Colin said:Hi all.
Just one of my infrequent de-lurks (I tend not to post unless I have
something I think worth saying), but I wondered if I could get the
group's opinions on how I should tackle what I believe to be unfair
competition rules.A local village has an annual charity cycle ride I enter, and this year
there is to be a free prize draw for participants (I don't know what the
prize is yet, but last year it was a bike from the LBS, so I wouldn't
mind entering). However, to be eligible to enter you must wear a h*lm*t
for the whole ride. Since following the various "debates" on this group,
I haven't worn one for over a year, and it seems a touch unfair to
exclude people like me (I won't be the only one there un-lidded) from
the competition, especially when the un-lidded will doubtless contribute
as much to the charities and the event as the lidded. To this end, I
shall be writing to the organizing commitee expressing my concern, but
I've been writing and rewriting draft letters for the last hour and a
half and I'm getting nowhere. I can't decide on what the main thrust of
the letter should be, so I thought I seek opinions here.Should it be along the lines of "I think your competition is unfair as
it excludes people based on their lifestyle choices" (or similar), or
should it be along the lines of "your competition is not only unfair in
penalising people who don't believe the hype, but in promoting h*lm*t
use, you are propagating misinformation detrimental to the individual
and to cycling as a whole"?I don't want to be antagonistic, as from experience this simply gets
peoples backs up to the point where rational dialogue doesn't exist, and
I suspect quoting chapter, verse, statistics and sources in the initial
letter will quickly get me dismissed as a zealot, so I'm in a quandary
as to how to approach it. Anything I do say I want to be able to back up
with hard facts, as the head of the committee is a local GP, (and
incidentally my own GP), so all thanks to cyclehelmets.org and Guy for
lots of material there.What makes it more interesting is I don't know if the ruling is from the
cycle ride committee or whether it has been imposed on them by the
suppliers of the prize.Thanks if you've read this far - by the length of the post it's probably
a good thing I don't post that often 🙂
For your information, this is the type of leter I write to events
organisers: (NB: NZ has an all-encompassing mandatory h*lm*t law, but
that fact is irrelevant to this discussion):
Dear sirs/mesdames,
Thank you for the invitation to take part in the the Big Coast bicycling event
on the weekend of 12-13 February.
I remember in the 1980's taking part in similar events, both here and
overseas, and they are reall great for camaraderie and seeing a lot of
scenery. Of course, in those days no-one wore extremely uncomfortable or
ineffective headgear!
I notice as part of the conditions of entry that
"Safety is paramount - helmets must be worn by all riders; including when
riding at the campsite"
First, there is no proven connection between wearing helmets and bicycling
safety. Safety has everything to do with riding carefully, within the road
rules, and having a bicycle in good condition with good brakes etc! It is
doubly ironic when you put this helmet requirement at the top of your list,
when most researchers would put it at the bottom if anywhere at all!
Second, the requirement to wear a hot uncomfortable piece of headwear ruins
any enjoyment I might get from this event. So I am NOT entering and I will
NOT be taking part.
I realise that, as organisers, you are free to make your own rules, however
I would like to point out the effect of this rule in blocking any chance of
me taking part. I would also like to point out that, scientifically, the
wearing of bicycle helmets has not been conclusively proved to do anything
useful at all.
Sometimes they reply, sometimes not.
Peter
--
If you are careful enough in life, nothing bad -- or
good -- will ever happen to you.