Helmet Poll: First Hand Experience

[Bill Sornson]

Alan Braggins wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> For an OC type such as you, I'm sure the "helmet question" is,
>> indeed, complex. The rest of us merely assess, decide and ride.
>
> Rather than, say, starting a Usenet thread designed to support their
> decision

Two of his three "poll" choices were /counter/ to his belief. HTH

 

[jtaylor]

"Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Peter Clinch wrote:
> > [email protected] wrote:
> >
> >> The concern that increased helmet use will lead to a MHL (note the
> >> specificity:"lead to a MHL) seems to be restricted to a few posters
> >> from the UK.
> >
> > Since it's been stated by government departments that they would only
> > push for an MHL once voluntary wearing has increased, the "few posters
> > from the UK" have very good evidence that they're right.
>
> But not about Sally Tenspeed donning a lid in Podunk, Iowa. No "threat"
to
> you gits whatsoever.
>

Sure.

That's why there are so many MHL's in the US - people like you don't
understand how they get passed (or don't care - you too? You do have one in
your state, no?).

 

[[email protected]]

Bill Sornson wrote:
> Alan Braggins wrote:
> > [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> For an OC type such as you, I'm sure the "helmet question" is,
> >> indeed, complex. The rest of us merely assess, decide and ride.
> >
> > Rather than, say, starting a Usenet thread designed to support their
> > decision
>
> Two of his three "poll" choices were /counter/ to his belief. HTH


Hey! Don't confuse the UK AHZ brigade by presenting facts! They much
prefer scare tactics, twisted statistics, half-truths and outright
lies.

 

[Bill Sornson]

jtaylor wrote:
> "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Peter Clinch wrote:
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>> The concern that increased helmet use will lead to a MHL (note the
>>>> specificity:"lead to a MHL) seems to be restricted to a few posters
>>>> from the UK.
>>>
>>> Since it's been stated by government departments that they would
>>> only push for an MHL once voluntary wearing has increased, the "few
>>> posters from the UK" have very good evidence that they're right.

>> But not about Sally Tenspeed donning a lid in Podunk, Iowa. No
>> "threat" to you gits whatsoever.


> Sure.
>
> That's why there are so many MHL's in the US - people like you don't
> understand how they get passed (or don't care - you too? You do have
> one in your state, no?).

By your "logic" ( LOL ), then, WE should be giving YOU grief for wearing
helmets.

Many UK posters have admonished many US posters that "choosing to wear a
helmet is a vote for compulsion". That /may/ be true over there (although
even that is way over-stated for fear-mongering purposes), but it's /not/
true over here.

Sally Tenspeed in Podunk is NOYB. Period.

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, Bill Sornson wrote:
>
>But not about Sally Tenspeed donning a lid in Podunk, Iowa. No "threat" to
>you gits whatsoever.

Is Sally Tenspeed from Podunk, Iowa making hundreds of Usenet posts
attempting to justify her decision, or is she just going out and riding,
with no hassle from anyone?


>You seem to be projecting your frustration and impotence on to others.
>Hey, here's an idea: cut it out.

Great idea. As the one who done more projecting of impotence than anyone
else, feel free to demonstrate how, you miserable hypocrite.

 

[Bill Sornson]

Alan Braggins wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Bill Sornson
> wrote:
{context removed; real shocker, that}

>> But not about Sally Tenspeed donning a lid in Podunk, Iowa. No
>> "threat" to you gits whatsoever.

> Is Sally Tenspeed from Podunk, Iowa making hundreds of Usenet posts
> attempting to justify her decision, or is she just going out and
> riding, with no hassle from anyone?

Sally Tenspeed posted to a newsgroup that she's had experiences that affirm
her decision to wear a helmet whilst cycling. She specifically stated that
she doesn't care what others do; she's confident that her choice is a smart
one /for her/.

Sally Tenspeed then was subjected to personal abuse and haughty ridicule
from a bunch of bullies and morons who are so paranoid and defensive that
they can't even tell who truly opposes them.

HTH

>> You seem to be projecting your frustration and impotence on to
>> others. Hey, here's an idea: cut it out.

> Great idea. As the one who done more projecting of impotence than
> anyone else, feel free to demonstrate how, you miserable hypocrite.

Why didn't you speak up when Carl claimed I misspelled your name,
Braveheart? What a cowardly scumbaggins you are.

Go cower under the covers. No need for a lid THERE.

