sshhhhh!

David Martin said:

http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php

I read as far as:
"Everyone is invited to ride, so long as they have a helmet".

JimP

--
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to
grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after
all. - DNA

David Martin said:

http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php

With the UK represented by.....Yeovil and Aberdeen!

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

Jim Price said:

David Martin said:

http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php

I read as far as:
"Everyone is invited to ride, so long as they have a helmet".

Does it say they have to wear it? I have one. It is at home on the
shelf.

...d

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I read as far as:
"Everyone is invited to ride, so long as they have a helmet".

Does it say they have to wear it? I have one. It is at home on the
shelf.

Being a bloke, you're always carrying one with you. Go on the ride and
wave it at anyone that questions this.

Response to Jim Price:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php

I read as far as:
"Everyone is invited to ride, so long as they have a helmet".

It's worth pointing out that the organiser's based in Dallas, where
there's a full MHL. I can understand him telling people to wear a
helmet in order not to break the law; but I think it's pretty stupid to
extend this instruction to more sensible places.

--
Mark, UK
"I've noticed that the press tends to be quite accurate, except when
they're writing on a subject I know something about."

Jim Price said:

David Martin said:

http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php

I read as far as:
"Everyone is invited to ride, so long as they have a helmet".

mind you the ride is to be paced within the design limits of helmuts.
The website rather reductively refers to cycling as a sport (which I
believe it can be for some people)

best wishes
james

Jim Price said:

David Martin said:

http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php

I read as far as:
"Everyone is invited to ride, so long as they have a helmet".

JimP

You obviously missed the clue in the previous paragraph

"This ride will be open to anyone that has access to a bike and a
helmet" and read more than you needed to!

julesh

David Martin said:

Jim Price said:

David Martin said:

http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php

I read as far as:
"Everyone is invited to ride, so long as they have a helmet".

Does it say they have to wear it? I have one. It is at home on the
shelf.

Not explicitly, but prior to that he says "This ride will be open to
anyone that has access to a bike and a helmet." without specifying in
that sentence whether you should ride the bike or leave it at home on
the shelf. I'm just guessing that he means you must bring both and use
them for their intended purposes when he goes one to say "Everyone is
invited to ride". Then he goes on to re-enforce the helmet stance by
insisting you have one while not insisting on having a bike.

Let me put it this way, it is absolutely not the sort of event I would
want to turn up to only to have an argument about helmet wearing,
despite myself being right with the rest of the sentiment.

JimP

--
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to
grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after
all. - DNA

Mark McNeill said:

Response to Jim Price:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php

I read as far as:
"Everyone is invited to ride, so long as they have a helmet".

It's worth pointing out that the organiser's based in Dallas, where
there's a full MHL. I can understand him telling people to wear a
helmet in order not to break the law; but I think it's pretty stupid to
extend this instruction to more sensible places.

That is a fair point, and the Texas MHL something I was not previously
aware of. Given that some of the other places are US states, you would
have thought that even a leftpondian might have been sensitive to that,
but then he might be thinking of lawsuits.

JimP

--
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to
grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after
all. - DNA

Julesh said:

Jim Price said:

David Martin said:

http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php

I read as far as:
"Everyone is invited to ride, so long as they have a helmet".

JimP

You obviously missed the clue in the previous paragraph

"This ride will be open to anyone that has access to a bike and a
helmet" and read more than you needed to!

As I explained elsewhere in the thread, it wasn't until he went on to
place more emphasis on having a helmet than a bike when I stopped reading.

JimP

--
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to
grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after
all. - DNA

Response to Jim Price:

Quoted message said:

Given that some of the other places are US states, you would
have thought that even a leftpondian might have been sensitive to that,
but then he might be thinking of lawsuits.

I wrote to the guy, and he wrote back: yes, he fears liability issues if
ride organisers don't tell participants to wear a helmet. He also
believes that helmets are intrinsically A Good Thing; but in this
context he was not inclined to argue the point, and neither was I.

--
Mark, UK
"I like also the men who study the Great Pyramid, with a view to
deciphering its mystical lore. Many great books have been written on
this subject, some of which have been presented to me by their authors.
It is a singular fact that the Great Pyramid always predicts the history
of the world accurately up to the date of publication of the book in
question, but after that date it becomes less reliable."

Mark McNeill said:

I wrote to the guy, and he wrote back: yes, he fears liability issues if
ride organisers don't tell participants to wear a helmet. He also
believes that helmets are intrinsically A Good Thing; but in this
context he was not inclined to argue the point, and neither was I.

I have been surprised in that past at just how much faith the
Leftpondians put in helmets and how aggressive they are about having
their beliefs shaken. Even normally sane people like John Allen base
their beliefs on personal "HSML" anecdotes and dismiss the research
evidence because it conflicts with their anecdotes.

Still, it shouldn't be a surprise from the land that champions
Intelligent Design.

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I read as far as:
"Everyone is invited to ride, so long as they have a helmet".

Does it say they have to wear it? I have one. It is at home on the
shelf.

Being a bloke, you're always carrying one with you. Go on the ride and
wave it at anyone that questions this.

Anyone who questions I'm a bloke is very likely to get something waved
at them. It's very unlikely to be my helmet, though 🙂

JimP

--
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to
grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after
all. - DNA

Jim Price said:

David Martin said:

Jim Price said:

David Martin wrote:
> http://www.rideofsilence.org/main.php
I read as far as:
"Everyone is invited to ride, so long as they have a helmet".

Does it say they have to wear it? I have one. It is at home on the
shelf.

Not explicitly, but prior to that he says "This ride will be open to
anyone that has access to a bike and a helmet." without specifying in
that sentence whether you should ride the bike or leave it at home on
the shelf. I'm just guessing that he means you must bring both and use
them for their intended purposes when he goes one to say "Everyone is
invited to ride". Then he goes on to re-enforce the helmet stance by
insisting you have one while not insisting on having a bike.

Let me put it this way, it is absolutely not the sort of event I would
want to turn up to only to have an argument about helmet wearing,
despite myself being right with the rest of the sentiment.

Perhaps I was being trollish, but I emailed the organiser and asked
why she was excluding a great many Europeans from the ride. This is
her response. I really don't care to get involved with a reply.

=====

Hi Tom,

Thank you for contacting us. We are not aiming to
exclude European cyclists by enforcing the helmet
issue. Here in North America, where cycling isn't as
supported as in Europe, we frequently have bike vs
auto collisions. Studies have shown that wearing a
helmet lessens the chance of permanent brain injuries.

We also wear helmets here in North America to
encourage children to wear helmets. Since a child's
head is the heaviest body part, it is usually the body
part that is hit during an accident. Wearing a helmet
is the best way to prevent brain damage during a fall.

As a pediatric nurse, with 11 years experience, I have
seen first hand how devestating a brain injury can
effect a family.

That being said, I understand that most Europeans do
not wear helmets. My family in The Netherlands do not
wear helmets, and they don't really understand why we
in North America do. But The Netherlands and most
European countries respect cyclist on the road. Here
in North America, we are not so lucky. I do not know
a single person who has not been harassed by a
motorist while riding their bike.

Also, it is a liability issue for us. The US is very
much into suing people for anything. If we did not
state that helmets are required, and a person showed
up to ride without a helmet and was injured, they
could try to sue us for not protecting them by telling
them to wear a helmet. It seems very stupid that
someone could sue for this, but if it hadn't already
happened in the past, then we wouldn't be enforcing
this rule, and asking groups to have insurance.

We have to put this requirement on the website to
protect ourselves. That being said, we can't enforce
all location of the Ride Of Silence to obey all the
rules. But with it on our website, someone can not
come back and try to sue us.

I hope this helps. We do encourage you to participate
in the Ride of Silence.

Sincerely,
Judith Jolly, RN, BSN
www.rideofsilence.org

Response to Tony Raven:

Quoted message said:

Even normally sane people like John Allen base
their beliefs on personal "HSML" anecdotes and dismiss the research
evidence because it conflicts with their anecdotes.

He came across as sincere and thoughtful, though not to the extent of
being right, IMO.

Quoted message said:

Still, it shouldn't be a surprise from the land that champions
Intelligent Design.

What, the idea that something is too complex to have evolved naturally,
so it must be explained by something more complex? What on earth could
be dumb about that?

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512

--
Mark, UK
"On the issue of evolution, the verdict is still out on how God created
the Earth."

Tom Crispin said:

On Wed, 03 May 2006 14:32:44 +0100, Jim Price

Quoted message said:

Let me put it this way, it is absolutely not the sort of event I would
want to turn up to only to have an argument about helmet wearing,
despite myself being right with the rest of the sentiment.

Perhaps I was being trollish, but I emailed the organiser and asked
why she was excluding a great many Europeans from the ride. This is
her response. I really don't care to get involved with a reply.

<snip reply>

Well I guess that lowers my inclination to go for a cycling holiday in
the US.

JimP

--
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to
grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after
all. - DNA

Jim Price said:

Well I guess that lowers my inclination to go for a cycling holiday in
the US.

I'm just thinking of taking my Bike Friday with me to San Diego next
week as I have a weekend off over there, but the extra bulk of having to
pack a helmet for their mandatory helmet law in California is giving me
second thoughts.

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

Tony Raven said:

Jim Price said:

Well I guess that lowers my inclination to go for a cycling holiday in
the US.

I'm just thinking of taking my Bike Friday with me to San Diego next
week as I have a weekend off over there, but the extra bulk of having to
pack a helmet for their mandatory helmet law in California is giving me
second thoughts.

Take the Brompton. If stopped, fold it an tell them its a skateboard
(you have the rack, yes?). Now someone's going to tell me there's a MHL
for skateboards...

Failing that, the US patent department has a solution for everything.
There's one on this page for a folding bicycle helmet!
http://www.helmets.org/patents.htm

JimP

--
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to
grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after
all. - DNA

Jim Price said:

Take the Brompton. If stopped, fold it an tell them its a skateboard
(you have the rack, yes?). Now someone's going to tell me there's a MHL
for skateboards...

Yes they do but re-reading it its only for under 18's so I'm safe.

Section 21212 of the Vehicle Code

(a) A person under 18 years of age shall not operate a bicycle, a
nonmotorized scooter, or a skateboard, nor shall they wear in-line or
roller skates, nor ride upon a bicycle, a nonmotorized scooter, or a
skateboard as a passenger, upon a street, bikeway, as defined in Section
890.4 of the Streets and Highways Code, or any other public bicycle
path or trail unless that person is wearing a properly fitted and fastened
bicycle helmet that meets the standards of either the American Society
for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or the United States Consumer
Product Safety Commission (CPSC), or standards subsequently
established by those entities. This requirement also applies to a person
who rides upon a bicycle while in a restraining seat that is attached to
the bicycle or in a trailer towed by the bicycle.

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham