Stupid is and stupid does

It definitely seems that America is activity devolving I to something less intelligent.


:expressionless: no words

MAG recently updated their website and lost almost all of the content. But even last year the old version of the site was still saying that they opposed compulsory helmet laws here and wanted them repealed.

Just to be the devil’s advocate here. Even though it’s a stupid decision to ride your bike without a helmet, in the US it probably is more of a personal choice.

Since medical care is privatised, there is limited impact on resources so it then does become more of a personal choice. As in, you are not costing the taxpayer thousands for your treatment and rehabilitation. You are costing your insurer. I do.wonder if insurers in the US will catch on and add clauses to say you are only covered if wearing suitable helmet

Whilst I know the risks and would never own bike without a lid, there still have been times in Greece I’ve jumped onto a friend’s scooter to get a lift home (usually small distances with very low speeds).

the other day l popped to shops on my bike in converses. that felt SO WRONG. cannot imagine going with no helmet tbh


When you get on the back of a dirt bike without footpegs for pillions with no lid, wearing swim shorts, flip flops and no t-shirt you know you’ve reached peak teenage stupidity.

Ah those were good years. One could wonder how we made it out alive

PS I wasn’t totally without safety gear.i wore shades to protect my eyes from sun damage :joy:

1 Like

But what of the onlookers traumatized by seeing someone’s head splattered on a curb (sic), or their insurance companies who will have to pay for the therapy.

What if the rider is medically uninsured and at fault? In many places in the U.S. ambulances are contracted, so the private provider will always be paid. But if you cannot afford the bill that cost is coming from a local government budget.

And the more serious an injury, the longer it can take to address leaving the road closed for longer. This has implications to a lot more people, including direct policing costs and indirect economic costs. The estimated costs of road accidents are in the many billions, it is not just the emergency healthcare.

Even as utterly stupid as their healthcare system is, there are more costs than just the medical treatment of an injured rider and their insurance companies.

To be honest, the main difference in the results of having an accident without wearing a helmet to one with is a far higher chance of the rider dying. So I suspect the medical insurers are happier with a crash that results in death of their client at the scene rather than them having to pay out for surgery and potentially ongoing treatment for years afterwards.

MAG was created in response to the introduction of compulsory helmets in the UK as a movement to oppose it and a lot of it’s members would still support it’s repeal, even if most of them wouldn’t ride without a lid.

Both valid points

@Michael I’m not convinced on therapy. Shit happens on the roads and we have to deal with it. But you are right claims for this might be an issue. Closures and other resources is a valid point although the uplift in ambulances just for helmet/ head injuries is not going to be huge.

@Pat valid point

In fairness, there’s a significant proportion of the population here that would use a very similar argument for the banning of motorcycles completely, helmets or not.

1 Like

My point was not to make an argument for helmets, but against the devil’s advocate position that the only victim when not wearing one is the rider and their insurer. Not wearing them in an accident can have impacts on others far beyond just the cost of publicly funded healthcare.

Plus, if you say the costs to the N.H.S. are the reason to require helmets then there are a lot of activities which can be similarly argued against.

It’s not the activities, but the manner in which they’re conducted. A bit like skiers going off piste.

In any case, I suspect the economics behind this are irrelevant. Most of these decisions tend to be based on politics and who has the biggest lobbying wallet rather than economic impact and health analyses

1 Like

Don’t forget the exemption in law for followers of the Sikh religion. They can ride in the UK wearing their turban.

Hi @Gavin.WDS, welcome to LB :slight_smile:

Yes, I’ve heard this but must admit, I’ve never seen a Sikh on a bike, or at least not sans helmet. Has anyone?

I have!


You got to admit. This does look cool!

Although I accept it is probably better in a warmer climate than a soggy, wet London morning :smile:

1 Like

Once. But I don’t know how they can ride at any speed. Even with my glasses on and cycling if I get to 30mph then my eyes start watering, I would hate to try it at 70mph.