You clicked the link to say that you believe helmets should be compulsory for all cyclists. That’s one extreme of the continuum of views, mainly held by non-cyclists although some cyclists also think this.
If you have arrived at this view because some other group or organisation has persuaded you of it, it would be helpful if you could think about the reasons they advanced. Was it:
- cycling is dangerous
- cycling causes large numbers of head injuries
- helmet laws have worked elsewhere
- not enough cyclists wear helmets
- the evidence says that helmets prevent many injuries
Or maybe something else? If there’s another reason I haven’t covered do please contact me and let me know.
But above all I would like you to explore some of the reasons why helmet laws fail. Whether you still consider, after reading the evidence, that helmet promotion and use is good, well, that’s outside the scope of today’s conversation. But I would like you to go away secure in the knowledge that every single time a helmet law has been enacted, it has failed to yield the benefits on which its proposers secured its support. And yet, despite the widely documented failure of such laws and their damaging side-effects, not one of them has been repealed. And that’s a really great reason not to repeat the failed experiment again.
Finally, let me leave you with this thought: after looking around this website and maybe my own site, are you prepared to concede that my choice of whether to wear a helmet on any given ride is a fully informed one? If you will admit that, then you need to think long and hard about the fundamental premise of helmet compulsion, which is that everybody who chooses not to wear a helmet for any ride is necessarily wrong. There is a big difference between disagreeing with someone and making their decision illegal.