human909 wrote:high_tea wrote:il padrone wrote:I don't think anyone on here is arguing that the removal of MHLs is a 'magic bullet'....
Oh, some people are, I'm afraid.
Who?
high_tea wrote:Take the claim that "MHLs are killing utility cycling".
Which could quite well be true but it is not an equivalent statement to "the removal of MHLs will is a 'magic bullet' fix to utility cycling".
Well, it assumes some pretty dire consequences for utility cycling if they stay in place.
human909 wrote:
Simply put there is a host of changes necessary to improve cycling, one of the major ones is MHL. Moreover it was MHL that helped decimate cycling and brought us to wear we are now. However in the absence of other improvement simply dropping MHLs is unlikely to result in a miraculous explosion in utility cycling.
That's an important qualification, a reasonable one and one that is often not made.
human909 wrote:
high_tea wrote:What imposition? It's trivial. I wouldn't even dignify such complaints by calling them a first-world problem. It's no worse than mandatory seatbelt-wearing, for example. I accept that seatbelt efficacy is well-settled and helmet efficacy isn't, but the effect on basic rights is about the same.
The majority of people DON'T see it as trivial. Wearing a stupid foam hat is a big imposition. You might not see it like that because YOU are a cyclist. However the general public do see it as an imposition.
If it wasn't an imposition then why the need to make it mandatory? Why the debate in cycling in skiing and in rockclimbing? As a rock climber I would much rather go climbing bareheaded or with a sun hat. But due to my OWN choice I choose to climb with a helmet.
The Netherlands have seatbelt laws, right? I doubt that they are any more convenient there than there. In fact, if I may digress, they are for more inconvenient to me, and I suspect anyone else who has ever tried to get a toddler into a 5-point harness. I resist the urge to march against seatbelt laws because the impact on my freedom is, not to put too fine a point on it, trivial.
If the "majority of people" really think it's a non-trivial imposition on basic rights, they really need to think twice about cloaking themselves in Liberty's flag every time they
clear their throat. Pardon my saying so. They can say it's mildly inconvenient, I won't cavil with that.
At the risk of digressing, I don't see a helmet as a big drama because I wear a hat most (outdoor) places and one hat is much like another. It's got nothing to do with being a cyclist. Ironically, it's easier for me to find a big, stupid foam hat that fits than, say, a big stupid straw hat or a big stupid cap of any kind. Indeed the hats that fit are really big and, if I'm not careful, really stupid.
(Disclaimer: by "stupid" I mean, "likely to make me look like a farmer or something, which is stupid since I'm a computer programmer from the suburbs". Farmers looking like farmers is fine. Computer programmers looking like farmers is stupid.)