Nuxx:4e2c5450$0$2499$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.stack.nl!feeds.news.ox.ac.uk!news.ox.ac.uk!zen.net.uk!hamilton.zen.co.uk!prichard.zen.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <4e2c5450$0$2499$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: ROSPA against helmet compulsion. Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 18:20:16 +0100 References: <8465126f-a9e5-4e93-b9db-b36071facec9@ei5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>  Lines: 19 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To:  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Zen Internet NNTP-Posting-Host: 8d6c514b.news.zen.co.uk X-Trace: DXC=gSIbD_:f5]=>Kh6>W^jal80g@SS;SF6n7R9OH0:RnEN4XWM\AiRCGG0`:ITG5aA:c7l_cA_F On 23/07/2011 18:32, Simon Mason wrote: >> Our policy is that people should wear a helmet if they are taking >> part in an activity which could lead to a bump on the head > > I'm having some trouble thinking of any activity not covered by this, > including sitting on the sofa.

How come you wear a helmet yourself then?

I think you believe they improve safety, but you're still against compulsion because you're automatically against all restrictions on cyclists, even ones that you know will improve safety.

You think that dishonestly downplaying the effectiveness of helmets will mean they're less likely to become compulsory. So you say to everyone "You don't need to wear a helmet", despite wearing one yourself: you're happy to compromise other people's safety for "the cause", but your own is more important, isn't it?