It seems while reducing bicycle fatalities, the laws also significantly reduce bicycle use. It’s not clear to what extent kids may be shifting to other risky (or riskier) activities like skateboarding, and to what extent they may simply be becoming more sedentary as a consequence.
4 Comments
Sounds like a few studies done over the years on skiiers; while use of helmets among skiiers (among other safety improvements at ski areas like groomed trails, fencing, padding on ski-lift supports and trees, etc.) increased, so strangely did the number of fatalities! (I do not remember if the studies indicated any increase in the number of injuries, I must point out).
Given the hyper-safety-conscious era we’re living in, I’m surprised that parents still let their children ride bicycles at all. Apart from the risk of fatal accidents, there are all the less serious but much more common spills and falls that leave the kids with cuts, scrapes, and bruises. In a more realistic age, these were just a normal part of growing up but today it’s surprising that parents still are willing to accept it.
Which leads me to thinking that maybe there’s another angle on this story. Maybe the reason helmet laws lead to a reduction in cycling isn’t the monetary cost of the helmet, and isn’t the fact that helmets are seen as uncool by the kids. Maybe it’s actually because helmet laws makes parents see cycling as being more dangerous, and it’s the parents who are discouraging their kids from bicycling.
Blame the parents. I do a lot of bike miles, well over 1,000 per season (yes, the hard core riders will disagree with 1k being a lot). The neighborhood kids always see me in full costume as I want to be visible to cars. My helmet has been there on every ride since 1974. What I see most often is that when mom and dad ride w/ the child, especially on the bike path, ONLY the child has a helmet. Kids learn by example. I have enough scar tissue from road rash that wearing a helmet is just part of riding. For those who complain that helmets are hot I am reminded of the motorcycle line, “If it’s too hot to wear leathers, then it’s too hot to ride.”
Years ago when the new generation of helmets (post “hair net” helmets) came out and people started pushing legislation to mandate helmets, the League of American Wheelmen (LAW), a bicycle safety and bicycle advocacy group did a survey on the effects of helmet laws.
To their astonishment, deaths and serious injuries in states that had mandatory helmet laws for kids had actually risen.
The theory was that kids were not wearing the helmets correctly and that many just had the helmets unstrapped and sitting on their heads. No one had bothered to write a law that said the helmets must be worn correctly with the chin straps buckled. The other rational was that a false sense of security was given to kids that wore helmets and so they were doing more dangerous stunts on a bike.
This lunacy did not get past the federal government either. Congress wrote a law that said you had to wear a bike helmet on all military bases. (Not just kids – everyone.) The only problem was that they specified that the helmet had to be certified to a standard that was outdated. The law required that the helmet be affixed with a certification that was no longer being issued. In essence, a person could not buy a helmet that complied with the law, or they had to find a second hand helmet that was not as safe as the newer ANSI standard helmets.