TheRocketMan Posted June 6, 2015 Share Posted June 6, 2015 Here's some examples of bad cyclists.....you see good ones too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkleyIan Posted June 6, 2015 Share Posted June 6, 2015 Wow, is this thread still going? Some people are idiots, ergo some cyclists are idiots and some motorists are idiots. Next!! yep its still going and we've only just reached the subject of helmets. Grab a seat , get some popcorn and settle down. I think we are good for at least 40 more pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawsom34 Posted June 6, 2015 Share Posted June 6, 2015 Go on then I'll add my 2 p worth on the helmet debate. 1.Will it become law to wear one on a push iron yes it will 100% certain of that. 2.This will happen when about 90% of cyclists wear one voluntary, look at when motorbike crash helmets were introduced same happened there. 3.Do I agree with it, nope not at all we should have the freedom of choice to wear one or not there's a lot more dangerous things about than cycling without an helmet should we ban them as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birobasher Posted June 6, 2015 Share Posted June 6, 2015 Helmets were only ever designed to reduce the risk of head injury, of course they're not meant to keep your dome or the rest of you pristine from a high speed collision. Any safety gear is a bonus though, compared to none at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 Go on then I'll add my 2 p worth on the helmet debate. 1.Will it become law to wear one on a push iron yes it will 100% certain of that. 2.This will happen when about 90% of cyclists wear one voluntary, look at when motorbike crash helmets were introduced same happened there. 3.Do I agree with it, nope not at all we should have the freedom of choice to wear one or not there's a lot more dangerous things about than cycling without an helmet should we ban them as well. In New Zealand the accident rate increased by 20% when they made it compulsory to wear cycle helmets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommo68 Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 ,,,,,,,,,Tommo has stated that he would turn a blind eye to a driver hitting a cyclist, It is both rude and not a little ignorant when people misquote you to prove a point of their own or discredit you. IF you read my post you WILL discern that I meant that I would not be willing to act as witness (or give up the time that ut would involve) on the behalf of THAT pedal tricyclist. I stand by that.. I would not he is IMHO either selfish or an idiot or perhaps a combination of the two. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 It is both rude and not a little ignorant when people misquote you to prove a point of their own or discredit you. IF you read my post you WILL discern that I meant that I would not be willing to act as witness (or give up the time that ut would involve) on the behalf of THAT pedal tricyclist. I stand by that.. I would not he is IMHO either selfish or an idiot or perhaps a combination of the two. . . So, matt's assertion was correct then. You would turn a blind eye to a motorist hitting a cyclist. Says a lot about you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birobasher Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 In New Zealand the accident rate increased by 20% when they made it compulsory to wear cycle helmets. The fact that a thing happens after another thing happens doesn't necessarily prove cause and effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 The fact that a thing happens after another thing happens doesn't necessarily prove cause and effect. It has been suggested that the fall in the number of people cycling that happened in New Zealand after the laws were passed and enforced vigorously, led to a lot less people cycling which in turn caused the higher accident rate. The research does seem to support the hypothesis that more cycling leads to a lower accident rate, or to put in another way. The more to barriers to cycling that you put up, the higher the accident rate is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommo68 Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 (edited) So, matt's assertion was correct then. You would turn a blind eye to a motorist hitting a cyclist. Says a lot about you. Another one that apparently does not want to read. I said I would not be a witness on the behalf of THAT cyclist. Which is true I wouldn't. And why the fuss anyway. I'm being quite open about it unlike many people in regard to many other incidents when people choose to not come forward as witnesses when asked because of the potential hassle it may cause them. . . Edited June 7, 2015 by Tommo68 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts