Yet more victim blaming & helmet effectiveness assumptions

For all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmet usage will be moved here.
Post Reply
User avatar
squeaker
Posts: 4114
Joined: 12 Jan 2007, 11:43pm
Location: Sussex

Yet more victim blaming & helmet effectiveness assumptions

Post by squeaker »

"42"
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Yet more victim blaming & helmet effectiveness assumptions

Post by kwackers »


Excessive speed wasn't a issue - do you think he was exceeding the 12mph rating of a bicycle helmet?
Mattyfez
Posts: 354
Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 7:24pm

Re: Yet more victim blaming & helmet effectiveness assumptions

Post by Mattyfez »

kwackers wrote: do you think he was exceeding the 12mph rating of a bicycle helmet?


Witness - "She told the inquest she saw the schoolgirl being thrown over the car by the impact."

Quite possibly...
rualexander
Posts: 2645
Joined: 2 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Contact:

Re: Yet more victim blaming & helmet effectiveness assumptions

Post by rualexander »

Saw this in the TV listings for 24 Hours in A&E

Screenshot_20171026-211911-01.jpeg


So they wouldn't have bothered sending him for a CT scan if he had been wearing a helmet?
User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10801
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Yet more victim blaming & helmet effectiveness assumptions

Post by Cunobelin »

I knew those helmets were good, but not that good!

The cyclist has spinal, abdominal and chest injuries, yet the reason for the CT is "not wearing a helmet"

I wonder just hw the helmet would have saved him from the other injuries

Then of course, there were the epileptic and the elderly man , both suffered exactly the type of head injury that a helmet could have prevented

Typical selection of helmet hypocrisy
Post Reply