A no brainer
I watched the news last night.
I watch it at six most nights, just to see my Sharon, but that’s beside the point.
There was an item on about some crowd who are worried about brain injuries caused by falling off bicycles. That’s fair enough – I would be worried if I suffered a brain injury from falling off a bicycle.
Now, I’m sure these people are genuine and sincere, but they really pissed me off.
They are calling on the government to make the wearing of cycle helmets compulsory.
What the fuck is it about modern society, that any time anyone is injured, the cause has to be the subject of legislation?
I don’t cycle these days, due to a combination of laziness age and living in a very hilly area, but if I did, it is unlikely I would wear a helmet. I hate those idiotic looking bunches of plastic bananas, and anyway I like to feel the wind in my hair. I am a reasonably mature adult, so my attitude is that if I did fall off and crack my head, then that is my fault. I just would make sure I didn’t fall off. I know there are dangers associated with cycling, just as there are dangers associated with just about anything, so I take the appropriate care.
What I do not need is some fucker coming along and demanding a law to protect me against my own mistakes.
A spokeswoman said on the news that it was a “no brainer” that the law should be introduced.
She was spot on there.
A society that need to be carefully wrapped in nice soft legislation in case it hurts itself is a no brain society.
I got very annoyed at that news item.
I got perilously close to a heart attack.
They should introduce a law banning items about people wanting to introduce laws.
Perhaps they should just bring in a law banning the news?
1) Too many fucking people on the planet already
2) How is natural selection going to work effectively if we keep interfering with it like this.
I do wear a helmet, because I take the odd risk. But I’d like someone to design one based on the German WW2 army helmet. Or maybe the WW1 version with a spike out the top of it?
Robert – They should bring in a law banning these fucking Nanny State laws.
Thrifty – Spot on. I’ll see you on the other side?
Do you think all such laws should not exist? What about gun control laws? Seat belts?
TT – I am against all laws that are there to protect us from ourselves. Gun laws are presumably there to protect others? As for seat belt laws – surely if I want to do a header through my own windscreen then that is my business? What right has any government to legislate as to the amount of risk I impose on myself?
AMEN.
LOL at Thrifty!
When they introduced helmet laws for motorcycles somewhere I lived a long time ago (can’t remember where, now) the excuse was the high cost of health care for people permanently disabled by head injuries, and disability payments, all of which fell on the state; therefore the state claimed it had a right to legislate for helmets.
Well ok, but by that logic, anyone using municipal water and septic systems could one day be subjected to legislation dictating how often, how much, and what time they poop. I’d be happier if our government spent less money on ministers’ spa treatments, and more money on roads: wouldn’t it be nice if cyclists were in cycle lanes, instead of sharing narrow potholy mountain roads with trucks and cars, so not getting hit in the first place?
But then the whole bicycle thing really gets me going. I hate hate hate them.
Thrifty, agree with both points – /especially/ the second.
Grandad – agreed for the front seats, but if I crash while sitting in the front seat, I don’t want to fly into the windscreen and survive only to have my back-seat passengers then crack my skull open with theirs.
Why would anybody “hate” bicycles ?
I’m confused by the hating bicycles bit too, and I am assuming I have misunderstood.
‘Won’t somebody think of the children?’
‘Why? Is there a shortage?’
Cyclists are there to be despised. It’s their only function.
Let’s look at the reasons –
1. They are a smug load of bastards [“Look how Green we are” *vomit*]
2. They ignore every rule of the road, and then whinge when they are rightfully mowed down.
3. They wear those hideous Lycra outfits that are just asking to be hit.
4. They cost the country a fortune with their unused cycle-lanes, that take up precious road space from the king of the road – The Car.
Poor Old Grandad. Clearly deprived of a bike as a child. When all the other kids had one.
TT – You must be joking. A round trip of around seven miles a day to school and a hell of a lot more besides. What’s more, I had a real bike – a good solid model with three Sturmey Archer gears. None of your modern 50 gears, drop-handlesbars shite.
3 gears? 3 gears??? what i wouldn’t /give/ for 3 gears.
I cycle to work every day on a BMX. (absolute truth)
It would be nice if I could drive, but since the stupid goddamned theory test is both retarded and expensive, I don’t think I’ll be doing that any time soon.
thank $deity for whoever came up with the monaghan bypass, or I’d be cycling up and down drumlins every day. as it is, i only get exhausted while climbing the cathedral hill after I’ve had a few pints. the ride down the other side helps to clear out the head enough to pretend I’m at least not drunk.
‘Tis all very well for Grandad in his mountain fastness, breathing in God’s fresh air, saying he despises cyclists, but what about those of us who live near the city centre? A reduction in motor traffic would improve air quality, reduce stress and have a less harmful effect on children’s physical development, if studies are to be believed. Cars are a wasteful and inefficient means of delivering people to work. Most of them have only one occupant when they could be carrying another three or four. As a motorist and a cyclist, I say a bike is more efficient, creates less pollution and gets you to your job on time. A bike represents FREEDOM – no licence, tax, or insurance required. Cycling is one of the last activities to have escaped the attention of the taxman and the bureaucrat. I say: No compulsory helmetting!
Seamus – The simple answer is that cities are an exception. Everything should be banned from city centres – cars, buses, lorries and [why not?] people. That way there will be no pollution, traffic chaos or health issues. We agree about the helmetting, but my arthritis disagrees with you about the freedom. 😉
I’m not smug about green-ness, I’m smug that I am cycling past the stationary cunts in cars. I ran a red in front of the cops the other day, score. Oh, and I’m there on the freedom aspect
@thrift – agreed there!
Yesterday, the boss beeped his horn loudly as he smoothly sailed straight passed me in his car. A few minutes later I rapped on his window and waved as I passed him at a busy junction.
Never bothered with that red/green crap myself. I don’t have a drivers license, so they can’t revoke it for me breaking the lights. Besides – you can always get off your bike and walk it through the lights like a pedestrian.
I seem to remember Mr Bean doing that with his three-wheeler…
There ought to be a law against it……
Helmets are compulsory here . . .works well in stopping head injuries but won’t protect you from bouncing off the bonnet of an oncoming vehicle!
AnFearBui – Don’t worry. There soon will be.
Baino – I thought you were a tough lot down in Oz? Don’t tell me the Dundee image is all wrapped up cozily in [Marino] wool?
Herself uses the Dublin Bikes a lot to get around the various bits of her parish and bought a cycle helmet in September. I don’t understand their design. I wear a helmet for skiiing (falling over is a much more frequent occurrence than falling off a bike) and don’t understand why the bike helmets are not much more like the skiers’ helmets.
Ian – Whoever designed those things obviously had an obsession with Alien, or something. They are hideous. And why can’t people buy normal helmets – there must be plenty lying around after the last war, as Thrifty implied? A case of recycling on your cycle?