I really really hope Yehuda ends up being responsible for something that not only gets that law repealed, but causes a massive backlash that causes the council (and maybe Ms. State) no end of embarrassment.
Unless he can rack up some sort of ‘critical mass’ of tickets that can be annulled in one go as part of an accepted protest settlement, he’s just accumulating a lot of debt. I don’t like the parking regulations in central London, but I don’t think that picking up a load of parking tickets is any way to get round them. Yehuda’s shooting himself in the foot…
Thank you.
To be honest, I was just warming up, but once he replied I thought it was time to stop.
if I get time I’ll write up the other emails I was thinking of sending, and add them to the series.
Reminds me of the scene in “American Graffiti” — the cop writes a ticket to the guy in the yellow hotrod for some sort of violation (I think it was having the front end lowered too much). He hands the ticket to the girl who is riding and indicates she should put it in the glove compartment, telling her to “file it under CS”.
Bicycle Bill: Thanks, that was great to read. I also appreciated the officer’s clear understanding of where he fit into the system, and using his inside knowledge to give you advice on how to change it.
Man am I glad I don’t have to deal with that garbage. Just rode to work (without a helmet). I was actually thinking about this this morning…it’s getting cool enough to need a beanie every once in a while in the morning…when I stuff a hat under a helmet, it gets way too small and pinches in places. I’d almost have to buy a summer helmet and a winter helmet.
I’ve worn a seatbelt since long before the laws were enacted–ever since the first time I got a car that had seatbelts in it–but I opposed that law when it was enacted and I still hate it. I’m opposed to pretty much any sort of law that takes personal safety decisions out of the hands of the individual.
The streets are not part of any natural selection process. They are an entirely artificial construct designed to allow people travel in safety. Laws are intended to reduce danger; if failure to enforce these laws leads to unacceptable danger then the answer is more rigorous enforcement of those laws, not inventing new ones to criminalize the victims.
With one little exception – seatbelts are not only a matter of personal protection. In the case of an accident, the person not using a seatbelt can greatly endanger other persons present in the car.
I still see it as a matter of personal choice. I can choose not to ride in a car with someone who refuses to wear a seatbelt. I can choose not to let people ride in my car if they won’t wear seatbelts. It’s up to the people in the car to decide on the rules, and the government should have nothing to say about it. I feel the same way about anti-smoking laws; although I have asthma and cigarette smoke is very unpleasant to me, I think it should be MY responsibility to ask someone not to smoke if it’s bothering me, rather than having a law that says they can’t do it. For that reason, many years ago (before anti-smoking laws), when the company where I worked banned smoking in the workplace, I went to the office of the vice-president in charge of that manufacturing plant and lodged a formal protest (both spoken and in writing) against the new rule.
Sorry, I disagree here. Seatbelt/helmet laws and similar affect only the person involved. Smoking involves EVERYONE around the smoker. I can smell a cigarette 3 or 4 cars behind a smoker’s car – what with all the anti-pollution regulations, what’s up with that? The smoker is emitting many times the pollution his car is…
There is a huge difference between helmet and seatbelt laws in the actual use of the equipment, helmets will not prevent a wreck, seatbelts can. Seatbelts can keep the driver located at the controls of the vehicle so that more than one emergency maneuver can be executed, or so that any second maneuver can be executed after the emergency maneuver. I used to race sports cars back in the day, and I can vouch for this effect. In fact when the right front wheel fell off my Honda after a bit of shoddy maintenance, while I was driving at speed on a curvy bit of country road with rock walls on either side, my racing harness that I had decided to wear instead of the regular 3-point seatbelt, left me firmly in place and in control of the car in spite of the bruises and sore muscles from the steering wheel trying to dislodge me from the car. But I still think helmet laws are stupid…
I will agree with that Opus – When driving I feel sad that the old type of ‘manual’ belt is no longer an option. When I start driving, I wait for a suitable gap do the following:
1. Check that road is clear of cars behind me for enough distance to do the following without causing problems:
2. I apply the brakes for a second or too then ‘snatch’ hard on them to lock my seat belt.
3. Holding the locked belt with my (too fat) tummy, I then adjust my electric seat back to a comfortable driving position from the drawn-back position when parked. (Basically I lift the rear to a comfortable tilt then move forward to the right ‘reach’. All this from where I left in when I parked – Dropped to the bottom stop and brought back until I can only just reach the pedals fully.)
