Helmets Part 1,489,348 - To Wear Or Not To Wear
- Thread starter knoxie
- Start date
67spyder
10 mW
While I agree that drivers need to be as cautious as possible pedestrians have the most to lose in a collision and should do everything in their power to avoid being hit. Here in Regin, SK we for some unknow reason have the opposite problem that pedestrians will cross busy streets without even looking, much less stopping before crossing. This practice is very common with high school and university students (very dumb in an area where the streets are ice half the year). Two years ago I was driving down the busiest street in town when a guy walked right in front of my car, I was not speeding, it was a warm sunny day and I saw him as soon as he stepped off the curb without looking or stopping. My thresh hold braking and reaction time were perfect and I stopped about 6 inches from his leg. When he turned to call me an asshole was the first time he even looked in my direction. If anything had gone less than perfect he would have at minimum had a broken leg or worse. I guess my point is that we each must take as much responsibility as possible for our own safety and the safety of others.
When I ride I use the following moto "Paranoia is just good thinking when they really are out to get you"
As far as helmets go I LOVE riding without a lid!! (let the flame war begin
When I ride I use the following moto "Paranoia is just good thinking when they really are out to get you"
As far as helmets go I LOVE riding without a lid!! (let the flame war begin
Lock
100 MW
Hmmm... if ya want to reference the traffic situation in Toronto, stats from 2007:
One Person Killed Every 6.4 Days
One Person Injured Every 30.2 Minutes
One Collision Every 9.8 Minutes
One Pedestrian Injured Every 3.93 Hours
One Truck Collision Every 4.53 Hours
One Cyclist Injured Every 9.21 Hours
Not pretty. The only truly safe, long-term solution is physically separate infrastructure for peds and 2 wheelers. Simpliest and cheapest short-term solution is to ban private autos from the downtown core. Next best solution is to reduce max speed limits...
LoCk
One Person Killed Every 6.4 Days
One Person Injured Every 30.2 Minutes
One Collision Every 9.8 Minutes
One Pedestrian Injured Every 3.93 Hours
One Truck Collision Every 4.53 Hours
One Cyclist Injured Every 9.21 Hours
Not pretty. The only truly safe, long-term solution is physically separate infrastructure for peds and 2 wheelers. Simpliest and cheapest short-term solution is to ban private autos from the downtown core. Next best solution is to reduce max speed limits...
LoCk
John in CR
100 TW
Mitch,
I agree with the thread title, though I'd go further to set the target at 0 fatalities or injuries, which I take as 0 accidents. It's not possible, and unattainable goals typically get less effort. How about minimizing fatalities and injuries. Not only is it achievable, so marked improvements can be congratulated, but further improvements are always possible. Something I'd like to see for us to come up with a list of every specific danger situation or condition and how best to avoid each, by either how we avoid getting into the situation or what to look for in advance to avoid it along with effective ways to get out of it.
We have members with decades of cycling experience as well as those with far less experience on a bike, like myself, who can also contribute from defensive driving experience too. There's a lot of cycling specific safety measures as well as those that are general and apply to all personal transportation. Contributing to the list in thread form can work, but it will eventually become a monstrosity of good info mixed in with duplication and fill. To serve the greatest good we'd need to compile the list into a more useful form, maybe incorporated in something like the ES Safety Manual, of which road safety is a section.
I'm up in the air regarding article your second post. I understand and partially agree with the author's attitude, and anyone in authority must avoid any attitude encourage drivers' idea that pedestrians and cyclist should look out for cars. Everyone must look out for everyone and respect their right of way. As part of safety efforts it also must be understood by all that others will make mistakes and drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians alike will in fact be safer with extra care, and that extra care won't slow anyone in getting to their destination. From that standpoint the Toronto Police video is appropriate to increase safety, and the tone should be modified with a broader push for all to not only avoid the mistakes of others, but also to all can stop making the mistakes. The police video didn't have it ass backwards, but the push should have been from all sides.
I agree with the thread title, though I'd go further to set the target at 0 fatalities or injuries, which I take as 0 accidents. It's not possible, and unattainable goals typically get less effort. How about minimizing fatalities and injuries. Not only is it achievable, so marked improvements can be congratulated, but further improvements are always possible. Something I'd like to see for us to come up with a list of every specific danger situation or condition and how best to avoid each, by either how we avoid getting into the situation or what to look for in advance to avoid it along with effective ways to get out of it.
We have members with decades of cycling experience as well as those with far less experience on a bike, like myself, who can also contribute from defensive driving experience too. There's a lot of cycling specific safety measures as well as those that are general and apply to all personal transportation. Contributing to the list in thread form can work, but it will eventually become a monstrosity of good info mixed in with duplication and fill. To serve the greatest good we'd need to compile the list into a more useful form, maybe incorporated in something like the ES Safety Manual, of which road safety is a section.
I'm up in the air regarding article your second post. I understand and partially agree with the author's attitude, and anyone in authority must avoid any attitude encourage drivers' idea that pedestrians and cyclist should look out for cars. Everyone must look out for everyone and respect their right of way. As part of safety efforts it also must be understood by all that others will make mistakes and drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians alike will in fact be safer with extra care, and that extra care won't slow anyone in getting to their destination. From that standpoint the Toronto Police video is appropriate to increase safety, and the tone should be modified with a broader push for all to not only avoid the mistakes of others, but also to all can stop making the mistakes. The police video didn't have it ass backwards, but the push should have been from all sides.
John in CR
100 TW
Lock said:
I think for bikes and ebikes to become a meaningful % of personal transportation, that yes the lower speed ebikes and bikes need to be physically separated from traffic, but pedestrians should be separated from bikes for the same reasons. Is that how it works in Holland or is that infrastructure spacious enough for both bikes and peds. If shared, Is relaxing and leisurely cycling slowly part of the equation that makes it work?
MattyCiii
100 kW
Driving is a responsibility, not a right.
A BIG part of the problem is how safe drivers (conscientious and reckless drivers alike) feel in their five-star rated safety cages: Airbags, anti-lock brakes, crumple zones, traction control, side-impact airbags...) All this safety gear makes people drive like there's no tomorrow. And for the pedestrian/cyclist they hit, indeed there is no tomorrow.
Technology exists today such that automobiles can have their speed limited by electronics embedded in speed limit signs (and default to some reasonable speed, like 35mph when no signs are present). A low-power transmitter prevents cars from exceeding 25mph in a 25mph zone, etc.
Cars can be equipped with sensors that automatically apply brakes when approaching stationary objects too swiftly (I personally witnessed a rear-end accident 3 weeks ago; the driver in the rear was not paying attention).
Last but not least, we have the means to equip cars with airbags on the OUTSIDE, that deploy when the car hits a human being. I read an article awhile back that made the case that it's not simply the kinetic energy of an impact that grievously harms pedestrians/cyclists, it's the shape of the car - and that an airbag can mitigate some of the injuries/fatalities.
Implement all this through federal mandate. The cost is passed on to car buyers. States are incentivized to charge an exponentially increasing excise tax on 'grandfathered' (older) cars, as an economic incentive to upgrade to new cars equipped for safety.
Implement the above, and injuries/deaths will decrease measurably.
A BIG part of the problem is how safe drivers (conscientious and reckless drivers alike) feel in their five-star rated safety cages: Airbags, anti-lock brakes, crumple zones, traction control, side-impact airbags...) All this safety gear makes people drive like there's no tomorrow. And for the pedestrian/cyclist they hit, indeed there is no tomorrow.
Technology exists today such that automobiles can have their speed limited by electronics embedded in speed limit signs (and default to some reasonable speed, like 35mph when no signs are present). A low-power transmitter prevents cars from exceeding 25mph in a 25mph zone, etc.
Cars can be equipped with sensors that automatically apply brakes when approaching stationary objects too swiftly (I personally witnessed a rear-end accident 3 weeks ago; the driver in the rear was not paying attention).
Last but not least, we have the means to equip cars with airbags on the OUTSIDE, that deploy when the car hits a human being. I read an article awhile back that made the case that it's not simply the kinetic energy of an impact that grievously harms pedestrians/cyclists, it's the shape of the car - and that an airbag can mitigate some of the injuries/fatalities.
Implement all this through federal mandate. The cost is passed on to car buyers. States are incentivized to charge an exponentially increasing excise tax on 'grandfathered' (older) cars, as an economic incentive to upgrade to new cars equipped for safety.
Implement the above, and injuries/deaths will decrease measurably.
Sheriff Jon
100 W
I am a realist, I realize the inherent danger and risks in sharing the road with motorized vehicles that are far larger and heavier than I am. I choose to wear a Helmet. Knowing....should I say believing, that IF I should go down for any number of reasons, that a Helmet may/should help to protect the contents of my head from serious injury. And to me it is well worth any inconvenience in wearing one, as I believe it should do its intended job if needed. I do not expect that drivers are going to see me or give me my right of way, and I ride accordingly and defensively. Nor do I expect that cities are going to do much to make riding a bike or scooter any safer. Wearing a Helmet does not cause me to be more reckless or ride any faster than if I were to not use one. It is simply a precaution that I am willing to take to enjoy the freedom of riding the open road.
MattyCiii
100 kW
Lately I've been wearing a full face (modular) motorcycle helmet, for crash protection, shelter from the elements, and a place to mount some lights.
I've been wearing a bicycle helmet, and good thing. I went down July 4th, smashed my left shoulder and my helmet. My melon was fine 10 seconds after the accident, but the shoulder still ain't right.
I've been wearing a bicycle helmet, and good thing. I went down July 4th, smashed my left shoulder and my helmet. My melon was fine 10 seconds after the accident, but the shoulder still ain't right.
Evoforce
10 kW
Ok....I guess I am the next batter up. I'll take a swing at this..Why is it, that if i am the batter, that I am the only one that has to wear a helmet(granted the catcher has on protective gear)? Why doesn't the rest of the team need to have their heads protected? They are still at risk of injury.
MattyCiii
100 kW
My swing: "what, why not make automobile drivers wear a helmet too?"
I'd rather the car drivers (me too) pay $1000 more per car for "external airbags" that help mitigate injuries to people cars hit, or some $$$ for sensors that automagically engage brakes before hitting a human, etc.
Driving recently, I almost pulled out in front of a cyclist. I'm 42 years old, with good vision. The biker had the required front headlight (blinking, in fact). but I "almost didn't see him" (the words to use in the USA if you run someone over and do not want to be fined $50 for littering the streets with their carcass). Gas - no! brake! life saved... the cyclist probably did not know how close a call that was. I was biking nor 30 minutes ago...
Point? Helmets for cyclists - GOOD. Expensive external airbags, sensors, traffic cameras, speed governors for cars, GOOD!
I'd rather the car drivers (me too) pay $1000 more per car for "external airbags" that help mitigate injuries to people cars hit, or some $$$ for sensors that automagically engage brakes before hitting a human, etc.
Driving recently, I almost pulled out in front of a cyclist. I'm 42 years old, with good vision. The biker had the required front headlight (blinking, in fact). but I "almost didn't see him" (the words to use in the USA if you run someone over and do not want to be fined $50 for littering the streets with their carcass). Gas - no! brake! life saved... the cyclist probably did not know how close a call that was. I was biking nor 30 minutes ago...
Point? Helmets for cyclists - GOOD. Expensive external airbags, sensors, traffic cameras, speed governors for cars, GOOD!
beast775
100 kW
traffic stinks here 
. college am radio yesterday -a older female wearing dark clothes was struck by a car and died,no charges have been laid,ill give them something to lay on 
. college am radio yesterday -a older female wearing dark clothes was struck by a car and died,no charges have been laid,ill give them something to lay on John in CR
100 TW
Sheriff,
Don't get wishy washy now. Of course you know it, and I agree 100%, that if someone goes down a helmet can help avoid serious injury. I consider that a simple fact, and the better the helmet and more complete its coverage the more likely it is to help IF you crash. Despite that there is still valid debate, because increased helmet use hasn't achieved much in the way of better numbers whatever the reason, but with so many making a beeline to helmets when it's off topic, part of the reason is obvious, though I refuse to be drawn into that any further other than to issue a challenge for anyone to find a single instance where a helmet prevented an accident that wasn't a freak occurrence. Also, I read somewhere that most serious bike head injuries involve a blow to the face, so pro-helmet guys not wearing a full face helmet are selling themselves way short.
I think Mitch wanted this thread to avoid the helmet debate, and instead focus on what else we can do to be safe, because a helmet can never trump avoiding an accident. There are lots of things we can do to make us many times safer than the average guy on the road with his bike, whether he's wearing a helmet or not. Just look at a list of the most serious bike/car collisions to see what I mean, the 1-10 list about 1/4 the way down the page http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/health/risks.htm To me the greatest difference can be made through efforts directed at avoiding accidents, and it doesn't require a change in driver attitude or better infrastructure, for which we would have to organize in order to force change, and about which complaining does nothing. Let's focus here on identifying and eliminating rider mistakes, and how to avoid driver mistakes. I'm sure that encompasses the vast majority of serious accidents, just like it would car on car accidents. Finding that common ground will be especially helpful to inexperience riders and can probably help fine tune the riding of even the most experienced.
I'll try to kick off a constructive discussion with one item:
Lane position for better visibility and space, ie claim your lane for good reason -
Our position in the lane has a big impact on cars seeing us and often how well we can see them, and at the side of the road we're often harder to see or we're seen much later, such as when a car in front us blocks the view of an oncoming car waiting to turn across our lane. If it's a car in front of us, we may see the other car, but they quite likely don't see us if we're near the side of the road. In that instance, with no cars behind that would block the turning car anyway, I move near the center of the road in full view to the turning car. Then as I near it, I move back toward the side of the road at a time that minimizes the amount of time I am exposed if he turns anyway. That also gives him more space and allows him to start his turn sooner.
Generally, traffic permitting, I ride in the middle of the lane where I'm most visible to all cars, and have more space to maneuver around debris or potholes. For cars entering from a side street, I will also move within the lane depending which direction they are turning to minimize the time I am exposed. I move within the lane quite a bit, all depending on circumstances to give oncoming cars or cars coming from a side street or from behind the best opportunity to see me. I think that movement itself makes me more visible too.
Anyone have something to add about lane position, or do something differently?
Don't get wishy washy now. Of course you know it, and I agree 100%, that if someone goes down a helmet can help avoid serious injury. I consider that a simple fact, and the better the helmet and more complete its coverage the more likely it is to help IF you crash. Despite that there is still valid debate, because increased helmet use hasn't achieved much in the way of better numbers whatever the reason, but with so many making a beeline to helmets when it's off topic, part of the reason is obvious, though I refuse to be drawn into that any further other than to issue a challenge for anyone to find a single instance where a helmet prevented an accident that wasn't a freak occurrence. Also, I read somewhere that most serious bike head injuries involve a blow to the face, so pro-helmet guys not wearing a full face helmet are selling themselves way short.
I think Mitch wanted this thread to avoid the helmet debate, and instead focus on what else we can do to be safe, because a helmet can never trump avoiding an accident. There are lots of things we can do to make us many times safer than the average guy on the road with his bike, whether he's wearing a helmet or not. Just look at a list of the most serious bike/car collisions to see what I mean, the 1-10 list about 1/4 the way down the page http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/health/risks.htm To me the greatest difference can be made through efforts directed at avoiding accidents, and it doesn't require a change in driver attitude or better infrastructure, for which we would have to organize in order to force change, and about which complaining does nothing. Let's focus here on identifying and eliminating rider mistakes, and how to avoid driver mistakes. I'm sure that encompasses the vast majority of serious accidents, just like it would car on car accidents. Finding that common ground will be especially helpful to inexperience riders and can probably help fine tune the riding of even the most experienced.
