Comments on: “Maryland considering mandatory helmets for drivers”

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 21:39:14 +0000

@Ron Miller: I’m not suggesting substitution here. It’s all additional. Seatbelts + helmets (+ iron sides to vehicles + 24 airbags + whatever, maybe halon fire extinguishers build into the engine compartment and gas tank?)

It’s all incremental.

By: Ron Miller

Ron Miller — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 18:54:28 +0000

John, I agree with you on this issue but not on your logic. Of course, we could always do more and we draw the line short of the maximum level of safety. Where I disagree with you is that it does not follow that just because things could be taken to a further extreme does not automatically every idea to improve safety. Under your logic, we should not have child safety seats because we could always take it further and make them wear helmets. Why have police when we could always have a Gestapo that could make us even safer? is not a good argument in favor of eliminating police, right?

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 18:10:02 +0000

Driving around in a tank would save lives, particularly mine. It would be a tad tough on the other end.

Helmets would no doubt have both positive and negative tradeoffs too.

The kneejerk support of such ideas in the press is often more dangerous than the problem they address.

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 18:02:40 +0000

Wouldn’t wearing helmets 24/7 reduce fatalities?

Slipping in the tub; falling down the stairs; stumbling on broken pavement; falling out of bed… people die from these accidents every year!

How, after all, can you put a value on a human life?

By: Ron Miller

Ron Miller — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 17:09:53 +0000

Maybe Jim. The hard part is getting people to change what they are accustomed to, I guess.

Helmets would save a lot of lives. I’m not sure I would not have supported the rule when Mr. Ford started firing out Model-Ts. But it is not possible to change people’s habits now and there would be that whole problem of the blogosphere exploding.

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 16:09:23 +0000

Perfect 4/1 post. Just believable enough to make you wonder…

By: Jim Collins

Jim Collins — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 13:53:48 +0000

A five point harness would save more lives than the current contraption called a seat belt. Properly designed it would be more comfortable and would negate the need for air bags.

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 13:07:52 +0000

@Andrew_M_Garland: 360° cameras projecting on a heads-up display on the helmet’s face screen. You could actually put all the data from the dashboard there.

Except that helmets would obviate the purpose of convertibles, I’d do it!

By: delurking

delurking — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:55:56 +0000

🙂
You are obviously a veteran of the helmet wars.

By: aaaa

aaaa — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 11:45:08 +0000

Compared to helmets for cyclists (which seem to have strong support also on this site), helmets for drivers would be more effective and save more lives. Yes, there are studies on that.