4. Check while driving on . . . Is the position safe and comfortable?
This system means I am held firmly in place and my back can relax, avoiding the back-ache that used to plague me before I started doing this. Since then, I have driven thousands of miles a week without problems as my arms and legs do all the work, not my torso specifically.
(I know the torso supports the limbs but the point is one of minimizing the torso work
Many times I have been in an emergency situation and just like a racing driver, I have been able to control the car safely away from harm as I was always at the controls, as Opus says above.
I agree with the point that the difference is one of either being able to be safe BECAUSE of the device or simply being helped to reduce injury BY the device.
Seatbelts are a lousy comparison for helmets. They test seatbelt design by running an actual car into a wall at 35 mph. Very realistic. They test bike helmet design by dropping a helmet on a model “head” (no crash test dummy, just a head) six feet or less. Not realistic at all. Very stupid.
No wonder they don’t work. All they do is produce lots of “I bumped my helmet so I would have died” stories.
When I first read the strip in my morning stupor, I read it as something about anti-helmet law leaflets, and I fancied Yehuda as a ground-based human-powered version of military leaflet dropping propaganda efforts. I thought he’d had some quarter sheets printed up and found the perfect way to distribute them. Littering issues aside, the idea seemed pretty good. Then I reread the strip and realized my eyes had deceived me.
Yehuda’s racked up quite a few tickets in a short period of time. I wonder if he hot-glued some styrofoam peanuts to the inside of his umbrella hat from the other day if he could make a more compelling argument that it is indeed a helmet.
But will Yehuda stand up in court? Can he find a lawyer to stand with him? What legal point negates the helmet bylaw? He’ll have to show it impedes his civic rights in some fashion.
I like my cycling friends alive enough to be glad they had helmets on when bad crashes happened. One was hit-and-run in town and later crashed riding down a mountain road at high speed, the other has been hit twice in town by hit-and-run drivers. Both are certain the helmet saved their heads allowing them to ride again later (after the broken bones healed). Yehida can’t control everything around him… we all pay for the hospital care when someone is tragically injured, and so I have no problem with helmets that are shown to work protecting against some but not all possible impacts while riding my bike for transportation.
Anecdotal evidence is always “a helmet saved my life”. The sheer number of these anecdotes can only mean that helmeted cyclists have far more crashes than un-helmeted ones.
The simple counter argument would be “unhelmeted crash victims have too much brain damage to offer anecdotes.” What we need are numbers, not mediocre attempts at logic.
There are no accident statistics that show any decrease in head injuries to cyclists that can be attributed to an increase in helmet use by cyclists.
Helmet users only ever offer anecdotes.
I really really hope Yehuda ends up being responsible for something that not only gets that law repealed, but causes a massive backlash that causes the council (and maybe Ms. State) no end of embarrassment.
I second the motion.
Third
Forth.
Looks like Yehuda got the right idea… to tick Nanny State off.
Unless he can rack up some sort of ‘critical mass’ of tickets that can be annulled in one go as part of an accepted protest settlement, he’s just accumulating a lot of debt. I don’t like the parking regulations in central London, but I don’t think that picking up a load of parking tickets is any way to get round them. Yehuda’s shooting himself in the foot…
That’s a lot of tickets.
He must have spent the entire weekend cycling about looking for cops.
I have received 13 helmet tickets in the last 18 months. 7 of them I have fought in court (and had them dismissed). The rest I have paid.
Ahh, the joys of living in a country with mandatory helmet laws.
I was stopped by the cops again a few weeks ago, and had an interesting exchange with the police office. Details here:
http://chillikebab.wordpress.com/2012/09/20/helmets-cops/
Strangely, I have yet to receive the ticket through the post. Perhaps the officer was persuaded by my arguments…
Thanks for supplying the link. That was the best post on the helmet debate that I have read so far.
Thank you.
To be honest, I was just warming up, but once he replied I thought it was time to stop.
if I get time I’ll write up the other emails I was thinking of sending, and add them to the series.
Would it be possible to add links to the referenced papers?
I’ve added the attachments to the post, as I have a number of requests to do so.
He’ll get some tickets for pollution.
Reminds me of the scene in “American Graffiti” — the cop writes a ticket to the guy in the yellow hotrod for some sort of violation (I think it was having the front end lowered too much). He hands the ticket to the girl who is riding and indicates she should put it in the glove compartment, telling her to “file it under CS”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IkDW9iLeLY
Bicycle Bill: Thanks, that was great to read. I also appreciated the officer’s clear understanding of where he fit into the system, and using his inside knowledge to give you advice on how to change it.
Man am I glad I don’t have to deal with that garbage. Just rode to work (without a helmet). I was actually thinking about this this morning…it’s getting cool enough to need a beanie every once in a while in the morning…when I stuff a hat under a helmet, it gets way too small and pinches in places. I’d almost have to buy a summer helmet and a winter helmet.
Incidentally chilllikebab, that was a pretty cool cop you found.
Hey Yehuda… don’t ride down my street littering as you go.
Love ya man, but trashing the eco system ain’t cool.
I agree with the cop, trying to fight the cops aren’t going to get you anywhere. Take his advise, fight it where you have a chance of winning.
This helmet debate reminds me of the great seatbelt debate, when the law was enacted, but I am glad we have that law.
I’ve worn a seatbelt since long before the laws were enacted–ever since the first time I got a car that had seatbelts in it–but I opposed that law when it was enacted and I still hate it. I’m opposed to pretty much any sort of law that takes personal safety decisions out of the hands of the individual.
No foolin’! Give Darwinism a chance…
The streets are not part of any natural selection process. They are an entirely artificial construct designed to allow people travel in safety. Laws are intended to reduce danger; if failure to enforce these laws leads to unacceptable danger then the answer is more rigorous enforcement of those laws, not inventing new ones to criminalize the victims.
Of course they are. The stupid ones get weeded out. Darwinism at its finest!
With one little exception – seatbelts are not only a matter of personal protection. In the case of an accident, the person not using a seatbelt can greatly endanger other persons present in the car.
I still see it as a matter of personal choice. I can choose not to ride in a car with someone who refuses to wear a seatbelt. I can choose not to let people ride in my car if they won’t wear seatbelts. It’s up to the people in the car to decide on the rules, and the government should have nothing to say about it. I feel the same way about anti-smoking laws; although I have asthma and cigarette smoke is very unpleasant to me, I think it should be MY responsibility to ask someone not to smoke if it’s bothering me, rather than having a law that says they can’t do it. For that reason, many years ago (before anti-smoking laws), when the company where I worked banned smoking in the workplace, I went to the office of the vice-president in charge of that manufacturing plant and lodged a formal protest (both spoken and in writing) against the new rule.
Sorry, I disagree here. Seatbelt/helmet laws and similar affect only the person involved. Smoking involves EVERYONE around the smoker. I can smell a cigarette 3 or 4 cars behind a smoker’s car – what with all the anti-pollution regulations, what’s up with that? The smoker is emitting many times the pollution his car is…
There is a huge difference between helmet and seatbelt laws in the actual use of the equipment, helmets will not prevent a wreck, seatbelts can. Seatbelts can keep the driver located at the controls of the vehicle so that more than one emergency maneuver can be executed, or so that any second maneuver can be executed after the emergency maneuver. I used to race sports cars back in the day, and I can vouch for this effect. In fact when the right front wheel fell off my Honda after a bit of shoddy maintenance, while I was driving at speed on a curvy bit of country road with rock walls on either side, my racing harness that I had decided to wear instead of the regular 3-point seatbelt, left me firmly in place and in control of the car in spite of the bruises and sore muscles from the steering wheel trying to dislodge me from the car. But I still think helmet laws are stupid…
I will agree with that Opus – When driving I feel sad that the old type of ‘manual’ belt is no longer an option. When I start driving, I wait for a suitable gap do the following:
1. Check that road is clear of cars behind me for enough distance to do the following without causing problems:
2. I apply the brakes for a second or too then ‘snatch’ hard on them to lock my seat belt.
3. Holding the locked belt with my (too fat) tummy, I then adjust my electric seat back to a comfortable driving position from the drawn-back position when parked. (Basically I lift the rear to a comfortable tilt then move forward to the right ‘reach’. All this from where I left in when I parked – Dropped to the bottom stop and brought back until I can only just reach the pedals fully.)
4. Check while driving on . . . Is the position safe and comfortable?
This system means I am held firmly in place and my back can relax, avoiding the back-ache that used to plague me before I started doing this. Since then, I have driven thousands of miles a week without problems as my arms and legs do all the work, not my torso specifically.
(I know the torso supports the limbs but the point is one of minimizing the torso work
Many times I have been in an emergency situation and just like a racing driver, I have been able to control the car safely away from harm as I was always at the controls, as Opus says above.
I agree with the point that the difference is one of either being able to be safe BECAUSE of the device or simply being helped to reduce injury BY the device.
Would you welcome a Law requiring motorists and pedestrians as well as cyclists to wear helmets?
Yes, if you welcome a law requiring cyclists also to wear a seatbelt
Seatbelts are a lousy comparison for helmets. They test seatbelt design by running an actual car into a wall at 35 mph. Very realistic. They test bike helmet design by dropping a helmet on a model “head” (no crash test dummy, just a head) six feet or less. Not realistic at all. Very stupid.
No wonder they don’t work. All they do is produce lots of “I bumped my helmet so I would have died” stories.
Next strip: Yehuda starts rethinking his stance against helmets after suffering a concussion when he rear-ends a garbage truck.
Unhelmeted cyclists crash into things much, much less than helmeted ones.
Maybe… but if you hit your head on the curb after your wheel slips into the streetcar tracks you may find yourself wishing you had some protection.
When I first read the strip in my morning stupor, I read it as something about anti-helmet law leaflets, and I fancied Yehuda as a ground-based human-powered version of military leaflet dropping propaganda efforts. I thought he’d had some quarter sheets printed up and found the perfect way to distribute them. Littering issues aside, the idea seemed pretty good. Then I reread the strip and realized my eyes had deceived me.
Yehuda’s racked up quite a few tickets in a short period of time. I wonder if he hot-glued some styrofoam peanuts to the inside of his umbrella hat from the other day if he could make a more compelling argument that it is indeed a helmet.
But will Yehuda stand up in court? Can he find a lawyer to stand with him? What legal point negates the helmet bylaw? He’ll have to show it impedes his civic rights in some fashion.
He’ll defend himself.
http://yehudamoon.com/20080514/
the issue needs a helmet – you are beating it beyond recognition
like^^^
Like 2
I like my cycling friends alive enough to be glad they had helmets on when bad crashes happened. One was hit-and-run in town and later crashed riding down a mountain road at high speed, the other has been hit twice in town by hit-and-run drivers. Both are certain the helmet saved their heads allowing them to ride again later (after the broken bones healed). Yehida can’t control everything around him… we all pay for the hospital care when someone is tragically injured, and so I have no problem with helmets that are shown to work protecting against some but not all possible impacts while riding my bike for transportation.
Anecdotal evidence is always “a helmet saved my life”. The sheer number of these anecdotes can only mean that helmeted cyclists have far more crashes than un-helmeted ones.
Interesting observation Don.
I wonder how it is possible to turn the theory into a fact???
The simple counter argument would be “unhelmeted crash victims have too much brain damage to offer anecdotes.” What we need are numbers, not mediocre attempts at logic.
There are no accident statistics that show any decrease in head injuries to cyclists that can be attributed to an increase in helmet use by cyclists.
Helmet users only ever offer anecdotes.
There are just not enough dead and brain damaged cyclists to support your counter argument.
Repeat a theory often enough and it becomes a “fact”.