Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

bikebiz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 797 posts

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#401

Post by supertrope »

School-Cotton wrote: post #325
prepend wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren’t the at fault vehicular manslaughter laws in the US the same for drivers who hit cars, cyclists, and pedestrians? If you kill a cyclist in the US and you’re at fault, that’s likely jail time (same for hitting a car or pedestrian). What’s missing in US laws vs Netherlands?

It’s not a matter of what’s actually written in the laws but of police/prosecutorial discretion. Whatever laws are on the books are virtually never actually enforced against motorists, because motorism (and disdain/resentment against cyclists) is deeply embedded in the culture. The default reaction of the median American (or at least, the median law enforcer) to any accident involving a motorist and a cyclist, regard…

The last time I did jury duty the judge and staff made sure everyone knew how to use the free parking. A jury of motorists isn't going to judge a fellow motorist harshly.

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#403

Post by anamexis »

aoeusnth1 wrote: post #345
practice9 wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless Pedal Me provide open-source data on which they based this decision, I don't believe it is based on safety. It's seems like marketing and cost-cutting issue for them. Customer: "Driver is wearing a helmet, and nobody provided helmets for us.. Are we in danger?" Pedal Me: "Say no more.. " Plus it seems they only bought caps & jackets for their drivers previously, no safety gear. Drivers are replaceable, aren't…

Why is a 5 meter long motorized bike with an enclosed cabin street legal?

2 bicycles with a little house in the middle??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzReEcDjmlY

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#404

Post by supertrope »

mslate wrote: post #366
Mountain_Skies wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a good thought experiment but assumes that everyone has the same ability to assess risk, which isn't true. Not only does the ability to correctly assess risk vary greatly between individuals, it varies greatly over the lifetime of an individual and sometimes even over the course of a day for the same individual.

So the takeaway here is that some people should not be issued drivers licenses.

Well now we go down a rabbit hole of a complex social problem. People don't drive just to joyride. They so because many areas are zoned into car dependency. When faced with no legal way to drive:

(1) Keep driving anyway without a license or with a suspended license.

(2) Use public transit that takes two or three hours one way. When the bus is late again one day they get fired possibly setting off a downward spiral and that's another person on public assistance.

(3) Vote for politicians who allow ridiculous policies like Arizona's lifetime driver licenses.

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#405

Post by staindk »

kqr wrote: post #322
ntoskrnl wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We're sorry your husband got a concussion, but at least his passenger felt safe!" This isn't the 70s. Just give everyone helmets. Passengers included. And yes you should clean them. If you're running a business I'm sure you can afford some little bottles of alcohol spray.

But if it's about safety, why don't actual car taxi cab companies provide helmets for their passengers? It's easier to get a serious head injury in a car than on a bicycle.

Cars have padded headrests, safety belts and airbags... I don't think helmets would help much inside cars?

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#406

Post by bluejekyll »

DangitBobby wrote: post #382
bluejekyll wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the article is very short, this was still easy to miss, “… and those driving around them take greater risks too.” So it does in fact mention that both people driving around those wearing helmets as well as the cyclists themselves take greater risks. The argument is that in the GP’s anecdote that the cyclist (and perhaps even the truck driver) would have taken less risky actions preceding the crash, thus avoidin…

> … and those driving around them take greater risks too Really? Data shows that a driver will subconsciously take stock of the fact that a cyclist is wearing a helmet and adjust their risk assessments accordingly? I find that incredibly difficult to believe.

This seems to be a good article on this: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/mar/21/bike-he...

“ In 2006 he attached a computer and an electronic distance gauge to his bike and recorded data from 2,500 drivers who overtook him on the roads. Half the time he wore a bike helmet and half the time he was bare-headed. The results showed motorists tended to pass him more closely when he had the helmet on, coming an average of 8.5 cm nearer.”

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#407

Post by 41b696ef1113 »

Swizec wrote: post #312
anonymousab wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but data shows that more accidents and injuries occur with helmets than without. This demands proof, citation, and of course, controlling for how many cyclists in an area wear helmets vs. not.

Same statistic for motorcycles. You are more likely to be injured in a crash if you wear a helmet. Because otherwise you go in the dead column.

Similar story for helmets during WW1. Prior to metal helmets, soldiers wore cloth caps. After the soldiers started wearing helmets, the number of head injuries climbed rapidly. The alternative, of course is that the soldier would otherwise have been dead.

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#408

Post by holoduke »

It's interesting that in the country where you have most bikes, the Netherlands, nobody is wearing helmets. Probably because it has the safest bike road network in the world. but still. Couple of deadly incidents every year occur because of no helmet. Something similar you see in France with skiing. While in Austria everybody is wearing a helmet in France is less than half of the skiers. Something cultural i guess.

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#409

Post by cush »

alexggordon wrote: post #344

Note, these are not normal bikes. From the article: > A major cause of head injuries is going over the handlebars, which is not possible with a 3 metre long bike. Another thing that makes us unique is our training systems, maintenance systems, and ability to track poor rider behaviour. Made me curious what they actually look like[0]. Seeing that, I’d tend to reset my presumptions about wearing helmets with these. The…

It's irrelevant how much data and training they have. Accidents happen and an accident with a car and no helmet is a bad time.

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#410

Post by [deleted] »

kqr wrote: post #322
ntoskrnl wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We're sorry your husband got a concussion, but at least his passenger felt safe!" This isn't the 70s. Just give everyone helmets. Passengers included. And yes you should clean them. If you're running a business I'm sure you can afford some little bottles of alcohol spray.

But if it's about safety, why don't actual car taxi cab companies provide helmets for their passengers? It's easier to get a serious head injury in a car than on a bicycle.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN