I Finally Bought a Bike Helmet

Last month I bought a bike helmet. It is the first bike helmet I have owned. This is unusual because I have cause to acknowledge that helmets reduce the potential for severe damage. I can credit the helmet I was wearing at the time of my motorcycle accident with protecting my head from impact with unyielding pavement and steel. 

So why so long the long delay? I can't say I was uninformed. I have read the reports and studies on bike helmets. In fact their is quite a lot of data out there, a casual search will bring you to proponents and opponents. Bike helmets laws have taken what appears to be a simple safety issue and turned it into a towering controversy. Read as much as you can, as much as is necessary to come to a decision you can be comfortable with. 

I had plenty of excuses for not buying a helmet, none of them credible. They are uncomfortable, they look silly, I will get helmet head, vanity can be dangerous. I thought I'd never get into an accident because I'm a safe cyclist. What finally brought me around to helmet wearing? I credit the Chief Corner with recommending Ontario enact a helmet law. (Though as the article states other jurisdictions are rethinking or removing their own helmet laws.) This had me thinking about my safety and head injuries. The more I thought about traumatic brain injury, the easier it was to dismiss previous excuses against wearing a helmet. When it comes down to it I'll take messy hair over brain damage. 

If i stop here I might get a smattering of applause for deciding to be safe, making a personal decision to be responsible for my own safety. 

I will instead go one more step and say I support mandatory helmet laws, with all the benefits and harms attached o such legislation. 

Helmet Laws are decried as nanny state legislation. It is considered an unwarranted intrusion into the life of the citizen. The citizen is responsible for their own safety and should be allowed to choose whether or not to wear a helmet. While this is primarily a Conservative/Libertarian view it probably has wider support. An entire piece could be written on the theory of personal responsibility, choice and government. I may do that in the future.

The level of intrusion does need to be balanced against the harm. For now i will just submit that a Government, has an interest in the safety of its' citizen. It can be indirect as with mountain climbing sports, ensuring that the equipment used meets a standard necessary for the safe enjoyment of the sport. It can be direct by mandating speed limits and seat belts. 

I don't recommend diving into legislation. Laws made in haste may be repented at leisure to paraphrase poorly a well know proverb. Any proposed Helmet Law needs to be studied and a decision arrived at free of ideology or special interests. 

In the mean time more Ontario should undertake to educate her citizens on the importance of Helmets as necessary biking equipment. Opponents may not like money spent trying to sway citizen to that point of view, but you can't take a position of personal choice without ensuring that choice be fully informed. 

I am left thinking that many will curse the government for making them wear a helmet. On the other hand those saved from permanent brain damage as a result of such legislation will not be among that group.