Comments on: Are bills regulating fireworks there to protect stupid people from themselves?

By: Tamar

Tamar — Sun, 27 Jan 2013 17:03:24 +0000

And speaking of unsafe fire practices.. does anyone know which states implement regulations for use of pyrotechnics indoors? In reading today’s news on the horrific fire in a nightclub in Brazil, I naively thought this type of thing couldn’t have happened here in the US- sadly it did in Rhode Island.

By: Navigator

Navigator — Fri, 04 May 2012 23:51:12 +0000

Yes, you can try to protect morons from themselves. But is that a reason to deprive the rest of us from having fun? Punks just don’t do it. And sparklers just don’t do it. So, just how far can you go to protect idiots?

By: Texas Ty

Texas Ty — Fri, 04 May 2012 12:35:17 +0000

Iam a DEMOCRATE and thats one thing our Gov in TEXAS did right…. He needs to make a bill for casinos and expand the hours and days open on the liquor stoers………..lol

By: dean

dean — Thu, 03 May 2012 11:59:40 +0000

“For pushbikes, the benefit is still fairly nonexistent for road cycling.”
“Also, a bicycle helmet is meant to protect your head when it accelerates six feet to the ground and then suddenly stops.”
Except it doesn’t.
It’s not nearly strong enough and your head is least likely to be the bits hitting ground first.”
Wow, on this subject you clearly have no clue what you are talking about. Are there instances where a helmet will not help? Yes, just as there are instances where air bags are of no help. But the data that show helmets have minimized, and in some cases prevented, head injuries are well known. There is a good reason cyclists who ride without helmets are referred to as “organ donors”.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 02 May 2012 19:58:04 +0000

http://goo.gl/B3RB4

By: GregH

GregH — Wed, 02 May 2012 16:25:02 +0000

Yes, and motorcycles can’t have mufflers, because other vehicles won’t know they’re there.

Boy, I sure wish there was some actual *science* that could tell us if helmets are effective at reducing mortality and morbidity due to vehicle accidents.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 02 May 2012 15:30:42 +0000

OK, so I reposted the “he should have been wearing a helmet” post.

By: Uncle Glenny

Uncle Glenny — Wed, 02 May 2012 14:23:08 +0000

Wow –

I got diverted into some road construction (bicycling) and wiped out sideways really badly, hitting the top of a jersey barrier with my temple. The helmet was trash but it did its work. (Greg: Mass Ave, porter sq)

Another time I got cut off by a van, and was thrown backwards (all those spinning tires and metal) like a high veloocity pro wrestling body slam to the pavement. Another helmet gone; that wrecked up my back but my head was fine. (A few months physical therapy for that that sequed into weight training that I commuted to by bike.)

Yes bike helmets don’t really protect the neck but their bulk makes up for that in collisions with non-protuding surfaces like pavement and car hoods.

I think these were both Bell racing helmets.

By: Wow

Wow — Wed, 02 May 2012 11:45:07 +0000

PS I recall there is enough energy in a four foot fall to break your neck.

Bike helmets don’t protect the neck.

By: Wow

Wow — Wed, 02 May 2012 11:36:47 +0000

“I might have agreed with you few years ago.”

All generalisations are false to some degree.

Except that one above, there.

But the number of accidents that were NOT saved by bicycle helmets vastly outnumber the accidents saved by helmets, which are nearly as many as accidents caused by wearing them (either by bad design or false sense of security).

And the fraction of people put off cycling multiplied by the expected benefits of cycling on health EASILY tip it the other way.

By all means, wear a helment.

Especially for children, get them to wear one (if only because YOU will be mortified if they even graze their head in a fall and as the adult it IS your fault).

But don’t make them compulsory.

And make sure that people know they are of limited use in an accident.