09-11-2019, 12:06 PM
(09-11-2019, 10:21 AM)robdrimmie Wrote: I mostly agree with your general point. In this specific case, information about whether or not the cyclist was wearing a helmet was a statement of fact in the accident report.
However, I don't believe this is an accurate comparison to make. Not wearing a seat belt and driving while under the influence are illegal. An adult gets to choose whether or not they wear a helmet. If you want to pull an example from the world of automobiles, it should be one where it is or was optional. Raising the issue of whether or not a driver was wearing a safety belt before the laws became widespread might be a good way to use your example. I grew up in the 80s and it was probably half and half who did and didn't wear a seat belt. True for drunk driving too: By including safety-related information in the reporting on the subject the culture changed and laws were passed.
That's still imperfect though. The safety value of helmets is not quite as well proven as that of seat belts, and there is still reasonable debate on the subject.
I'll go a bit farther and say that establishing an expectation that people have to wear helmets is, in my opinion, harmful to establishing a cycling culture. In the Netherlands, that expectation is absent, and there are a lot more people riding bicycles, which in turn leads to safety-in-numbers. I am not personally convinced that helmets do anything at puttering-along speeds except for getting fewer people to ride bicycles. I am pretty convinced that places with mandatory helmet laws (e.g. Australia) fail to get cycling modeshare.