents.

The answer is that in Amsterdam there is no fascist law to wear a silly smegma helmet, and people cycle, and do not emulate psychopaths like Lance Armstrong.

Let us change this silly law.

gg
 
burglar said:
9. Nobody wears helmets or neon vests

http://www.theurbancountry.com/2012/03/10-observations-about-bicycling-in.html
Click to expand...

Thanks for the support, burglar.

The coppers in Townsville, I have been told, are now instructed not to stop me when I ride my sedate bicycle without a helmet.

The Creek Prison is overflowing.

Helmets may be necessary for the lycra clad, 85kph nuts, but I see no reason to wear fluoro or other obscenities such as a helmet.

More folk would buy bicycles and ride them if this stupid law were removed.

Bicycle helmets kill by impacting on the fitness of folk such as I, who are put off riding bicycles by these stupid helmets.

gg
 
Top