A car door opening in your path is a car door opening in your path at any speed.
That's a straw man. Helmet advocates do not imagine them as some sort of invincible armor. They obviously will not keep you from being injured in a serious accident. What they do is reduce your chance of being killed. The large majority of fatal bicycle accidents involve head injuries. (One source: http://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/facts...) I would rather be in traction than dead.
I agree that children cannot be wrapped in cotton wool; they should be allowed to roam without supervision and make their own mistakes, even if that does slightly increase their risk of injury or death. But getting a bike helmet for your kid does not restrict their mobility or their ability to learn. It has no downsides, only upsides.
You've made the choice not to wear a helmet; if you ride safely, in a safe area, the extra risk is probably quite small, and if you believe it's a fair trade-off for a little extra comfort, that's your prerogative as an adult. But don't pretend that wanting to feel the wind in your hair is taking a moral stand.
> But don't pretend that wanting to feel the wind in your hair is taking a moral stand.
Your words, not mine -- as most of your post by the way. However, there is value in not arriving to your destination sweating or stinking (i.e. going to a meeting, social event, etc). In cases like that it's perfectly fine not to wear a helmet as long as the rider is aware of the risk, and adapts his/her riding style to this situation. Mostly everybody does it in Europe and we're all fine.
Yeah, and then you go flying and your head hits the ground, or a lamp post, or another car. Not always, but often enough.
Head injuries are pretty common in car-pedestrian or car-cyclist accidents even though the average car is much lower than the average head. Collisions don't end at the moment of impact.
I get it, you're advocating for people's safety -- that's noble. But, sometimes you have to live and let it die. In other words, you have to respect people's choices, or move to a nanny state and stop judging the people that decided not to live under the same rules as you.
No offense, but that's what will happen when poorly educated riders bike in the door zone. See: http://www.bikelaw.com/2016/02/18/door-zones-a-dangerous-gam...
Biking amongst traffic on roads requires skill, knowledge of biking laws, good situational awareness, knowing how to posture and when to take the lane to protect yourself.
Oh, and a bit of luck that the people next to you in their steel cages aren't homicidal towards bicyclists.
What do you propose a well-educated rider should do, when all the bike lanes are in the door zone and bikes are legally required to stay in the bike lane?
> Oh, and a bit of luck that the people next to you in their steel cages aren't homicidal towards bicyclists.
Yup. Which is why you wear a helmet.
Well that's the usual poor planning I see in America. Sharrows or "share the road" signs are much better than many of the dedicated bike lanes I've seen here.
First, find another route, if possible. Second, start going to your city's public meetings and/or complain to the city about the clear danger that poorly planned bike lanes inflicts upon the public. Learn the law specific to bicycles for your area and get involved with a bike advocacy group if you really care.
As far as helmets go, I like to keep my brains intact, so I wear one, and have the abrasions on an old helmet to prove it. Front tire blowout and dumping at 45 KPH downhill on a recumbent was an experience that could have been worse sans helmet. That said, a pound of plastic and foam can only do so much for you. Good luck!
Maybe we should stick kids in suits of armor Faraday cages too, just in case lightning strikes.
About 50% of all New York bike accidents, according to the article Jean_Claude linked.
> Maybe we should stick kids in suits of armor Faraday cages too, just in case lightning strikes.
I'm just baffled by all the people who think putting a helmet on is onerous and restrictive and destroys the experience of cycling. Why?