Conference noted::bicycle

RE: <<< Note 2995.0 by NODEX::CLBMUD::mcgreal "Pat McGreal 297-2285" >>>

I'd say that no, they should not be REQUIRED. There are too many rules and
regulations in contemporariy society already (at least in the States).

Personally, I always wear a helmet and would encourage others to do the same. 
						-- Tom

I think the answer to this question should fall in the same light as the answer
to 'Should there be a seat belt law?'  I hate having the govt. infringe on my
rights, but I also should not have to pay higher insurance premiums because I
wear my seatbelt and John Q. Citizen does not.  I wish I could get a clause that
says my policy is voided if I don't wear my seat belt, in return for a break on
the premium.  I can't understand why people don't wear helmets.  I always wear
mine.  When I vote 'yes' to 'should there be a seatbelt law?', I'm voting for
lower premiums in my auto insurance.

I do not think there should be a helmet rule in the TdF.  I do not think there
should be a helmet law (except for children) in the states either.  

My .02
Tim

    For races in those countries that don't require helmets (Italy,
    France), just award more race prize money for winners of stages
    that wear helmets vs. winners that don't.  Riders can still
    ride helmetless if they choose, comfortable in the knowledge
    that they won't win squat.  

    .-1  good incentive, but I would hope that incidents like Fabio's
    death themselves would open other cyclists' eyes to the incentive
    that's already there.
    
    I think I'll start pointing out Fabio's lack of a helmet to people I
    know who don't wear them.
    
    Tim

    i don't think riders should be made to wear them. i'm with Tom, i
    always wear one and support the wearing of them.
    
    in the states, it's not a question of more gov't, but having an injured
    party or their survivors sue the crap out of the USCF or the organizer
    for not mandating them. i don't know if the Euro's are as sue-happy 
    as the cretons we have here, so i don't know what the UCI's risks are.
    
    on a scale (and i don't have the stats), the TdF has probably
    experienced the least fatalities and DNF injuries than most races.
    
    btw, the incentive in -2 wouldn't last through one stage race in
    Europe. the riders would protest and win or a lot of money would get
    flushed down the toilet. you cannot make the comparison of behavior,
    culture, and response between the U.S. and Europe. 
    
    Chip

    
    As Chip brought it up, I think main reason Helmets are required in most
    if not all races here, is solely due to law suits and insurance 
    requirements that organizers have to deal with. If such things existed
    to the extreme that it is in this country, then European races would
    require them too, to save their butt and wallet not out of concern 
    for particapants safety. 
    
    Shaw

id be interested to see stats on who is suing uscf/promoters/... re: race crash
i have crashed a couple times in races, and would not sue the org i support
especially since every time -so far- the crash has been rider induced
while course conditions may have exacerbatd injuries,
the crash was not the courses fault

this leaves my hypothosis:
   its the survivors and lawyers who induce the suits, not the riders

wonder if there is any evidence to support or reject it?

--roger

btw, a helmet saved my butt, err head, last year when i broke my collar bone
-r

    i think you may haved missed my point... you have to wear helmets in
    the states at races regardless of whether it's a licensed race or
    not. you also have to submit a release form whether it's a licensed
    race or not. 
    
    this goes far in preventing lawsuits in the U.S....
    
    i have never heard of a lawsuit against an organizer or the USCF for
    injuries, but i wouldn't doubt here have been some.
    
    Chip

	I agree with the thread through this note that helmets are
	a good idea. I also encourage everyone that I know who rides
	and doesn't wear one to wear one0. Though I'm not a zealot about 
	it. I also don't wish to see an over abundance of regulation.
	Though some rules are so obviously common sensical (seat belts) 
	that the regulation doesn't bother me.

	The U.S. does have way to much frivolous litigation. The root of
	this (IMHO) is that too many people take responsibility
	for their actions until they get hurt. Then they go looking
	for someone to blame to make themselves feel less guilty for
	not having been cautious enough.
	Ski areas in the U.S. are the classic example. In Europe 
	if you ski off a cliff it's you responsibility. I'd bet suing
	the ski area is mostly unheard of there.

	Being involved in inherantly risky activities means taking 
	serious responsibility for your own actions.

	I'm curious why people like Indurin and the like don't wear
	one. Is it a traditional thing, a macho thing or what?
	Good helmets are so well made today that weight, ventilation,
	and comfort just aren't issues anymore.
	I guess they aren't interested in setting a good example for
	other cyclists. Unless they feel that not wearing a helmet
	*is* a good example.

	Pat

They still complain that it is too hot.  They could clearly make sponsorship
money for wearing a brand-X helmet.

I have *no* problem with USCF-sponsored races having helmet clauses.  You don't
like it?  Tough cookies, don't race.  If I'm sponsoring some public event, I'll
make the rules, thank you very much.  If I don't want to allow people without
helmets, or people who are riding Tim's Custom Bikes then it should be my
perogative.  If the TdF wants to require helmets, great.  Wear one or don't race.

My problem is that there is WAY WAY WAY too much legislation, WAY WAY WAY too
many lawyers and WAY WAY WAY too many politicians in this country.  The founding
fathers never indended for there to be professional or career politicians. 
They'd roll over in their graves if they knew what goes on.

Tim

    even folks like Indurain (32 now i believe) are still way old for
    having decent helmets when he first started. consequently, he grew
    up in the sport not wearing one. a lot of the "old timers" wear the
    hair nets which is pretty much like wearing nothing.
    
    btw Tim, while i agree with your position philosophically, the attitude
    probably wouldn't draw much of a crowd... :-)
    
    Chip

Indurain turned 31 on July 16.  (during stage 14, Guzet Neige)

    -1 thanks...

Before I read this note, I wrote a reply in 2609.10 - I think we are all 
agreed on the surfeit of legislation (and just who gains by litigation!).

It is a personal choice and a personal responsibility, and in my opinion, it 
should be left that way.

    
    I think it should be left a personal choice with the following
    provisions for those who choose not to wear one:
    
    	1. If you happen to suffer a head injury that would likely have 
    	   been prevented by a helmet, all your insurance is null and 
    	   void. 
    
        2. Insurance companies should make HIGH premium risk insurance
    	   available. You can pay a premium for insurance to offset the
    	   results of having normal insurance cancelled by the previous 
    	   provision. 
    
    Even though the system sucks, it's still the system. As my car
    insurance rates climb (even though I haven't made a claim in YEARS)
    because of other bad drivers... as my health insurance claims rise
    (even though I exercise it rarely) due to smokers and other needless
    risk takers... I feel the burning need to see those make dumb choices
    TRUELY accept responsibility for their choices. 
    
    Until the system is fixed, I have a hard time fighting for the personal
    rights of those who are needlessly costing me.
    
    
    								- Mac