2 ms·
I think if you want these programs at all, you have to make difficult decisions. The fact is, nobody is going to carry a helmet around on the off chance they ar
by Analemma_ 9y ago
I think if you want these programs at all, you have to make difficult decisions. The fact is, nobody is going to carry a helmet around on the off chance they are going to use a rideshare. If they have one at all, they're using their own vehicle. I've used Seattle's bikeshares a few dozen times now, and I love it a great deal, but I never would've bothered if I had to wear a helmet - I would've just taken an Uber or something.
I have even seen some people claim that, measured in QALYs other such utilitarian metrics, helmet laws make people unhealthier on average in that they discourage riding bicycles and that the net effect of this is worse than the increased risk, but I don't know how reliable that result is.
- dvt 9y agoNot sure why you're getting downvoted, I think you're making valid points. Paternalistic laws definitely have upsides and downsides (upside of safety, downside of lacking autonomy). I think your idea might work in cities that have designated bike lanes or bike-only roads. For example, in Santa Monica, we have some bike-only lanes, so it might work here, but like in downtown LA, it would be a shitshow and I can basically guarantee that people will die at some point. And then you have to deal with that mess.