I'll try to kick off a constructive discussion with one item:
Lane position for better visibility and space, ie claim your lane for good reason -
Our position in the lane has a big impact on cars seeing us and often how well we can see them, and at the side of the road we're often harder to see or we're seen much later, such as when a car in front us blocks the view of an oncoming car waiting to turn across our lane. If it's a car in front of us, we may see the other car, but they quite likely don't see us if we're near the side of the road. In that instance, with no cars behind that would block the turning car anyway, I move near the center of the road in full view to the turning car. Then as I near it, I move back toward the side of the road at a time that minimizes the amount of time I am exposed if he turns anyway. That also gives him more space and allows him to start his turn sooner.
Generally, traffic permitting, I ride in the middle of the lane where I'm most visible to all cars, and have more space to maneuver around debris or potholes. For cars entering from a side street, I will also move within the lane depending which direction they are turning to minimize the time I am exposed. I move within the lane quite a bit, all depending on circumstances to give oncoming cars or cars coming from a side street or from behind the best opportunity to see me. I think that movement itself makes me more visible too.
Anyone have something to add about lane position, or do something differently?
MattyCiii
100 kW
Amen brother...John in CR said:
As a cyclist and an automobile driver, this is something cars see.
I seriously take the lane, and though in most other cases I'm a complete coward, when it comes to taking a lane I somehow screw up the coverage. It's interesting/scary how being 40% in a lane (on a 2-lane road) makes 'cagers lane-split between me and another car, but if I'm 50% in a lane they slow down and let me have the whole f'n lane. I'm wetting myself at the possibility of being run down in the middle of the right lane, but a$$hole cageras are in actuality giving me more room. Go frackin' figure.
John in CR
100 TW
Here's another-
Avoid riding at night if at all possible, and if you must then light up well, and just a crappy bike light on front and little red blinky on back, while better than nothing, just doesn't cut it. That's when over half of adult cycling fatalities occur according to this study from '94-'98, look about halfway down for the nighttime charts http://www.velomondial.net/velomondiall2000/PDF/GEARY.PDF. A big chunk of those fatalities are alcoholics with revoked drivers licenses according to Johns Hopkins, but considering a low % of cyclists are on the road at night, it's a high risk venture. Don't think that helmet is going to keep you safe at night either, because the survival rates of night collisions are extremely low, so that helmet may be only saving a carrot, potato, or other vegetable.
For the guys who are lighting up with those high intensity LEDs, I worry about those crazy bright lights blinding drivers, so if they aren't for off road, please do evaluate and test those beam angles from the point of view of others before taking them on the road. The last thing you want to do is cause someone else to crash while trying to keep yourself safe.
Avoid riding at night if at all possible, and if you must then light up well, and just a crappy bike light on front and little red blinky on back, while better than nothing, just doesn't cut it. That's when over half of adult cycling fatalities occur according to this study from '94-'98, look about halfway down for the nighttime charts http://www.velomondial.net/velomondiall2000/PDF/GEARY.PDF. A big chunk of those fatalities are alcoholics with revoked drivers licenses according to Johns Hopkins, but considering a low % of cyclists are on the road at night, it's a high risk venture. Don't think that helmet is going to keep you safe at night either, because the survival rates of night collisions are extremely low, so that helmet may be only saving a carrot, potato, or other vegetable.
For the guys who are lighting up with those high intensity LEDs, I worry about those crazy bright lights blinding drivers, so if they aren't for off road, please do evaluate and test those beam angles from the point of view of others before taking them on the road. The last thing you want to do is cause someone else to crash while trying to keep yourself safe.
John in CR
100 TW
MattyCiii said:
Interesting point on those lane splitters if you don't take it all. Now that I think about it, your 40% sounds pretty accurate. I have a fast ebike and ride at traffic speeds. I'm sensitive to those tailgaters, which some movement within my lane after looking over my shoulder so they know I know they're there usually backs them off. If not, I find a safe place to get to the side and slow down motioning them to pass. I really go the distance to avoid inconveniencing motorists, so I get pretty pissed when they do stupid and unnecessary stuff that puts me at risk. On one or two occasions following a car at an appropriate distance that if I was a car no one should pass to get in that spot, I was only at 30-40% of the lane and the car behind pulls along side of me on a narrow road with zero shoulder, and I'm like WTF!
. Since then I think I've owned it a bit better, but I'm glad you mentioned it, and it's going to be a more conscious effort now. Let's see them split it with me past center of the lane. hehehe.Try some movement in your lane as they ease in behind, like a little wave "here I am, and from the lane divider to the edge of the road is mine." It works on motorcycles too. I don't much like anyone on the side of me, because it's like an invasion of my space. OTOH a lot of the delivery type motos like to check out what I'm on, so if the coast is clear with lots of space I slide toward the side and ride straight, so they can pull along side and gawk. Most of the time no, because it leaves me with less space someone next to me looking totally the wrong direction instead of paying attention, and the last thing I want is them wiping out and taking me with them. Just a movement in the lane, maybe 20% of the width, like I'm going around a rough spot or something keeps them in back as if I put up a wall.
I don't know if they think I'm drunk or what, but I don't care, because it projects a degree of unpredictability in their mind, which causes them to give me more space like sheep doing my bidding. It's weird that it works so well, because in heavy traffic here lanes become irrelevant and it's all about who claims the position first gets the right of way, and size matters big time. eg No one messes with buses. They take whatever space they want and everyone else must yield. I see cars manhandle motos in the same manner, though it doesn't affect them because they quickly grab another small space and go on their way. Maybe it's just the novelty I am, a fat guy on an unusually low and long strange looking bike that he pedals only a little. That wouldn't make them back off though, but the movement does, and it's a move with purpose nothing like a weave....move left, track straight, move right, track straight.
dogman dan
1 PW
I agree with the weaving a bit tactic. When riding real motorcycles I learned a long time ago to veer to the right a bit from time to time as a car catches up with you. Sorta saying, hey dude, I want all this lane!
Last year in El Paso, driving a car, I was entering a turn lane at a stoplight where you have a corner, a road to turn right in, and then a little island for the stoplight pole. Two mothers with baby buggies strolled out into my turn lane into my path, while showing me the back of their heads. Sheesh, I mean they actually stepped off the curb and into my path without even looking. BTW, El Paso has a very high rate of pedestrians hit by cars. No suprise if that is how they stroll around.
Another thing I've noticed. Around here they have lots of slow down zones by the schools, and even at the high school it's a 15 mph zone. So then comes the first day of colledge, and the freshmen are completely clueless how to cross University street, which is 5 lanes at 35mph. So the cops have to trot out there for a week or so, and issue a ton of jaywalking tickets.
Seems like a kid ought to have learned how to cross a street by age 18, but NOPE. :lol: Just one of those things that being "safe" for too long created.
Last year in El Paso, driving a car, I was entering a turn lane at a stoplight where you have a corner, a road to turn right in, and then a little island for the stoplight pole. Two mothers with baby buggies strolled out into my turn lane into my path, while showing me the back of their heads. Sheesh, I mean they actually stepped off the curb and into my path without even looking.
BTW, El Paso has a very high rate of pedestrians hit by cars. No suprise if that is how they stroll around. Another thing I've noticed. Around here they have lots of slow down zones by the schools, and even at the high school it's a 15 mph zone. So then comes the first day of colledge, and the freshmen are completely clueless how to cross University street, which is 5 lanes at 35mph. So the cops have to trot out there for a week or so, and issue a ton of jaywalking tickets.
Seems like a kid ought to have learned how to cross a street by age 18, but NOPE. :lol: Just one of those things that being "safe" for too long created.
John in CR
100 TW
I don't get the thought process of many peds either. Regarding college kids though, our campus had different road laws. Peds had the absolute first right of way, then bikes, then motor vehicles. It took me a while to get used to it, but before long I was right there with everyone else stepping into the roads without a care in the world. However, I never carried that over to anywhere off campus. The ped who yelled asshole in a previous post may have carried over thinking from a campus situation, or just didn't know the law regarding when a pedestrian does have the right of way.
The risks many peds take baffles me, so I give them more room than even oncoming cars. I'll be damned if I'm going down because some stupid ped screws up. I think many of them put too much reliance on their ears, because our stereo hearing is quite effective, but they miss that adding some vision at least through quick glances is essential.
On my ebike I've surprised quite a few peds walking the same direction and turning to cross, and they've made that first step before realizing I'm coming. In 13 years here I've never seen them do it with a car, so peds will have to change as electric become more common. Tire noise helps but some tires are pretty darn quiet.
The risks many peds take baffles me, so I give them more room than even oncoming cars. I'll be damned if I'm going down because some stupid ped screws up. I think many of them put too much reliance on their ears, because our stereo hearing is quite effective, but they miss that adding some vision at least through quick glances is essential.
On my ebike I've surprised quite a few peds walking the same direction and turning to cross, and they've made that first step before realizing I'm coming. In 13 years here I've never seen them do it with a car, so peds will have to change as electric become more common. Tire noise helps but some tires are pretty darn quiet.
67spyder
10 mW
Here in Canada (I'm not sure if it is legislated yet or just proposed) Electric cars will have noise makers that play below 30Kph. The Mitsubishi I-miev that I got to go for a ride in this past summer played an mp3 of a vacuum cleaner very quietly below 30Kph. The guy driving used a switch under the dash to turn it off and it was surprising how you didn't notice the sound until it was gone
MitchJi
10 MW
Hi,
What I was thinking when I started the thread was that a campaign, similar to MADD could be tremendously effective. Its the "Low Hanging Fruit" because it would be massively cheaper than separate infrastructure. I'm not saying we shouldn't continue to stress safe ebike riding or stop pushing for better infrastructure. But I think potentially the biggest bang for the buck is a campaign similar to MADD. In terms of Helmets if automobile drivers were more attentive and respectful of bicycles you'd be safer wether you wore a Helmet or not (hopefully sidestepping some of the Helmet debate ).
MitchJi said:
John in CR said:
Lock said:
John in CR said:
What I was thinking when I started the thread was that a campaign, similar to MADD could be tremendously effective. Its the "Low Hanging Fruit" because it would be massively cheaper than separate infrastructure. I'm not saying we shouldn't continue to stress safe ebike riding or stop pushing for better infrastructure. But I think potentially the biggest bang for the buck is a campaign similar to MADD. In terms of Helmets if automobile drivers were more attentive and respectful of bicycles you'd be safer wether you wore a Helmet or not (hopefully sidestepping some of the Helmet debate
). Excellent idea. Let me know when its available so I can purchase a pdf.John in CR said:
John in CR
100 TW
Mitch,
Great way to sum it up, go for the "low hanging fruit", and using the passion from family members of those killed in a constructive manner to fuel such a campaign has a lot of merit.
