Helmet law ANGER!

Well, after yet another heated discussion about the need or lack of need for mandatory helmet laws, I figured it would be a good idea to put my views on virtual paper once and for all. This has been a cause for ranting for years, and my wife is sick of hearing about it, so in the future instead of venting to the next poor soul who mentions it, I'll refer them here and try and move on.

Firstly, I'm not against wearing helmets, I just don't believe you should be forced to wear one. Telling old ladies cycling 500m to the shops at 10km/h they have to now wear a helmet will most likely result in them not cycling anymore. But if you are cycling along a busy road in rush hour, it's probably a good idea to stick one on.

I did stumble upon this article from Australia's ABC news which quoted one Professor Chris Rissel who sums up perfectly what I'm trying to argue:

Associate Professor Chris Rissel, from Sydney University's School of Public Health, says the greatest drop in head injuries was in the 80s - before the laws were introduced - because of road safety campaigns and speed controls. 

He says the number of head injuries has remained steady since then, creating a case to overturn the helmet law.

"What it does is it puts people off cycling and makes people think that cycling's a dangerous activity, even though it's a really healthy thing to do and it increases people's physical activity," he said.

"And you're seeing things like in the Melbourne bike hire scheme - it's not working as well as it has in the rest of the world because people don't walk around with a helmet just in case.

"You've got helmets creating a barrier to cycling, particularly spontaneous, short-trip cycling.

"People who ride short trips down to the shops, or ride in parks or just going along quiet streets. Their risks are very, very low."

Essentially - education not legislation. That's it. Finito.