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On 2 Aug 2006 14:37:43 -0700, [email protected] said in
<[email protected]>:

>For an OC type such as you, I'm sure the "helmet question" is, indeed,
>complex. The rest of us merely assess, decide and ride.

And for a black-is-white (sorry, black-*and*-white) Liddite like you
I'm sure it's - well, black and white. Things often are when you are
determined to look at them only in the most superficial terms.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, Bill Sornson wrote:

>Sally Tenspeed in Podunk is NOYB.

Then maybe she should stop crossposting, Bill. Sorry, Sally. Or Bill.
Whatever. Maybe you should go back to "Sorni".

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 17:05:37 GMT, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Alan Braggins wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>, Bill Sornson
>> wrote:
>{context removed; real shocker, that}
>
>>> But not about Sally Tenspeed donning a lid in Podunk, Iowa. No
>>> "threat" to you gits whatsoever.
>
>> Is Sally Tenspeed from Podunk, Iowa making hundreds of Usenet posts
>> attempting to justify her decision, or is she just going out and
>> riding, with no hassle from anyone?
>
>Sally Tenspeed posted to a newsgroup that she's had experiences that affirm
>her decision to wear a helmet whilst cycling. She specifically stated that
>she doesn't care what others do; she's confident that her choice is a smart
>one /for her/.

If she tries to justify it in ways that run counter to reality, then
she's mistaken and those errors should be pointed out.

It's like if I got sick with the flu and recovered superquickly and
think it's because I drank a lot of Coca-Cola, just saying drinking
Coca-Cola is the right choice *for me* doesn't make my statement
correct. We have to take a look at the broader reality and see what
is known about Coca-Cola? Coudl it be true? Is there evidence one
way or another?

>Sally Tenspeed then was subjected to personal abuse and haughty ridicule

You mistake someone asking her "What evidence do you have for that?"
as abuse.

>from a bunch of bullies and morons

Morons?

"When I divide 180,000 by 300,000,000 I get 0.006. Every time."

LOL.

JT


****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[[email protected]]

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> On 2 Aug 2006 14:37:43 -0700, [email protected] said in
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >For an OC type such as you, I'm sure the "helmet question" is, indeed,
> >complex. The rest of us merely assess, decide and ride.
>
> And for a black-is-white (sorry, black-*and*-white) Liddite like you
> I'm sure it's - well, black and white. Things often are when you are
> determined to look at them only in the most superficial terms.
>
>

What a fool I've been, treating, as I have, helmet use a simple matter
of choice: Sunglasses, yes or no? Trousers or shorts? Top up or top
down? Red wine or white? Motobecane or Havnoonian?

Now I see this is a very weighty question, akin to pondering the future
of western civilization!

I have seen the error of my ways!

Can I ever rehabilitate myself in your eyes, O Wise One? And, most
importantly, in the eyes of the Wonderous Raven, Great Leader of the
Helmet Sceptics?

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On 3 Aug 2006 15:17:59 -0700, [email protected] said in
<[email protected]>:

>What a fool I've been, treating, as I have, helmet use a simple matter
>of choice

Indeed. It's a very complex matter. Read Mok et. al. for a hint of
why.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[[email protected]]

Just zis Guy needs a life, you know? wrote:
> On 3 Aug 2006 15:17:59 -0700, [email protected] said in
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >What a fool I've been, treating, as I have, helmet use a simple matter
> >of choice
>
> Indeed. It's a very complex matter.


Yep, almost as complex as deciding whether to hang that new roll of TP
sheets out or sheets in.

(What would an OC such as "Guy" do without a cause, however trivial or
meaningless?)

 

[Bill Sornson]

[email protected] wrote:
> Just zis Guy needs a life, you know? wrote:
>> On 3 Aug 2006 15:17:59 -0700, [email protected] said in
>> <[email protected]>:
>>
>>> What a fool I've been, treating, as I have, helmet use a simple
>>> matter of choice
>>
>> Indeed. It's a very complex matter.
>
>
> Yep, almost as complex as deciding whether to hang that new roll of TP
> sheets out or sheets in.

Sheets OUT, of course. (I can't cite any /studies/ or anything, but it's
common sense backed by experience. Don't ask.)

