Re: Ontario Helmet Law being pushed through

  • Thread starter Steven M. Scharf
  • Start date



F

Frank Krygowski

Guest
Steven M. Scharf wrote:

>
> The key to defeating MHLs is not to babble like Frank and Roger, it is to
> formulate a position based on factual information. You will never convince
> politicians to listen to you, as opposed to listening to ER and trauma
> physicians, in regards to the statistics on the severity of injuries of
> helmeted versus non-helmeted patients; you have no data only speculation.


:) Steven is intent on disparaging me ever since I pointed out that
he, as a self-proclaimed "lighting expert," really should learn what
"lumens" are, and correct the many resulting mistakes in his "lighting
expert" website!


But the above paragraph contains yet another Scharf mistake. I have
already had politicians listen to me, "as opposed to ER and trauma
physicians." A few years ago, my state legislature was considering a
mandatory helmet law. I (along with another Effective Cycling
instructor) traveled to the capitol and testified before a committee
considering the bill.

It was a gratifying experience. We two were the only ones opposing the
bill, but we had the data the others did not. One legislator was
literally having trouble staying awake through the "Think of the
children!" and "85% effective!" testimony, but literally sat up and took
notice when we began our presentations.

The bill died in that committee.

I can't promise it would happen every time. But Scharf's "You will
never convince politicians to listen to you" is absolutely, totally wrong.


--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]
 
F

Frank Krygowski

Guest
thepiddler2002 wrote:

> Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>> 50 years worth of taking walks makes walking seem safe
>>to me!
>>
>>
>>Oh - and I can say exactly the same thing about 48 years of cycling.
>>
>>;-)

>
>
> I never had an accident walking,


Well, perhaps you're just lucky. You know, of course, that there are
many more pedestrian fatalities in the US than bike fatalities, right?

but I had one last August on my bike
> and, if I had not worn my helmet I would be dead.


Sorry, but there's no way you can know that.

I landed on the back of my head
> first. It shaterd my helmet and knocked me out for 5 min.


It would be interesting (but impossible) to replay the accident without
the helmet. Think: Exactly how far does your helmet stick out beyond
the back of your head?

I ask because there must be _many_ crashes in which people hit their
relatively large helmets, but in which they'd never touch, or barely
touch, their heads. We can't say for sure - but your crash may have
been one of them.

When I was a teenager many, many years ago, we'd spend time wrestling in
our back yards. Falls onto our backs were common. We knew
instinctively to tuck our chins and prevent head impacts.

When I was in judo classes soon after, falls like that were even more
common. Of course, they taught us to do the same thing.

If we'd worn helmets that stuck out in back, those helmets would have
hit time and time again. The same may have been the case in your situation.

Keep in mind: It's pretty conclusive that helmets haven't changed
fatality rates for cyclists. If yours really did save your life, it
would have been a rare thing indeed.

And you need to ask yourself: How much slower, and how much more
carefully would you have been riding, if you weren't feeling protected
by your helmet?


--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]
 
S

Steven M. Scharf

Guest
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > The key to defeating MHLs is not to babble like Frank and Roger, it is

to
> > formulate a position based on factual information. You will never

convince
> > politicians to listen to you, as opposed to listening to ER and trauma
> > physicians, in regards to the statistics on the severity of injuries of
> > helmeted versus non-helmeted patients; you have no data only

speculation.
> >
> > If you use the personal freedom argument they'll counter with the seat

belt
> > argument. ...

>
> One I used was that we had people riding very short distances on quiet
> residential streets to reach a train station, and that whether they
> used a helmet or not, their commute (which was mostly by train) would
> be safer than driving. Meanwhile there were not enough bike lockers
> to go around, leaving the helmet tied to the bike was risky due to a
> vandalism problem, and carrying it into work (without a bike) was
> simply awkward.


It sounds like Toronto is hell-bent on putting this law into place, and from
what I read on-line in the Toronto star, there are no people putting forth
sound arguments like this. You have two camps, both hardline, which makes
for bad laws.
 

Similar threads

F
Replies
44
Views
1K
Road Cycling
Just zis Guy, you know?
J
J
Replies
0
Views
314
Road Cycling
Just zis Guy, you know?
J
S
Replies
19
Views
668
Road Cycling
Just zis Guy, you know?
J