My contribution to the no comp. helmets campaign - Esp. suited for MPs

4 reasons why compulsory helmets are bad.

http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk/nohelmets.htm

It is made as simple as possible so you can send it to your MP.


--
PETER FOX Not the same since the bolt company screwed up

2 Tees Close, Witham, Essex.
Gravity beer in Essex http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk

On 23/1/04 11:57 am, in article , "Peter
Fox" wrote:

4 reasons why compulsory helmets are bad.

http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk/nohelmets.htm

It is made as simple as possible so you can send it to your MP.


I'd put them in the following order

3,2,1,4 and change 1 to be 'cycle use has dropped' rather than 'helmets
don't work'

This gets the points across as:

1. It is trying to solve a small problem
2. It is ineffective at doing so
3. It is actually counterproductive in exacerbating a bigger problem
4. Even if it was brought in, it is unenforceable.

"Peter Fox" wrote in
message ...
4 reasons why compulsory helmets are bad.

http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk/nohelmets.htm

It is made as simple as possible so you can send it to your MP.


--
PETER FOX Not the same since the bolt company screwed up

2 Tees Close, Witham, Essex.
Gravity beer in Essex http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk

It seems to me like another "Law" that the Police will not enforce. How
many people do you see driving with fog lights on ? And how many of them get
stopped and charged by the Police ?

Graham

4 reasons why compulsory helmets are bad.

http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk/nohelmets.htm

It is made as simple as possible so you can send it to your MP.

Wow, that was good. Do you remember any of the details about "A study of
cycling accidents in London shows no benefits from increased helmet use".
Haven't come across it before.

Mark.

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 14:34:12 +0000 (UTC), Graham
wrote:


"Peter Fox" wrote in
message ...
4 reasons why compulsory helmets are bad.

http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk/nohelmets.htm

It is made as simple as possible so you can send it to your MP.

It seems to me like another "Law" that the Police will not enforce.
How
many people do you see driving with fog lights on ? And how many of them
get
stopped and charged by the Police ?

The police may not enforce this law effectively but if the use of private
security guards and community support officers increases then children not
wearing helmets which be much easier targets than cars with foglights on.

Colin
--

Graham wrote:
"Peter Fox" wrote
in message ...
4 reasons why compulsory helmets are bad.

http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk/nohelmets.htm

It is made as simple as possible so you can send it to your MP.


--
PETER FOX Not the same since the bolt company screwed up

2 Tees Close, Witham, Essex.
Gravity beer in Essex http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk

It seems to me like another "Law" that the Police will not
enforce. How many people do you see driving with fog lights on ? And
how many of them get stopped and charged by the Police ?

Graham

Or illegal number plates, going OT for a second Peter, have you ever heard
of a cyclist from Witham called Paul Waller ? He'd be in his early to mid
thirties now. I haven't seen nor heard from him for over 10 years.

--
The Reply & From email addresses are checked rarely.
http://www.mseries.freeserve.co.uk

"Graham" wrote in message
...

It seems to me like another "Law" that the Police will not enforce. How
many people do you see driving with fog lights on ? And how many of them
get
stopped and charged by the Police ?

It won't be the police - it is one of the many extra penalties that the
private "enforcers" will be allowed to give out - along with lights checking
and pavement cycling - and I think that they will find it easier to get
their quotas from cyclists than from cars.

Eddie Dubourg

--
Sigseg: trying to do normal exit

In article ,
Peter Fox writes:
http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk/nohelmets.htm

It is made as simple as possible so you can send it to your MP.

Succinct and to the point. Thank you.

ObNitPick: I don't think you meant "helmet injuries" in the last
sentence of #1. "Head injuries whilst cycling"?

--
Nick Kew

Following on from Mark Thompson's message. . .

Wow, that was good. Do you remember any of the details about "A study of
cycling accidents in London shows no benefits from increased helmet use".
Haven't come across it before.
Go to John Franklin's page - It is his work.

--
PETER FOX Not the same since the bolt company screwed up

2 Tees Close, Witham, Essex.
Gravity beer in Essex http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk

Greetings,

personally, since I have been regularly commuting through London traffic for
the past 5 years or so, I have always worn a helmet. I've been wiped out
twice by cagers, and on each occasion (both times over the handlebars) I am
confident that a helmet has saved me from more serious injury.

Whilst, as a police officer myself, I feel that ticketing cyclists for a
lack of helmets would be a waste of time and resources, I feel the rabid
hatred of helmets displayed by some posters to this NG is wrong, and the
encouragement of safe cycling should include a push for all to wear helmets.

I don't note the same people arguing for the removal of the requirement for
a helmet on a motorbike. I know it can be argued that a motorbike can go
far faster then a bicycle, but even with my low level of fitness I can
manage 20+ mph on the way to work, and don't think a close encounter of the
pavement kind with my head is survivable without protection.

T.T.F.N.

SPENNY

"Peter Fox" wrote in
message ...
4 reasons why compulsory helmets are bad.

http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk/nohelmets.htm

It is made as simple as possible so you can send it to your MP.


--
PETER FOX Not the same since the bolt company screwed up

2 Tees Close, Witham, Essex.
Gravity beer in Essex http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk