survey - what would you do

Quoted message said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear one
in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle less? I'm
assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling full stop.

Being a student I might just not wear one. The consequences
would involve a fine that I wouldn't pay, then possibly free
accommodation and meals. I've only a couple of years left
tho so fortunately won't get the chance.

I would also campaign vehemently for the law to be extended
to pedestrians, particularly in the home, and for MPs in the
House of Commons.

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

Quoted message said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear one
in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle less? I'm
assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling full stop.

Use my Giro E2 more often, cussing in the summer when it
is really too hot to be wearing it while halfway up
Cheddar gorge.

Pete White

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

Quoted message said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear one
in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle less? I'm
assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling full stop.

Shouldn't really answer as I always wear one (yes!!, even
when walking, doing DIY or about the house!!! - no, not
*REALLY*!!)...but.... I'd wear one, after all, don't want
to be breaking the law, like those naughty cagers who
believe it's alright to break the law ' jus'a lil' bit ',
right kids ;-) Dave.

Sam said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

I'd go back to wearing one normally, like I did for years.
It's not *that* much of a pain compared to not riding.

I would be a total PITA for the DfT though, and fight to get
the law repealed (unless flying pigs heralded it actually
being a Good Thing, but not much danger of word eating on
this one, methinks).

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext.
33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177
Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email hidden]
dundee.ac.uk~pjclinchOpen ↗

Sam said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear one
in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle less? I'm
assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling full stop.

Change religion?

thamesvalley.police.ukdefault.aspOpen ↗
n=Q&ID=190

Sam said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear one
in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle less? I'm
assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling full stop.

I'd probably wear one for longer journeys but I'd walk more
to the local shops and the Brommie in the hall would
probably get less use. I'd also continually curse BHiT and
Annetts and campaign strongly for helmets for car drivers.

I know that one of my daughters has said she will stop
cycling if she has to wear one.

John B

Vincent Wilcox said:

Sam said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally wear
one)? Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just
wear one in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle
less? I'm assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling
full stop.

Change religion?

thamesvalley.police.ukdefault.aspOpen ↗
Q&ID=190

Have you ever been to a Sikh wedding? You'd have to get
used to knocking back a fair bit of whisky and getting
into a fight.

Colin
--

Sam said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear one
in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle less? I'm
assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling full stop.

Ride less when it's hot, stop riding TTs because the chin
strap stops me breathing properly (I'm asthmatic and any
pressure on my throat is a Bad Thing). Shopping on the bike
would be pretty much out - what do you do with the thing
when you've parked up?

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

Quoted message said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear one
in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle less? I'm
assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling full stop.

Act as if nothing has changed, they've got to catch you
first. Can you imagine how ridiculous it would be being
chased by a copper in any vehicle? I suppose we'll be lumped
with number plates next! I mean the cops can't even manage
an arrest of some pilfering toss pot, that's just swiped a
TV under their very nose. They'd all need to be a lot fitter
and cut out those pies. They really don't want to alienate
cyclists, they are about the only supporters of their stupid
victimise the motorists scam.

--
Mike W

Doki said:

Sam said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear one
in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle less? I'm
assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling full stop.

I wouldn't wear one, or if I thought i was actually in
danger of ever seeing a bobby, I'd get one of my wooly
hats and stick some plastic to the outside, then put it on
whenever I saw a bobby...

The problem is that if you ever had an accident you'd
probably get NO compensation if you weren't wearing a
h*****. All the CTC's good work so far would be wasted if it
was obviously the law of the land.

Zog The Undeniable said:

Sam said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear
one in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle
less? I'm assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling
full stop.

Ride less when it's hot, stop riding TTs because the chin
strap stops me breathing properly (I'm asthmatic and any
pressure on my throat is a Bad Thing). Shopping on the
bike would be pretty much out - what do you do with the
thing when you've parked up?

Stick the chain / cable through the straps.

--
Michael MacClancy Random putdown - "A modest little person,
with much to be modest about."- Winston Churchill
www.macclancy.demon.co.uk www.macclancy.co.uk

Colin Blackburn said:

Quoted message said:

Change religion?

thamesvalley.police.ukdefault.aspOpen ↗
=Q&ID=190

Have you ever been to a Sikh wedding? You'd have to get
used to knocking back a fair bit of whisky and getting
into a fight.

Colin
--

Ive lived in Cricklewood.

The ceromonial sword could come in handy for slashing car
tyres as an additional bonus to wearing no helmet though.
Maybe not such a crazy idea after all.

Zog The Undeniable said:

Doki said:

Sam said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear
one in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle
less? I'm assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling
full stop.

I wouldn't wear one, or if I thought i was actually in
danger of ever seeing a bobby, I'd get one of my wooly
hats and stick some plastic to the outside, then put it
on whenever I saw a bobby...

The problem is that if you ever had an accident you'd
probably get NO compensation if you weren't wearing a
h*****. All the CTC's good work so far would be wasted if
it was obviously the law of the land.

TBH I'd be very tempted to drive to a MTB trail 10 or so
miles away with the bike in the boot, then ride around
there with no helmet, and drive back, rather than my
current ride to the local woods, around the woods for a bit
and then home.

Sam said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear one
in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle less? I'm
assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling full stop.

Wear a helmet and keep my hair short during the summer
months.

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

Quoted message said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear one
in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle less? I'm
assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling full stop.

I'd carry on not wearing one - the police have better things
to do than to chase a non helmet wearing cyclist.

--
Akin

aknak at aksoto dot idps dot co dot uk

Sam said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Fight to get the law changed? Accept defeat? Just wear one
in areas you think you might get caught? Cycle less? I'm
assuming nobody on this ng would stop cycling full stop.

None of those. Not wear a helmet, and risk appearing in
court from time to time.

** Phil.

On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 17:33:53 +0100, "Sky Fly" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I'd carry on not wearing one - the police have better
things to do than to chase a non helmet wearing cyclist.

hmm I wonder .... that would probably be generally the case,
but I wonder if in some areas, the Martlew Bill (if enacted)
would act as a 'stop and search' tool for the police to use
on young men on bicycles in a public place.

A
--
audmacd-aaatt-hhhhooottt-mmmaailll-dddoottt-cccommm

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

Quoted message said:

if helmets became mandatory (and you don't normally
wear one)?

Oh and I thought from the topic title you were going to ask
something interesting, like this moral dilema (nothing to do
with cycling):

What would you do in the following situation, honestly? This
test only has one question, but it's a very important one.

Please don't answer it without giving it some serious
thought. By giving an honest answer you will be able to test
where you stand morally. The test features an unlikely,
completely fictional situation, where you will have to make
a decision one way or the other. Remember that your answer
needs to be honest, yet spontaneous. Please scroll down
slowly and consider each line - this is important for the
test to work accurately.

You're in Florida...In Miami, to be exact. There is great
chaos going on around you, caused by a hurricane and severe
floods. There are huge masses of water all over you. You are
a CNN photographer and you are in the middle of this great
disaster. The situation is nearly hopeless. You're trying to
shoot very impressive photos. There are houses and people
floating around you, disappearing into the water. Nature is
showing all its destructive power and is ripping everything
away with it.

Suddenly you see a man in the water, he is fighting for his
life, trying not to be taken away by the masses of water and
mud. You move closer. Somehow the man looks familiar.
Suddenly you know who it is - it's George W. Bush! At the
same time you notice that the raging waters are about to
take him away, forever. You have two options. You can save
him or you can take the best photo of your life. So you can
save the life of George W. Bush, or you can shoot a Pulitzer
prize winning photo, a unique photo displaying the death of
one of the world's most powerful men.

And here's the question (please give an honest answer):

Would you select color film, or rather go with the
simplicity of classic black and white?

😉

Rich

Richard Goodman wrote:

[snip]

Quoted message said:

And here's the question (please give an honest answer):

Would you select color film, or rather go with the
simplicity of classic black and white?

Have to be B&W : after all, President Bush sees everything
that way (America : good; much of rest of world : bad), so
you could hardly do him justice by shewing the readers of
Time-Life that there is, in fact, a continuum. Of course,
you'd have to process the film pretty carefully, otherwise
nasty shades of grey could creep in which might sow
unpleasant seeds of doubt into said readers' minds ...

** Phil