Cyclists !!

[Gardian]

May I first of all say that I'm neither a cyclist myself, nor one of the 'I hate em' brigade.

It just struck me this morning on the short drive back from the village that at this peak holiday time, the roads are inundated with cycling holidaymakers who are neglecting to wear a protective helmet. What's more, they usually ride two-abreast along roads which are full of crazy drivers at the best of times.

Without exception, the 'serious' cyclists (you know, the full Tour de France gear) wear a helmet.

Are these people mad?

[Sunday Driver]

No, they're just on holiday, aren't they?  And as everyone knows, nothing nasty happens whilst you're on holiday.

Besides, the bikes only come out for two weeks in the year, so it's not worth spending money on a helmet for that short time.....[;-)]

A nice dose of gravel rash will wake 'em up!

 

 

[Jc]

Most Tour of France cyclists do not want to wear helmets but were made to do so under penalty of heavy fines.

[Cassis]

Yes, the UCI introduced the rule after Andrei Kivilev fell off and died through head injuries on a downhill stretch (2003?).  I think they are allowed to take them off on certain stages during the final climb when the finish is on the summit of that climb and when the climb is at least 5km in length.

[Jc]

I should also have said that a cycle helmet offers protection if worn correctly;most tourists,particularly the women(mustn't disturb the hair-do)wear them on the back of the head so they will not protect the face if you go off frontwards and are likely to break your neck if backwards and I cycle in France and the UK.What is good about France is the courtesy shown by all drivers even the local truckies.

[thunderhorse]

Oh, Gawd! I drove police traffic cars without a seatbelt, and then the law said I had to wear one. I rode high powered motorcycles without a helmet, and then the law said I had to wear one (except as a Seikh on religious grounds). I can choose whether to ride a horse with or without a helmet. I fly light aircraft, but not yet compelled to wear a parachute (unless in a glider [sometimes] or aerobatic aircraft).

My French neighbours chain-saw in flip-flops, but my young nephews and nieces can't play conkers without protective glasses.

Be honest, the world is barking, and so are the people that go along with this nonesense about so-called personal safety/protection. Where has the common sense gone?

I've been involved in H & E, and to me that's based on common sense, not dictatorial edicts. Whose life is it anyway?

If cyclists want to ride without helmets, as adults, that's their prerogative and their risk. End of. It wouldn't be a problem if every other booger saw them in time and gave them room: and so it goes on.

Give me some freedom to do what I want without interference from any other body that thinks it knows how to control my life better than I do. I am human: the bloody interferers are NOT!

[Gardian]

[quote user="thunderhorse"]
If cyclists want to ride without helmets, as adults, that's their prerogative and their risk. End of. It wouldn't be a problem if every other booger saw them in time and gave them room: and so it goes on.

[/quote]

Thunderhorse ................

Agree with just about everything you've said, particularly your 3rd sentence above.

The problem is that it wouldn't be like that if there was a prang and you or I were even remotely involved.  You / I allegedly driving too fast; poor, unprotected from the-bad-old-car-driver cyclists; them just on holiday and minding their own business.

I'm tempted to make a black humour comment, but it would be inappropriate.  I totally agree that it's their problem, but the law doesn't always see it that way (from your background, you must know that) and I'm fearful that sooner rather than later someone is going to get badly hurt in this kneck of the woods.

[Gardian]

[quote user="thunderhorse"]
If cyclists want to ride without helmets, as adults, that's their prerogative and their risk. End of. It wouldn't be a problem if every other booger saw them in time and gave them room: and so it goes on.

[/quote]

Thunderhorse ................

Agree with just about everything you've said, particularly your 3rd sentence above.

The problem is that it wouldn't be like that if there was a prang and you or I were even remotely involved.  You / I allegedly driving too fast; poor, 'unprotected from the-bad-old-car driver' cyclists; them just on holiday and minding their own business.

I'm tempted to make a black humour comment, but it would be inappropriate.  I totally agree that it's their problem, but the law doesn't always see it that way (from your background, you must know that) and I'm fearful that sooner rather than later someone is going to get badly hurt in this neck of the woods.

[saddie]

It is not just politeness that makes the French give cyclists room. It is detailed in the code de la route right down to how much room and is doubtless associated with a fine should the gendarmes be watching.

[Cassis]

If the French obey the code de la route out of fear of being spotted breaking it by the lurking gendarmes, then presumably the code de la route says nothing about use of indicators, roundabouts, keeping your distance behind the car in front ....  etc!  [:)]

[thunderhorse]

[quote user="Cassis"]If the French obey the code de la route out of fear of being spotted breaking it by the lurking gendarmes, then presumably the code de la route says nothing about use of indicators, roundabouts, keeping your distance behind the car in front ....  etc!  [:)]

[/quote]

Right on! [:D]

[Richard-R]

It's very simple, if you kill a cyclist with your car it is concidered MURDER hence French driviers over-taking them on blind bends, into oncoming traffic. If they crash and kill another car driver, it is only reckless driving.

[Russell 23Russell]

Oh dear, oh dear, so the helmet debate has reached this forum now has it?  Some facts:

Pro riders are forced to wear helmets at all times.  There are no exceptions.

Helmets provide protection up to speeds of about 12mph.  About the speed you would reach from falling down.  They provide little or no protection from an accident involving a car at even modest speeds.  They have to be correctly worn and sized to do even this.

They are hot and uncomfortable to wear, especially in hot weather, even the most expensive - £130+ ones. 

Helmets do reduce injuries, but from reducing cycle use, not by providing protection, as bourne out in Australia.  There has been a significant reduction in cycle use there since compulsary helmets were introduced.

 

And as a footnote;

As for it being the drivers fault if a cyclist is injured (UK), do you remember the incident earlier this year involving members of the cycling club.  4 dead and the driver gets fined £180 for 3 defective tyres.

[Mayennaise]

Don't talk to me about cyclists!!!! Our village is holding its fete this weekend and today there are three cycle races taking place. We get marooned in our house as the varying routes go past us on all sides!! There is a limit to how many times you can look at lycra clad bottoms and hairless legs speeding past  without getting bored!!!! There is a very tight turn opposite which they seem to take at an alarming speed. I'm just waiting for one of them to take a tumble!!. and yes they are all wearing helmets!!

I did try to cross the road this morning but the marshall kept blowing his whistle and waving at me and I didn't know whether to go forward or backward so I gave up and scurried back indoors!!

 

[Cassis]

[quote user="Russell 23"]

Oh dear, oh dear, so the helmet debate has reached this forum now has it?  Some facts:

Pro riders are forced to wear helmets at all times.  There are no exceptions.

[/quote]

I think there is one exception, Russell.  I believe they are allowed to remove them in road races if the finish is a hillclimb of 5km or more, but not before the start of the ascent.

[Mark]

Russell, your point regarding helmets offering little or no protection at speeds above 12 MPH isn't a 'fact' as such, since it certainly isn't agreed upon by all independent contributors to the argument, or indeed by research commissioned and undertaken by bodies without a vested interest in claiming that the wearing of helmets is a waste of time.  Either side in the argument can always cite a trend 'defining' their argument as being correct, but none of it is black and white, of course. 

One specific example of the value of wearing a helmet, among many, was the medic who suggested that Abdou would have suffered far more gravely if he'd been without a helmet after hitting that gendarme on the Champs Elysée a few years ago (and he was doing rather more than 12MPH [;-)]) .  Conjecture, maybe....   

Also, as I'm sure you're aware, the argument is further skewed by the feeling that the wearing of helmets encourages greater recklessness, causing more accidents.  It'll run and run....!

I generally don't wear a helmet, but I almost certainly should. 

 

[Russell 23Russell]

[quote user="Cassis"][quote user="Russell 23"]

Oh dear, oh dear, so the helmet debate has reached this forum now has it?  Some facts:

Pro riders are forced to wear helmets at all times.  There are no exceptions.

[/quote]

I think there is one exception, Russell.  I believe they are allowed to remove them in road races if the finish is a hillclimb of 5km or more, but not before the start of the ascent.
[/quote]

 

That was last year, this year it is compulsary at all times.  No more free helmets at the bottom of the final climb of the day.

[Russell 23Russell]

[quote user="Mark"]

Russell, your point regarding helmets offering little or no protection at speeds above 12 MPH isn't a 'fact' as such,

[/quote]

 

OK, not a fact as such, but the design brief is to give that level of protection.

I wear one in certain circumstances and find their most benficial feature is the ability to attach a peak. [;-)]

[Cassis]

[quote user="Russell 23"][quote user="Cassis"]

I believe they are allowed to remove them (helmets) in road races if the finish is a hillclimb of 5km or more, but not before the start of the ascent.

[/quote]

 

That was last year, this year it is compulsary at all times.  No more free helmets at the bottom of the final climb of the day.

[/quote]

I know some cycle racing organisations and events have gone this step further but I didn't know the UCI had changed it to make helmets compulsory at all times during races.  They haven't bothered updating it on their website - they still have the hill climb rule. [8-)]

I guess it's not a big issue in the overall scheme of things.