Helmet letter

burtthebike said:

I've just been called by someone who spotted my letter in yesterday's
(Saturday) Times, but I can't find it on their website. If someone could
copy me the page or email a link, I'd be eternally* grateful.

Front page, search "Richard Burton"...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article2696277.ece

R

--
I think [cycling] has done more to emancipate women than anything else
in the world. [...] I stand and rejoice every time I see a woman ride by
on a wheel... the picture of free, untrammeled womanhood.
-- Susan B. Anthony

Roger Burton West said:

burtthebike said:

I've just been called by someone who spotted my letter in yesterday's
(Saturday) Times, but I can't find it on their website. If someone could
copy me the page or email a link, I'd be eternally* grateful.

Front page, search "Richard Burton"...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article2696277.ece

R

Roger, is that what you wrote in its entirety, or have they edited it?

burtthebike said:

I've just been called by someone who spotted my letter in yesterday's
(Saturday) Times, but I can't find it on their website. If someone
could copy me the page or email a link, I'd be eternally* grateful.

* or until Wednesay, whichever is the sooner.

Richard Burton

Interested to see a Have Your Say comment:
"In some US states the use of cycle helmets has been rightly outlawed
because the incidence of accident and injury increased when they are used."
First time I've heard this, and a quick Google doesn't find anything.
Sounds a bit odd in fact. Can anyone provide confirmation, or otherwise?

Jon McD

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

burtthebike said:

I've just been called by someone who spotted my letter in yesterday's
(Saturday) Times, but I can't find it on their website. If someone could
copy me the page or email a link, I'd be eternally* grateful.

Front page, search "Richard Burton"...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article2696277.ece

Good letter. One of the Have Your Says says "In some US states the use
of cycle helmets has been rightly outlawed because the incidence of
accident and injury increased when they are used." Does anyone know
anything about this?

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell

"Roger Burton West" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

burtthebike said:

I've just been called by someone who spotted my letter in yesterday's
(Saturday) Times, but I can't find it on their website. If someone could
copy me the page or email a link, I'd be eternally* grateful.

Front page, search "Richard Burton"...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article2696277.ece

R

Many thanks Roger.

"Roger Burton West" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

burtthebike said:

I've just been called by someone who spotted my letter in yesterday's
(Saturday) Times, but I can't find it on their website. If someone could
copy me the page or email a link, I'd be eternally* grateful.

Front page, search "Richard Burton"...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article2696277.ece

Only four comments so far? come on chaps!

"_" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Roger Burton West said:

burtthebike said:

I've just been called by someone who spotted my letter in yesterday's
(Saturday) Times, but I can't find it on their website. If someone could
copy me the page or email a link, I'd be eternally* grateful.

Front page, search "Richard Burton"...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article2696277.ece

R

Roger, is that what you wrote in its entirety, or have they edited it?

Just realised that you probably meant "Richard" not "Roger" and you're
probably wondering why no-one has replied.

Not quite all that I wrote: I did question whether a body in receipt of
public funding should be allowed to lobby Parliament to change the law, and
there were a couple of other minor changes, not affecting the sense.

I did aim for a letter short enough, which still made enough points to
interest the editor, and I'm reasonably happy with how it turned out. It's
always worth bearing in mind that newspapers have limited space and
therefore making your letter as short as possible, while still getting your
the main points in, is more likely to get it published.

BTW, I think the lady who quotes that laws in the US prohibit cycle helmets
may well be an ABD supporter and a spoiler, put in so that other
correspondents will be able to show how ridiculous and misinformed the
anti-compulsionists are.

Response to Tony Raven:

Quoted message said:

Good letter. One of the Have Your Says says "In some US states the use
of cycle helmets has been rightly outlawed because the incidence of
accident and injury increased when they are used." Does anyone know
anything about this?

A good letter indeed.

That particular "Have Your Say" also contains this -

"Banning cycle helmets saves lives! Enforcing their use would be a
culling mechanism as powerful as the presence of speed cameras outside
schools would do - they force drivers to take their attention off the
road ahead and watch the dashboard."

and sounds suspiciously like somebody is taking the [censored], very possibly
at the present Lib-Dem candidate for Guildford:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sue_Doughty

--
Mark, UK
"Whatever people in general do not understand, they are always prepared
to dislike."

Jon McD said:

burtthebike said:

I've just been called by someone who spotted my letter in yesterday's
(Saturday) Times, but I can't find it on their website. If someone
could copy me the page or email a link, I'd be eternally* grateful.

* or until Wednesay, whichever is the sooner.

Richard Burton

Interested to see a Have Your Say comment:
"In some US states the use of cycle helmets has been rightly outlawed
because the incidence of accident and injury increased when they are used."
First time I've heard this, and a quick Google doesn't find anything.
Sounds a bit odd in fact. Can anyone provide confirmation, or otherwise?

A quick gander at http://www.helmets.org/mandator.htm doesn't reveal any
such prohibition (to my jaundiced eyes, at any rate). It's hard to
prove a negative.

On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 22:24:41 +0100, burtthebike wrote
(in article <[email hidden]>😉:

Quoted message said:

[...]
Only four comments so far? come on chaps!

Done mine.

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 22:24:41 +0100, burtthebike wrote
(in article <[email hidden]>😉:

Quoted message said:

[...]
Only four comments so far? come on chaps!

Done mine.

Those ABD/Crapspeed muppets have a history of this- spamming
newsgroups and comment pages.

Response to Roger Burton West:

Quoted message said:

burtthebike said:

I've just been called by someone who spotted my letter in yesterday's
(Saturday) Times, but I can't find it on their website. If someone could
copy me the page or email a link, I'd be eternally* grateful.

Front page, search "Richard Burton"...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article2696277.ece

R

And a predictable enough letter in response <sigh>:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article2707954.ece

"Sir, While cycling with a helmet would undoubtedly contribute to road
safety (=3FCommon sense is a casualty of road statistics=3F, letter, Oct
20), what would help even more is if cyclists actually abided by other,
more fundamental rules, such as not completely ignoring red lights."

--
Mark, UK
"They've eliminated the middleman. The corporations don't have to lobby
the government anymore: they *are* the government."

Mark McNeill said:

Response to Roger Burton West:

Quoted message said:

burtthebike said:

I've just been called by someone who spotted my letter in yesterday's
(Saturday) Times, but I can't find it on their website. If someone could
copy me the page or email a link, I'd be eternally* grateful.

Quoted message said:

Front page, search "Richard Burton"...

Quoted message said:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article2696277.ece

Quoted message said:

R

And a predictable enough letter in response <sigh>:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article2707954.ece

"Sir, While cycling with a helmet would undoubtedly contribute to road
safety (=3FCommon sense is a casualty of road statistics=3F, letter, Oct
20), what would help even more is if cyclists actually abided by other,
more fundamental rules, such as not completely ignoring red lights."

--
Mark, UK
"They've eliminated the middleman. The corporations don't have to lobby
the government anymore: they *are* the government."

Boring twaddle.

Loved the OP in Where Eagles Dare, by the way.

Mark McNeill said:

That particular "Have Your Say" also contains this -

"Banning cycle helmets saves lives! Enforcing their use would be a
culling mechanism as powerful as the presence of speed cameras outside
schools would do - they force drivers to take their attention off the
road ahead and watch the dashboard."

and sounds suspiciously like somebody is taking the [censored], very possibly
at the present Lib-Dem candidate for Guildford:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sue_Doughty

To some of us both theories sound like similar usenet sophistry.
Rogher Thorpe

Response to Roger Thorpe:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That particular "Have Your Say" also contains this -

"Banning cycle helmets saves lives! Enforcing their use would be a
culling mechanism as powerful as the presence of speed cameras outside
schools would do - they force drivers to take their attention off the
road ahead and watch the dashboard."

and sounds suspiciously like somebody is taking the [censored], very possibly
at the present Lib-Dem candidate for Guildford:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sue_Doughty

To some of us both theories sound like similar usenet sophistry.
Rogher Thorpe

Which? Nobody that I know of has seriously advocated banning cycle
helmets; and a good thing too IMO. On the other hand, enforcing their
use *has* been seriously proposed, and it has been enacted elsewhere; it
has never made cyclists any safer.

As to speed cameras outside schools, I haven't looked at the evidence.
Parallels have been drawn before about the speed camera argument and the
cycle helmet argument; and the argument above - which I was amusing
myself at here just a few days ago - sounds very much like rubbish, but
with the sort of persuasive only-common-sense feel of the helmet-
advocate's "hit someone with a two-by-four" gedankenexperiment. ;-)
But as ever, evidence trumps sophistry and anecdote; and if anyone
*does* have evidence, I'll gladly listen.

--
Mark, UK
"The shepherd always tries to persuade the sheep that their interests
and his own are the same."

yesterday in parliament
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-10-22a.159870.h&s=highway+code#g159870.r0

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:06:43 +0100 someone who may be Dan Gregory
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

yesterday in parliament
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-10-22a.159870.h&s=highway+code#g159870.r0

Excellent. Another indication that everyone who wears a helmet is
voting for compulsion. Whether they know or accept this or not is
irrelevant, the Department for Motorists counts them as voting for
compulsion.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On Oct 23, 2:54 pm, David Hansen <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:06:43 +0100 someone who may be Dan Gregory
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

yesterday in parliament
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-10-22a.159870.h&s=highwa...

Excellent. Another indication that everyone who wears a helmet is
voting for compulsion. Whether they know or accept this or not is
irrelevant, the Department for Motorists counts them as voting for
compulsion.

So, the only reason for specifying a highway would be the fear of
accidents involving motor vehicles. And this is something which
helmets are explicitly not designed to deal with.

...d

On Oct 23, 2:54 pm, David Hansen <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:06:43 +0100 someone who may be Dan Gregory
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

yesterday in parliament
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-10-22a.159870.h&s=highwa...

Excellent. Another indication that everyone who wears a helmet is
voting for compulsion. Whether they know or accept this or not is
irrelevant, the Department for Motorists counts them as voting for
compulsion.

So, the only reason for specifying a highway would be the fear of
accidents involving motor vehicles. And this is something which
helmets are explicitly not designed to deal with.

...d