You clicked the link to say that you believe helmets should be compulsory for children. That is the most common pro-compulsion view, and the focus of current legislation lobbying in the UK. In fact, I used to think exactly the same myself, until someone started me down the road of reading the evidence which underpins that position.
It’s portrayed as some kind of moderate middle ground, btu actually it isn’t: it is still compulsion, just “not for me”.
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.
So, I am a parent, and I think you will have seen from this and my own site that I am reasonably well-informed on the helmet issue. Are the compulsion lobby better informed than me? To the extent that they should be permitted to enforce their interpretation of the evidence on me and my children? Or is it that we simply differ on our interpretations of the evidence? Because if it is possible for a well-informed parent to decide that their child may make their own choice, then a law compelling all parents to force helmets on their children is clearly wrong.