Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A Helmet

This sub-forum all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmets will be moved here, if not placed here correctly in the first place.
Psamathe
Posts: 11129
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A Helmet

Postby Psamathe » 4 Mar 2015, 8:26pm

Report of C4 News this evening about dangers of cycling. And part way through (presenting what cyclists do wrong) presenter said "When cyclists routinely flout traffic rules ... not wearing a helmet ...".

And Jon Snow (not the presenter of that bit) then had a studio discussion. But Jon Snow is (or was) President of the CTC and last I heard CTC was very anti-regulations making wearing a helmet compulsory. So Jon Snow does not understand CTC policy (he was after-all involved in the cycling dangers bit).

And telling everybody about the regulation requiring wearing a helmet now makes motor vehicle drivers see all these naught cyclists without helmets "flaunting the regulations" and causing their own dangers ...

Ian

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby beardy » 4 Mar 2015, 9:27pm

I think that all of the parts of the highway code are called rules.
One of those rules says that we should wear lids. (rule 59)
Those saying that we are flouting that rule seem to be correct to me.

In order for helmets to be compulsory they would have to be made so by the law not the highway code.
So while it may give a wrong impression they are not falling foul of CTC's anti-compulsion either.

Psamathe
Posts: 11129
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby Psamathe » 4 Mar 2015, 10:12pm

beardy wrote:I think that all of the parts of the highway code are called rules.
One of those rules says that we should wear lids. (rule 59)
Those saying that we are flouting that rule seem to be correct to me.

In order for helmets to be compulsory they would have to be made so by the law not the highway code.
So while it may give a wrong impression they are not falling foul of CTC's anti-compulsion either.


To my mind the Highway Code advisory about helmets (Highway Code describes "should" as being advisory) does not constitute a "rule".

Oh and they also includes other examples such as riding the wrong way down a one way street, red light jumps, riding on the pavement which I always understood were the "must" (i.e. laws).

Ian

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby beardy » 4 Mar 2015, 10:42pm

Well we could get into a semantic argument about the meaning of the word "rule".

That will not change the fact that that is what is written as the title of these instructions in the highway code. RULE 59 clearly states we should wear lids. Just as RULE 70 says we should always park our bikes in a conspicuous location where it can be seen by passers-by.

A quick read through the other rules shows that motorised road users are far more guilty of breaking the rules and especially those which are laws than cyclists are. But it is them doing the judging and they are more than a little biased.

I think that we would all agree that using an indicator is a rule of the road but it has no more legal strength than the rule about helmets, does it?
In my experience it is also less common than helmets. :evil:

User avatar
Erudin
Posts: 643
Joined: 17 Sep 2009, 3:39am
Location: Cornwall

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby Erudin » 4 Mar 2015, 11:34pm

Link for the report: http://www.channel4.com/news/catch-up/display/playlistref/040315/clipid/040315_4ON_cycling_vt_pm_0403

Not exactly a report to encourage cycling is it?

The vigilante camera cyclist seemed to be looking for confrontation, he could easily have avoided being "cut up" by giving way to the car that was already moving into his lane.

The assertion that vehicles and cycles (since when is a bicycle not also vehicle) can not safely mix on same roads was not really challenged, segregated cycleways are never going to be the whole solution. Rush hour in congested London is not typical cycling, but that is all the report showed.

thirdcrank
Posts: 28687
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby thirdcrank » 5 Mar 2015, 7:49am

Write to Jon Snow and tell him what you think.

I've done this twice. The first time was about an attempt at humour in French in a caption shown on the ch4 news but it was just an embarrassing display of their ignorance of a foreign language, displayed to the world. The second was when he had just become CTC president and he was peddling his personal views about segregation but being presented by the media as CTC President.

I received personal replies from him to both my letters; the first was handwritten. IIRC, I published the second on here in the "Snowfall" thread.

Thermostat9
Posts: 268
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 5:38pm

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby Thermostat9 » 5 Mar 2015, 8:03am

Keme Nzerem is getting a hammering on Twitter about it. :mrgreen:

Psamathe
Posts: 11129
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby Psamathe » 5 Mar 2015, 10:48am

Thermostat9 wrote:Keme Nzerem is getting a hammering on Twitter about it. :mrgreen:

I was very unimpressed with the item (particularly annoyed about the rules/helmet thing). And the interview Jon Snow did at the end of the report was just abysmal. If he can't do better than that ... well ... a real wasted opportunity.

Ian

Thermostat9
Posts: 268
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 5:38pm

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby Thermostat9 » 5 Mar 2015, 10:59am

Psamathe wrote:I was very unimpressed with the item (particularly annoyed about the rules/helmet thing). And the interview Jon Snow did at the end of the report was just abysmal. If he can't do better than that ... well ... a real wasted opportunity.

Really amazing considering they are 'top end' journalists..... mind you look at this tweet from KZ!

Thanks all - lots of very sensible suggestions re cycle safety. Why on earth is the hot topic the right not to wear a helmet?


:roll:

Psamathe
Posts: 11129
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby Psamathe » 5 Mar 2015, 11:08am

Thermostat9 wrote:
Psamathe wrote:I was very unimpressed with the item (particularly annoyed about the rules/helmet thing). And the interview Jon Snow did at the end of the report was just abysmal. If he can't do better than that ... well ... a real wasted opportunity.

Really amazing considering they are 'top end' journalists..... mind you look at this tweet from KZ!

Thanks all - lots of very sensible suggestions re cycle safety. Why on earth is the hot topic the right not to wear a helmet?


:roll:

Unsure if you mean amazingly good, amazingly bad, amazingly naive or just amazing they did anything.

But what I found most surprising is that Jon snow (CTC President) was involved in the thing.

Ian

User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby bovlomov » 5 Mar 2015, 11:45am

Thermostat9 wrote:Really amazing considering they are 'top end' journalists..... mind you look at this tweet from KZ!

Thanks all - lots of very sensible suggestions re cycle safety. Why on earth is the hot topic the right not to wear a helmet?

It's hard to know what to make of that.
If it's a genuine question, then his ignorance should bar him from broadcasting on the subject. He may not agree with the people campaigning against compulsion, but a few minutes on the web will tell him why it's a hot topic.

Otherwise he's just being insulting and provocative.

Most likely, he knows why it is a hot topic, he'd rather it wasn't, but he hasn't the courage to argue about his real beliefs. Instead he has a snide dig at people who care about something he - incoherently - disagrees with.

mrjemm
Posts: 2933
Joined: 20 Nov 2011, 4:33pm

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby mrjemm » 5 Mar 2015, 11:54am

Right now Watchdog has Headway talking their stuff, and the usual emotive tales...

mrjemm
Posts: 2933
Joined: 20 Nov 2011, 4:33pm

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby mrjemm » 5 Mar 2015, 12:02pm

And now Cracknell...

User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby bovlomov » 5 Mar 2015, 12:09pm

mrjemm wrote:And now Cracknell...

Are you still there, mrjemm?.... Can you bear to tell us what happened?

mrjemm
Posts: 2933
Joined: 20 Nov 2011, 4:33pm

Re: Channel 4 Introduces a Regulation Requiring Wearing A He

Postby mrjemm » 5 Mar 2015, 12:21pm

Roughly... It was an article (purportedly (?)) about sports helmet testing. Started with cricket helmets and clips of Gatting and the Australian fellow who died recently, but started jumping about a bit and dropped cycle helmets in. Soon cycle helmets became the main focus of the article and had a Neurosurgeon from Headway saying how brains hold our memories and how damage to them is terrible, etc. (can't recall much here, was doing something), then went on to tell a tale about a young lad who'd been involved in a cycle accident with a van and is now living with brain damage; his father was/is a Paramadic called Mark Smith, who is now promoting helmet use, going around schools under the banner 'Team Smith' telling what appeared to be primary school kids about the necessity of wearing helmets and the horrors of not. The show ended with the host telling viewers 'so, be sure to wear a helmet, it's not worth it'. (Hmmm, that maybe doesn't sound right, but it was along those lines). Lots of lowest common denominator base fear type tactics.