I'd argue that scare tactics can be the most effective route to fast results, and how about taking advantage of instant media to snatch up some of that low hanging fruit using a two sided shock campaign that doesn't pit one side against the other? Since the most common cause of accidents is stupidity, and the stupidity is emanating from both inside and outside the cars, let's attack stupidity on both sides. Maybe call the campaign SAK for Stupid Accidents Kill, or SOS, Stamp Out Stupidity on the streets. I{m thinking of a series of shocking videos of horrific accidents, 2 per video, one where the motorist is the stupid idiot and the other where the cyclist or ped is. Then after the shock quickly show how each idiot went wrong with a link to voting for which idiot is more stupid, and that links to more videos along with the main poll to vote for who's the stupidest idiot on the list. Figure out how to include a touch of comedy after the shock, and the videos could be hugely popular, and maybe hit the jackpot with the thing going viral. The whole intent is to point out the little stupid things people do, and scare the bejesus out of them doing it again by demonstrating the horrific results, belittle those committing the stupid acts since no one really wants to be stupid, and educate them on exactly why it's stupid. A good parallel link could be to a slightly more educational section of "How to avoid the Stupid Idiots in your area."
Great way to sum it up, go for the "low hanging fruit", and using the passion from family members of those killed in a constructive manner to fuel such a campaign has a lot of merit.
I'd argue that scare tactics can be the most effective route to fast results, and how about taking advantage of instant media to snatch up some of that low hanging fruit using a two sided shock campaign that doesn't pit one side against the other? Since the most common cause of accidents is stupidity, and the stupidity is emanating from both inside and outside the cars, let's attack stupidity on both sides. Maybe call the campaign SAK for Stupid Accidents Kill, or SOS, Stamp Out Stupidity on the streets. I{m thinking of a series of shocking videos of horrific accidents, 2 per video, one where the motorist is the stupid idiot and the other where the cyclist or ped is. Then after the shock quickly show how each idiot went wrong with a link to voting for which idiot is more stupid, and that links to more videos along with the main poll to vote for who's the stupidest idiot on the list. Figure out how to include a touch of comedy after the shock, and the videos could be hugely popular, and maybe hit the jackpot with the thing going viral. The whole intent is to point out the little stupid things people do, and scare the bejesus out of them doing it again by demonstrating the horrific results, belittle those committing the stupid acts since no one really wants to be stupid, and educate them on exactly why it's stupid. A good parallel link could be to a slightly more educational section of "How to avoid the Stupid Idiots in your area."
This is often said but how many actually listen?
I just went for a ride around the block, what could go wrong? Well, when I get back from the urgent care, I'll upload the pictures. Basically, 20mph or so, hit a bump, bike threw me off and I landed, thats right, on my head, in the street.
The road rash and broke thumb will all heal but head injuries are a whole different animal and not to be played with. I knew better from the days of riding my Banshee but got complacent so off we go to have a doctor call me a dumbass.
Don't be a dumbass....
I just went for a ride around the block, what could go wrong? Well, when I get back from the urgent care, I'll upload the pictures. Basically, 20mph or so, hit a bump, bike threw me off and I landed, thats right, on my head, in the street.
The road rash and broke thumb will all heal but head injuries are a whole different animal and not to be played with. I knew better from the days of riding my Banshee but got complacent so off we go to have a doctor call me a dumbass.
Don't be a dumbass....
Good scared straight story, i hope your gray matter is okay.
I was just thinking that when i was going 36mph. I had to slow down to 17mph to hit these dips in the road without being bounced off my seat.
I have decided to stay in the 25mph realm for that reason.
But even at that speed, it is hard to react and brake before hitting something on the road.
Next upgrade: helmet.
I was just thinking that when i was going 36mph. I had to slow down to 17mph to hit these dips in the road without being bounced off my seat.
I have decided to stay in the 25mph realm for that reason.
But even at that speed, it is hard to react and brake before hitting something on the road.
Next upgrade: helmet.
Ypedal
100 TW
over 20mph i recommend full face helmets... i wear a Giro full time !
MadRhino
100 GW
Riding high speed on a hard tail definitely calls for some protection, even with poor suspension it doesn't take much of a bump to kick you out. Even if I have 8 in suspension travel perfectly tuned, I don't pass bumps and potholes seated, doing it ridgid is calling for trouble.Ypedal said:
I wear the same kind of helmet, but only when I'm going to ride hard offroad. Mine is nearly 15 years old and never took a hit, despite many memorable crashes.
Similar threads
