Nuxx:564da1c7-32b0-44f0-8d4c-416dafe5f18f@l11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com

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!postnews.google.com!l11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <564da1c7-32b0-44f0-8d4c-416dafe5f18f@l11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Chapman's Friend :-) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 03:33:08 -0800 (PST) References:  <7uetl6l6rd2khlok9dklr3meoni8ukpoe3@4ax.com>  <3mmtl65jvj36780pcd41r8psk15m82a8qp@4ax.com>   Lines: 70 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1298115189 29554 127.0.0.1 (19 Feb 2011 11:33:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 11:33:09 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: l11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.80 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5.8; U; en) Presto/2.7.62 Version/11.01,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 4205 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:799590

On Feb 19, 11:11=A0am, Tom Crispin  wrote: > On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 09:08:53 -0000, "Mrcheerful" > > > > > >  wrote: > >Tom Crispin wrote: > >> On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:39:28 -0800 (PST), thirty-six > >>  wrote: > > >>> On Feb 18, 6:38 pm, Tom Crispin  wrote: > >>>> On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 12:55:56 -0800 (PST), Nuxx Bar > > >>>>  wrote: > >>>>> I wonder if Angie Lee is related to Phil Lee? > > >>>>>http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2087579_cracking_campaign_backs_c= y... > > >>>> [Snipety snip] > > >>>> I received the pack today. > > >>>> It is full of nothing more than scaremongering guff. > > >>>> Nothing at all about checking tyre pressure or brakes, completing > >>>> Bikeability, or making safe decisions when riding on the road. Just > >>>> a simple implication that to stay safe on a bike a helmet must be > >>>> worn. > > >>> Loooking behind before moving off? =A0Ensuring saddle and handlebars > >>> are correctly positioned and secure? > > >> Indeed. My list of items more crucial to safety than a helmet was by > >> no means comprehensive. I am sorry if I gave that impression. > > >why do you not write back to the producers and offer them a more sensibl= e > >list.? > > I intend to do exactly that. > > For young and inexperienced cyclists I believe there are clear safety > benefits in the use of a properly fitted bicycle helmet. But that > comes second as a safety benefit to simple checks: tyres at correct > pressure, two correctly functioning brakes, a correctly adjusted > saddle, shoe laces tied so they cannot get caught in the chain, etc. > > I know there are those who believe that overall cycle helmets have a > negative impact on cyclist safety

I'd be surprised if anyone truly believed something so barking. I think some see it as the best way of preventing compulsion (since it stops arguments such as "If helmets aren't harmful but they might improve matters then why not have compulsion just to be on the safe side?")

Safety isn't really the main concern for such people, it's more about minimising restrictions on cycling whenever possible, even if safety is compromised, since cyclists are morally superior and so should be exempt from being told what to do no matter what. And if lies have to be told to advance that "cause" then that's no problem either. The end, apparently, justifies the means.

Quite telling that none of them will admit to thinking that :-) It's generally the same people who want moderation in URCM to be by opinion and personality rather than content, though oddly enough, they don't admit to thinking that either.  Why so coy, I wonder?