il padrone wrote:ldrcycles wrote:Ok, this is something i see all the time and i just don't get it. My fiancee isn't interested in riding for various reasons, but she has never for a moment mentioned any kind of issue with wearing a helmet. They are available from Big W for $18 so cost and availability can hardly be an impediment.
Here we go again. The topic has been covered numerous times in this thread. Be aware - there was a significant drop-off in cycle use in 1990, about 30% for adults and in excess of 50% for teenagers. You may not see the helmet as a negative - you're an enthusiast, committed to your recreation/transport pursuit. It's all the average folk who don't ride that are put off by the need for a helmet (yes, amongst other things). Just take a look at some videos of European cities and see just who is riding.... and how.
As you can understand, reading through the whole 205 pages here is more than i have time for, so my apologies for not having read previous explanations. I have seen plenty of graphs etc showing the drop off in participation AT THE TIME MHL WAS INTRODUCED, but that was nearly a quarter of a century ago. There are a lot of people such as myself who have grown up knowing nothing else, it is just the way things are that if you are going to ride a bike you must have a helmet.
People don't ride because they are lazy, they consider it beneath them, because they are scared of cars, having to wear a helmet just doesn't enter into it.
I know if i was to ask the people i worked with why they don't commute by bike, the answer would be an almost universal "it's too far".