Evaluation of New Zealand’s bicycle helmet law (2012)
1–10 of 50 posts
Re: Evaluation of New Zealand’s bicycle helmet law (2012)
#2For those with too little time, the basic premise is that helmet laws appear to suppress cycling significantly, increase the risk of cycling and cause premature deaths through lack of exercise
TL;DR "The following trends were observed following the introduction of New Zealand’s helmet law:
Cycling usage reduced by 51%. Cyclist’s injury risk per hour increased by 20–32%. Estimated to have contributed to 53 premature deaths per year (due to reluctance to cycle and hence people not exercising). Thousands of fines are issued annually for not wearing a helmet. May contribute to discrimination in accident compensation and the legal processes. Could have contributed to environmental pollution and environmental harm (due to use of vehicles in place of cycles). Possibly diminishes civil liberties and human rights (by imposing a requirement to wear a helmet when several reports raise serious doubts whether they improve safety overall)."
Re: Evaluation of New Zealand’s bicycle helmet law (2012)
#3For those with too little time, the basic premise is that helmet laws appear to suppress cycling significantly, increase the risk of cycling and cause premature deaths through lack of exercise TL;DR "The following trends were observed following the introduction of New Zealand’s helmet law: Cycling usage reduced by 51%. Cyclist’s injury risk per hour increased by 20–32%. Estimated to have contributed to 53 premature d…
I believe this kind of trend has been known for a while and was a main reason for not introducing helment laws in Germany.
Re: Evaluation of New Zealand’s bicycle helmet law (2012)
#4For those with too little time, the basic premise is that helmet laws appear to suppress cycling significantly, increase the risk of cycling and cause premature deaths through lack of exercise TL;DR "The following trends were observed following the introduction of New Zealand’s helmet law: Cycling usage reduced by 51%. Cyclist’s injury risk per hour increased by 20–32%. Estimated to have contributed to 53 premature d…
No, helmets aren't killing cyclists, car drivers are.
In the 1980's the New Zealand government removed tariffs on imported cars leading to a massive growth in car ownership.
More cars leads to more driving and less cycling. Then, with more cars on the road, cycling becomes more dangerous.
This trend just happened to coincide with the change in helmet law.
Re: Evaluation of New Zealand’s bicycle helmet law (2012)
#5Any chance to repeal this law?
Re: Evaluation of New Zealand’s bicycle helmet law (2012)
#6For those with too little time, the basic premise is that helmet laws appear to suppress cycling significantly, increase the risk of cycling and cause premature deaths through lack of exercise TL;DR "The following trends were observed following the introduction of New Zealand’s helmet law: Cycling usage reduced by 51%. Cyclist’s injury risk per hour increased by 20–32%. Estimated to have contributed to 53 premature d…
No, helmets aren't killing cyclists, car drivers are. In the 1980's the New Zealand government removed tariffs on imported cars leading to a massive growth in car ownership. More cars leads to more driving and less cycling. Then, with more cars on the road, cycling becomes more dangerous. This trend just happened to coincide with the change in helmet law.
Not sure your argument stands up to the 0-17 age group having a 75% reduction in cycling.
Re: Evaluation of New Zealand’s bicycle helmet law (2012)
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, helmets aren't killing cyclists, car drivers are. In the 1980's the New Zealand government removed tariffs on imported cars leading to a massive growth in car ownership. More cars leads to more driving and less cycling. Then, with more cars on the road, cycling becomes more dangerous. This trend just happened to coincide with the change in helmet law.
Not sure your argument stands up to the 0-17 age group having a 75% reduction in cycling.
Yes, their parents drive them about until they're 15 when they get their first car.
Re: Evaluation of New Zealand’s bicycle helmet law (2012)
#8My bicycle helment saved my life. You'll never convince me they're a bad idea.
Re: Evaluation of New Zealand’s bicycle helmet law (2012)
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, helmets aren't killing cyclists, car drivers are. In the 1980's the New Zealand government removed tariffs on imported cars leading to a massive growth in car ownership. More cars leads to more driving and less cycling. Then, with more cars on the road, cycling becomes more dangerous. This trend just happened to coincide with the change in helmet law.
Not sure your argument stands up to the 0-17 age group having a 75% reduction in cycling.
Fewer children are cycling and walking to school. More children are being dropped off at school by car.
More cars and less cyclists ultimately results in less safe conditions for cyclists.
Re: Evaluation of New Zealand’s bicycle helmet law (2012)
#10My bicycle helment saved my life. You'll never convince me they're a bad idea.
I don't think the argument is if bicycle helmets are good or bad, but rather bicycle helmet laws. You can be for wearing a helmet at all times and still against bicycle helmet laws. Much the same way you can be for the legalization of drugs but not be a drug user yourself.