Why are there no safety rules regarding children on bikes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

Seriously, you seem like an obsessive creep. Maybe worth talking to a mental health professional.

[Anonymous]

The most dreadful bike accident I ever saw was in September. A woman had a child in a car on the back seat and the mom hit a bump and turnover the bike. The child was tossed off the back carrier and skidded across grass and hit a drainage pipe. Blood gushed from the child's unhelmeted head, and the woman was too dazed to come to her aid. Fortunately, I wipes in my car and was able to stauch the blood, but it was a horrible sight. I suspect the child will have to have plastic surgery to re-attached her eyelid and surrounding area and maybe for the abraided skin on her face.

[Anonymous]

^^cart

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The most dreadful bike accident I ever saw was in September. A woman had a child in a car on the back seat and the mom hit a bump and turnover the bike. The child was tossed off the back carrier and skidded across grass and hit a drainage pipe. Blood gushed from the child's unhelmeted head, and the woman was too dazed to come to her aid. Fortunately, I wipes in my car and was able to stauch the blood, but it was a horrible sight. I suspect the child will have to have plastic surgery to re-attached her eyelid and surrounding area and maybe for the abraided skin on her face.

That was near where I live (and a terrifying video), but according to the DCUM anti-bike trolls like the one in this thread (cough, cough, ND, we see you, like it's really obvious), this is perfectly fine because it's so rare that no enforcement of anything is needed. Oh, and the kid lived, so they don't count anyhow. Oh, remember the two girls hit while walking (in a crosswalk while with their father) on walk to school day last year? They also lived, so they don't count anyhow.

But really, what they're saying is that the children shouldn't be allowed out of their homes. It's the parents' fault for allowing kids out of the house, even just to go to school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most dreadful bike accident I ever saw was in September. A woman had a child in a car on the back seat and the mom hit a bump and turnover the bike. The child was tossed off the back carrier and skidded across grass and hit a drainage pipe. Blood gushed from the child's unhelmeted head, and the woman was too dazed to come to her aid. Fortunately, I wipes in my car and was able to stauch the blood, but it was a horrible sight. I suspect the child will have to have plastic surgery to re-attached her eyelid and surrounding area and maybe for the abraided skin on her face.

That was near where I live (and a terrifying video), but according to the DCUM anti-bike trolls like the one in this thread (cough, cough, ND, we see you, like it's really obvious), this is perfectly fine because it's so rare that no enforcement of anything is needed. Oh, and the kid lived, so they don't count anyhow. Oh, remember the two girls hit while walking (in a crosswalk while with their father) on walk to school day last year? They also lived, so they don't count anyhow.

But really, what they're saying is that the children shouldn't be allowed out of their homes. It's the parents' fault for allowing kids out of the house, even just to go to school.

DP but oops, you referenced a different accident. The one I was thinking of, a mom and kid were biking down a small road and a car ran a stop sign at a high rate of speed and plowed over the kid without stopping - and it was all caught on camera by a neighbor's front door cam. (Kid was lived).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

+1

It's either dangerous or it's not dangerous. If it's dangerous than kids have no business doing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

+1

It's either dangerous or it's not dangerous. If it's dangerous than kids have no business doing it.

That's the way risk is. There either is risk or there isn't. It's binary. Definitely no gradations.

/s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

Yeah, the bike lobby has no answer to this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

Yeah, the bike lobby has no answer to this.

It is too stupid to answer.

[Anonymous]

It's called a question with a faulty premise. There's no point trying to answer it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

Yeah, the bike lobby has no answer to this.

It is too stupid to answer.

It's ok. We know you can't answer it. But we do enjoy your lame rationalizations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vast majority of bicycling injuries and deaths under the age of 20 could be prevented by wearing a helmet. Yet I routinely see children on bikes or, even worse, ebikes with no helmets.

"An average of 247 traumatic brain injury deaths and 140,000 head injuries among children and adolescents younger than 20 years were related to bicycle crashes each year in the United States. As many as 184 deaths and 116,000 head injuries might have been prevented annually if these riders had worn helmets. An additional 19,000 mouth and chin injuries were treated each year."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8909479/

I wear a helmet and my kids wear helmets (so far). I also wonder how many of those injuries would be prevented if someone didn't drive into them.

100 percent of them would be avoided if parents didn't put their kids in harm's way.

Do you also not let your kids swim or bathe? Think of the drowning risk!

I'm confused.

I thought you said the roads of D.C. are incredibly dangerous because everyone is going 70 mph and no one obeys any traffic rules and drivers are complete sociopaths with no regard for human life and police don't enforce anything and it's all just a complete free for all.

Now, you're telling me that allowing children to venture into all of that is no more dangerous than taking a bath?

+1

[Anonymous]

I sometimes walk with my children in my neighborhood. Arguments against car safety for kids on bikes also means arguments against care safety, traffic safety, trafic enforcement, etc. for kids on foot.

Kids must leave the house. Streets should be improved to make them safer. Cars have hit kids in crosswalks walking with their parents and one single instance of that, no matter how rare, is unacceptable to me as a parent.

I support emergency legislation for the specific location every time a pedestrian or biker is struck.

Bottom line: As a driver, I'm willing to accept street safety implementations that slow me down if it means safer roads for my kids who must, sometimes, leave the house for a variety of reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I sometimes walk with my children in my neighborhood. Arguments against car safety for kids on bikes also means arguments against care safety, traffic safety, trafic enforcement, etc. for kids on foot.

Kids must leave the house. Streets should be improved to make them safer. Cars have hit kids in crosswalks walking with their parents and one single instance of that, no matter how rare, is unacceptable to me as a parent.

I support emergency legislation for the specific location every time a pedestrian or biker is struck.

Bottom line: As a driver, I'm willing to accept street safety implementations that slow me down if it means safer roads for my kids who must, sometimes, leave the house for a variety of reasons.

What does this have to do with following the law so that kids wear helmets that evidence proves saves lives and protects from brain damage?