No cycling helmets

roco71

While out on a training spin today, I came across a group of maybe 30 cyclists on some type of charity spin, met them around Ballindud heading for Tramore. The majority were wearing a light blue t-shirt that I think had something to do with Crumlin Hospital on it. While it is fantastic to see people giving up their time to raise money for such a worthwhile cause I was amazed that not one of the cyclists was wearing a cycling helmet. Maybe this was an oversight but a major one if it was.

Hopefully the cycle went off safely and achieved its goal but if any of the organisers read this perhaps you need to take note of such a basic requirement that I am nearly sure along as being basic common sense is also a requirement by law.

desertcircus

It's not a legal requirement to wear a helmet while cycling. It's also a subject of heated debate among cyclists as to whether wearing a helmet is advisable. There's some tentative evidence that cars give helmeted riders less space than helmetless ones, possibly because the risks of collision don't strike people as being as serious with a cyclist wearing a helmet.

uberwolf

well you'll be happy to know that it is certainly not a legal requirement

kayaksurfbum

Its a bit weird that an organised cycle would not make them wear helmets! Madness not to wear one when cycling in a group.

wobbles

Well it depends. If they were cycling very quickly, then it would be a bit dangerous to cycle without a helmet. But it sounds like it was just a leisurely cycle to raise money, theres no need as they wouldnt be going to fast. They would be very visiable to motorists in a group that size.

Possible the only concern would be that they are raising money for a hospital, so they should have tried to portray safety as much as possible.

mojopolo

A cycling helmet saved my 7 year old son's life on new years day when we were out for a leisurely stroll in a forest park - he was knocked out cold and in hospital for 2 days (his head took the full impact and there wasnt another scratch on him) - just a well he didn't see the group of cyclist without helmets - he has promoted himself to the chief of the 'cycle helmet police'

thomasm

Luanacy for anyone on a bike not to wear a helmet regardless of speed

orwellian

Wearing helmets may make cyclists feel safer and thus take more risks. This effect is known as risk compensation and is consistent with other road safety interventions such as seat belts and anti-lock braking systems.[60][61]
In tests, adults accustomed to wearing helmets cycled faster when wearing a helmet than without, indicating a higher tolerance for risk.[62][63] Tests also show that children go faster and take more risks when wearing safety gear (including helmets),[64] and that parents allow children to be more risky when using safety gear.[65]
Motorists may also alter their behavior toward helmeted cyclists. One small study from England found that vehicles passed a helmeted cyclist with measurably less clearance (8.5 cm) than that given to the same cyclist unhelmeted (out of an average total passing distance of 1.2 to 1.3 metres).[66]
Rodgers re-analysed data which supposedly showed helmets to be effective; he found data errors and methodological weaknesses so serious that in fact the data showed "bicycle-related fatalities are positively and significantly associated with increased helmet use".[67] A range of theories have been proposed to explain why helmet use might indirectly translate into more or worse accidents. In short, the analysis of helmet effectiveness is confounded by changes in human behaviour apparently induced by the presence of protective headgear.

desertcircus

thomasm wrote: »

Luanacy for anyone on a bike not to wear a helmet regardless of speed

It really isn't. Drivers may pass closer; cyclists may behave differently when wearing helmets. It's by no means certain, or even probable, that a cyclist in a helmet is any safer than a cyclist without.

Cabaal

roco71 wrote: »

While out on a training spin today,

I can only assume by this that your a somewhat experienced cyclist

I was amazed that not one of the cyclists was wearing a cycling helmet. Maybe this was an oversight but a major one if it was.

But clearly not experienced in the laws that apply to cyclists in Ireland
:rolleyes:

such a basic requirement that I am nearly sure along as being basic common sense is also a requirement by law.

There basic requirement is a bike, reflectors and at night to use lights, oh and hand signals when turning of course.

It really saddens me when I see what appear to be experienced cyclist spout such crap about helmets being required by law, its clear they don't know what they are talking about.

Now if you want to talk about helmet use and saving lives you'd actually find they'd save far far more lives if motorists had to wear them

Making helmets a requirement for cyclists would effectively kill Dublin bikes in Ireland, in addition you'd likely find bike usage would drop the same as it did in Australia when they made them law, this of course would be a very bad thing to happen as we want less people with health problems so cycling is a thing we want to promote.

Another thing that helmet usage causes is for cycling to appear more dangerous then it is, it isn't very dangerous and infact most of the danger comes from other road users not giving enough space to cyclist, poorly maintained road surfaces and extremely poorly designed cycle lanes (sharing them with walkers for example is just idiotic)

Going on from not giving cyclist enough space it has been shown in research in the UK that motorists actually drive closer to cyclists wearing helmets as they assume they are safer cyclist, we of course know that a helmet makes you no more a safer cyclist then a seat belt makes you a good driver.

If people want to wear helmets thats fine, if they don't thats fine to as it is only the wearer that it will impact on (no pun intended), but what we don't need is foolish comments from people that think helmet use is law

kayaksurfbum

Cabaal wrote: »

It really saddens me when I see what appear to be experienced cyclist spout such crap about helmets being required by law, its clear they don't know what they are talking about.

No one said they were required by law.

Its smart to wear a helmet when your on a bike. end of story. I will allways wear one, and im an experienced cyclist.

Dont tell me ill be safer without it.

marlin vs

roco71 wrote: »

While out on a training spin today, I came across a group of maybe 30 cyclists on some type of charity spin, met them around Ballindud heading for Tramore. The majority were wearing a light blue t-shirt that I think had something to do with Crumlin Hospital on it. While it is fantastic to see people giving up their time to raise money for such a worthwhile cause I was amazed that not one of the cyclists was wearing a cycling helmet. Maybe this was an oversight but a major one if it was.

Hopefully the cycle went off safely and achieved its goal but if any of the organisers read this perhaps you need to take note of such a basic requirement that I am nearly sure along as being basic common sense is also a requirement by law.

There's always someone having a crib about anything that people are trying to do a bit or good for,get a life roco, and instead of cribbing go out and do something usefull like those people on their bikes.:rolleyes:

Marchandire

This debate is getting a bit heated so I'll just leave this here...

marlin vs

Marchandire wrote: »

This debate is getting a bit heated so I'll just leave this here...

bicycles,:rolleyes:

Finnbar01

Some people will never be happen until the state completly and utterly takes over ever single facet of our lives and nannifies the sh*te out of us.

Mint Sauce

It probably depended on who organised the cycle. I mean was it someone involved in the charity, or a cycling club.

If it was a cycling club, then I would be surprised that there wasn't a no helmet no ride rule.

As all the other posters said, there is no legal requirement for wearing a crash helmet. Now I'm not really involved in club cycling, but have done a number of charity events that were partly organised by clubs, and all of them had a no helmet no ride rule.

Cabaal

kayaksurfbum wrote: »

No one said they were required by law.

Sorry yeah your right,
The OP merely assumed they were required by law
:rolleyes:

Its smart to wear a helmet when your on a bike. end of story. I will allways wear one, and im an experienced cyclist.

Dont tell me ill be safer without it.

Don't assume people are safer with one as well, in short don't force your assumption of safety onto everybody else without thinking of the drawbacks.

dayshah

When I cycle to work I rarely go much over 20km/hr, which is a running pace. Should people be forced to wear helmets when out running?

I almost always where a helmet. They also make for a handy basket to put my keys and lights in. But for improving road safety, they are way down on the list compared to things like lights, bright clothing, or education for drivers and cyclists.

Anyway, this has hardly anything to do with Waterford, but for the record I've a blue and white helmet.

roco71

Cabaal wrote: »

I can only assume by this that your a somewhat experienced cyclist

But clearly not experienced in the laws that apply to cyclists in Ireland
:rolleyes:


It really saddens me when I see what appear to be experienced cyclist spout such crap about helmets being required by law, its clear they don't know what they are talking about.


Thank you to Cabaal and the others who put me right on the laws governing cyclists and the wearing of helmets. I did say that I was "nearly sure" in my original post.

Like every thing we do in life, the wearing of helmets etc is down to the individual, his or her decision. What I was amazed by was that as a cyclist who has taken part in many organised events that helmets were not compulsary.

roco71

marlin vs wrote: »

There's always someone having a crib about anything that people are trying to do a bit or good for,get a life roco, and instead of cribbing go out and do something usefull like those people on their bikes.:rolleyes:

@ Marlin, my life is fine thanks and as regards doing something useful like those people on their bikes -

Last year I took part in the Wicklow 200 cycle, The Ring of Kerry cycle, the Sean Kelly cycle to raise money for local charities. This year I have competed in triathlons around Ireland to raise money for local charities, I have entered to run The Solas 10 mile run to raise money for the South East Cancer Society. I kinda think I am doing my small bit on that front. You can sponsor me for the 10 mile run if you like.

mcmoustache

About 15 years ago, a man named Des Barnes of Coronation St died when he had a fall in his home and struck his head against a coffee table. His girlfriend was devastated and I'm sure that other residents of the street were too. It was a senseless death and had he been wearing a helmet, he would most likely be still alive today - unless he was in that tram accident last Christmas.

I don't understand why people don't wear helmets in the home. It's such a no-brainer. People bang their heads in the home all the time and it doesn't take much for a bang to be fatal. The simple wearing of a helmet would prevent so many deaths that it seems stupid to walk around the house without a helmet.

Why don't people wear helmets in the home? I think that it has something to do with assessing risk. Maybe people think that the chances of banging ones head fatally against something in the home are so low that it seems silly to wear a helmet. Maybe they think that they are too cool. Maybe they are just reckless.

Whatever it is that stops people from wearing their helmets in the house, it's stupid. Those who refuse to do so will feel rather silly if they end up dead like Des Barnes.

Minstrel27

Could be worse. The citizens of Amsterdam can be seen bombing around on their mopeds without a helmet. Crazy kamikaze people.