Well, enough said.

I find a correlation in wearing helmets at skate parks. People there do not wear a helmet to be safe, they wear one so that they can take more risk.

Another way to put it might be to call these ‘risk enablers’. When Gov’t does it, we can call it a ‘safety net’

For all the “it’s for the children” sophistry in the legislature, they seem to forget that a bunch of ten-year-old kids are going to be reluctant to don helmets in the 90+ degree summers of the Gulf Coast. One would expect, based on the legislative argument, that our hospitals would be overfull of scofflaw kids with head injuries from such reckless behavior, but such is not the case.

Just as well legislate against climbing trees without harness, ascenders, pitons and a belaying line…

“the law is an ass…”

MC

helmet laws have lots of unanticipated consequences. while helmets almost certainly reduce the number of cycling fatalities, the result on overall injuries, perversely is to cause them to increase. the same is true of air bags in cars. fatalities drop, but accidents increase.

the economics of this is straightforward if looked at from the correct angle:

risk is a commodity. people have a certain tolerance/preference for it. if we do something to reduce the risk of an activity (add an air bag) this reduced the price of risk. lower price yield increased demand, so we drive more or drive more quickly/aggressively.

one of my econ professors in college had done a bunch of work on this “airbags cause crashes” phenomenon. his advice was that if you wanted to slow drivers down, replace the air bag with a spear point. now see if anyone will go over 20 mph…

bike helmets have the same risk issues as airbags. you will not reduce injury by requiring helmets.

to reduce injury, you need to change risk preferences, not risk pricing. that can only be done through education be it either the “let’s talk about this son” version or the always memorable pavlovian “ow, that hurt” version.

as deaths are cheap and medical care for serious injuries is not, a government seeking to minimize health care costs ought to ban helmets, not mandate them.

i wonder if any of them even comprehend this.

there really ought to be a basic economic literacy test to hold public office. (or at the very least a testing requirement with scores published) “no politician left behind” has a nice ring to it…

Scientific American even reported that “Helmets attract cars to cyclists”
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=strange-but-true-helmets-attract-cars-to-cyclists

Parents need to take some responsability and pay attention to what their kis are doing. Don’t expect the government to make up for your lack of interest in your childs well being.