 

[[email protected]]

Bill Sornson wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Just zis Guy needs a life, you know? wrote:
> >> On 3 Aug 2006 15:17:59 -0700, [email protected] said in
> >> <[email protected]>:
> >>
> >>> What a fool I've been, treating, as I have, helmet use a simple
> >>> matter of choice
> >>
> >> Indeed. It's a very complex matter.
> >
> >
> > Yep, almost as complex as deciding whether to hang that new roll of TP
> > sheets out or sheets in.
>
> Sheets OUT, of course. (I can't cite any /studies/ or anything, but it's
> common sense backed by experience. Don't ask.)

The population studies show fewer people wipe when there is a MSOL
(Mandatory Sheets Out Law), this makes going potty more dangerous!
Going potty is no more dangerous than walking! Do you have a MSOL
whilst walking?

 

[dabac]

Since it's been stated by government departments that they would only
push for an MHL once voluntary wearing has increased, the "few posters
from the UK" have very good evidence that they're right.

Working for a government department, albeit in a completely different field, I find that line of reasoning questionable. A law isn't something you whip together over a few hours, it's a rather complicated piece of writing. And since there "has" to be repercussions if you break the law there is a considerable bit of research that has to be done to define the proper response as well. Then there's the whole bit of the enforcing agencies that has to be brought up to speed and taught to use the new law, which can be a task in itself, specially if they question the merits of the law.

In a situation similar to this, i.e. a rare rate of occurrence (few serious head injuries), obvious difficulties in monitoring and enforcing, and a limited scope (no secondary risk to bystanders) my department would in all probablility discourage the creation of such a law. And the more people who voluntarily "did the right thing", the smaller the benefit of the law would be.
Why make it mandatory if "everybody" is already doing it? It'd still bring with it all the hassle of the legalities.
Of course we would participate in creating such a law if so ordered though the proper chain of command, but it's a safe bet to say the we have far more pressing concerns that we'd prefer to deal with.

 

[jtaylor]

"dabac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> A law isn't
> something you whip together over a few hours, it's a rather complicated
> piece of writing. And since there "has" to be repercussions if you break
> the law there is a considerable bit of research that has to be done to
> define the proper response as well. Then there's the whole bit of the
> enforcing agencies that has to be brought up to speed and taught to use
> the new law, which can be a task in itself, specially if they question
> the merits of the law.
>

Interesting, this last point.

Sorni claims as a mitigating factor for the MHL in his state that it is
neither being enforced, nor obeyed. Perhaps the American approach to the
rule of law (expediency and personal comfort trumps it) is the reason they
have so many MHLs?

 

[H M Leary]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:

sip

>
> What a fool I've been, treating, as I have, helmet use a simple matter
> of choice: Sunglasses, yes or no? Trousers or shorts? Top up or top
> down? Red wine or white? Motobecane or Havnoonian?
>
> Now I see this is a very weighty question, akin to pondering the future
> of western civilization!
>
> I have seen the error of my ways!
>
snip

No worries, obs. We can only hope.

BTW. No REAL American would ride a froggie bike!
...and Harry is just down the street from me.

HAND

 

[Chris Malcolm]

In uk.rec.cycling jtaylor <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 16:22:41 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
>> said in <[email protected]>:

>> Which leaves us back where we started: the hypothesis that helmets
>> save meaningful injuries is unproven. Wear one or not, personal
>> choice, and recognise that it's just that. Think of it as a religious
>> issue.

> He already does - only religion can support a belief denied by fact.

Occams's Razor: the simpler hypothesis is stupidity.

--
Chris Malcolm [email protected] DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On 3 Aug 2006 17:59:21 -0700, [email protected] said in
<[email protected]>:

>> >What a fool I've been, treating, as I have, helmet use a simple matter
>> >of choice
>> Indeed. It's a very complex matter.
>Yep, almost as complex as deciding whether to hang that new roll of TP
>sheets out or sheets in.

It is indeed very complex, unless you are utterly determined to see
everything as black-is-white.

Sorry, that's black AND white.

No, I was right the first time.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[[email protected]]

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> On 3 Aug 2006 17:59:21 -0700, [email protected] said in
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >> >What a fool I've been, treating, as I have, helmet use a simple matter
> >> >of choice
> >> Indeed. It's a very complex matter.
> >Yep, almost as complex as deciding whether to hang that new roll of TP
> >sheets out or sheets in.
>
> It is indeed very complex,


You could hardly think otherwise. To do so would be to admit that you
have wasted your time and energy amassing a "library" of "data" on a
*very* trivial issue.

And now we will turn our attention to the next complex matter: "How
many angels can dance on the head of a pin?".