Bikeshare users-- what are you doing about helmets?

(this would be a good use of a poll feature if there was one, so users could respond anonymously)

I have not yet made use of Divvy but will very likely be perusing Denver's B-Cycle on an upcoming trip.... looking to travel light and not excited about dragging a helmet along... plus the friend I'm going with doesn't own one as far as I know.

So are you generally carrying a helmet around with you? Or have you just got comfortable going without? Or some other solution I am not touching on?

Thx.

Views: 2232

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Nançois on August 12, 2013 at 9:30am

I've had a second helmet for a year or so which I will now keep at work for days when it's raining in the morning but I can Divvy my way home at night.

Permalink Reply by Duppie on August 12, 2013 at 9:47am

Use a helmet almost all the time. But not on Divvy.

Divvy for me is so slow and relaxed, I don't feel that I need a helmet.

On my normal bike I may try to make the next intersection before the light turns, often moving through the intersection when the light turns. Not so on Divvy. I deliberately slow down, not catching the light.

But then, I don't commute on it daily. When I use it, it is for short rides in a leisurely fashion

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on August 12, 2013 at 9:58am

Too funny!

Leah Jone said:

I wear a helmet of Jewish guilt when I Divvy...

Permalink Reply by Grace Van Moer 8.25 mi on August 12, 2013 at 10:00am

Haven't used one yet, but I too will probably purchase a 2nd helmet to keep at my desk.  Almost all of my Divvy trips so far have originated from my office at Dearborn & Madison on days when I don't have my bike/helmet available.  After running the gauntlet westbound on Madison past Olgilvie over the lunch hour last week, a 2nd helmet seems like a wise choice.

Permalink Reply by Justin B Newman on August 12, 2013 at 2:25pm

When my wife and I flew to Denver last year, we took helmets along, and used B-Cycle extensively. I felt a bit silly flying helmets across the country, but I'm much more comfortable with a helmet than without. The time or two I left my hotel room without, I felt naked. For what it's worth, I din't ride around Denver without a shirt on, either. :-D

Permalink Reply by Shaun Jacobsen on August 12, 2013 at 3:03pm

No, I haven't been wearing one with Divvy. When I ride my own bike into work, I wear it. When I ride my bike around the neighborhood to the store, I normally don't wear it.

Having to carry around a helmet starts to defeat the spontaneity of bike share. I would feel stupid carrying around a helmet all day long. Don't make some crack about how stupid I'd look lying bloody on the pavement, either; I get it, we've all heard it, it's not witty anymore.

I do wish the city would have installed a protected east-west PBL downtown before putting Divvy in. It could have made it easier to make those lunch hour Divvy trips safer without safety gear.

Permalink Reply by Duppie on August 13, 2013 at 2:31am

The working theory is that if you are going to do something and you have made up your mind on how you will be doing it, you should not ask for advice on The Chainlink. You run the risk that people will give advice that upsets your belief system causing you to have to respond in a snarky way.

h' 1.0 said:

So the working theory is that riding fast and "unrelaxed" is likely to result in a meeting between one's head and the ground, rather than riding in mixed vehicular traffic? 

Permalink Reply by Thunder Snow on August 13, 2013 at 4:21am

Helmet wearing is all about risk mitigation; managing the risks of everyday life.  That calculus of risk/benefit to cost/convenience is going to be different for each of us.  There's no one-size-fits-all solution.

Some of us are oblivious to risk.  Some understand risk but don't care.  Some are overly fearful and see risks everywhere. And some, even if not personally concerned, are reluctant to burden our loved ones with the possibility of caring for us if we end up in a vegetative state, so our risk is mitigated for them.

I've slipped in the shower a number of times in my life.  Perhaps I should wear body armor and a helmet while bathing.  But each and every time, I've managed to regain my footing and not fall.  So I don't try to change my risk level by doing anything differently.  There may be a time in the future when my strength and reflexes won't save me, so I'll mitigate the newly increased risk by installing grab bars.  Even if I never slip and fall as an old guy.  That's risk mitigation.

It's unwise to stand outside in a lightning storm.  You might get struck by lightning.  But you probably won't, the risk level is pretty small for that to happen.  It would be foolish to stand in a lightning storm holding on to a steel water pipe on the side of your house.  You still probably won't get struck by lightning, but if you do, you're toast.  For me, that's what wearing a helmet is about.  My chances of hitting my head on the pavement are remote, but if I somehow do, not wearing a helmet is like clutching that water pipe in the storm.

 

Permalink Reply by Joe Studer 8.0 mi on August 13, 2013 at 4:53am

h' 1.0 said:

So the working theory is that riding fast and "unrelaxed" is likely to result in a meeting between one's head and the ground, rather than riding in mixed vehicular traffic? 

This does not sum up my thinking.

I typically commute to work by bike.  I ride in mixed vehicular traffic all the time.  I always wear a helmet when I commute, or when I am going for a long ride.  

I perceive there to be far less risk of an accident of any sort when I ride a Divvy, even though I am riding in mixed vehicular traffic.  This is my perception.  I use Divvy like I previously used taxis, or to cross the Loop when I don't feel like walking.  On a Divvy bike, I am riding much slower, on a much more stable bike, and I simply do not take the same risks I take on my other bikes.  (Not that I'm Johnny Risktaker in any event.) 

Given this low perception of risk, it seems to me too much of a hassle to bring a helmet with me, or to keep a separate helmet in my office so that I always have one available for me to use.



Permalink Reply by Joe Studer 8.0 mi on August 13, 2013 at 4:54am

To be fair, your response was kind of snarky, and did not demonstrate a lot of constructive working through the posts.  

h' 1.0 said:

Oh, put a lid on it.

I am genuinely trying to work through this-- and my own assumptions were challenged by some of the responses.

And yours are dead wrong.

Can't you just not post if you're having one of your "I hate humanity" days?

 

Duppie 13.5185km said:

The working theory is that if you are going to do something and you have made up your mind on how you will be doing it, you should not ask for advice on The Chainlink. You run the risk that people will give advice that upsets your belief system causing you to have to respond in a snarky way.

h' 1.0 said:

So the working theory is that riding fast and "unrelaxed" is likely to result in a meeting between one's head and the ground, rather than riding in mixed vehicular traffic? 

Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on August 13, 2013 at 6:29am

I don't want to put words in your mouth h, but if the point of starting this thread is to advise everyone that based on your experience and perception, all Divvy users should wear helmets all the time, you should just say that.

It should be noted that bike share programs in cities which have mandatory helmet laws (Aukland, Brisbane, Melbourne) are far less successful than those that do not (NYC, DC, Chicago). Seattle is wrestling with the issue even as we speak.

h' 1.0 said:

As I unsuccessfully tried to point out, I'm not getting exactly where the "odds of a crash are lower." Asking for clarification as I personally consider intermingling with cars to be the main risk to one's head, and the speed of the auto, not the rider to be the primary determinant of the outcome of a crash. 



Cameron 7.5 mi said:

Helmet use is always a bit of a cost benefit analysis. Helmets offer the benefit of protection in the event of a crash at the cost of dealing with the hassle carrying a helmet around. With Divvy I don't usually view the helmet as worth it both because as others have discussed the odds of a crash are perceived to be lower, therefore reducing the benefit of a helmet and the cost is higher because carrying a helmet around when not riding is a hassle. On normal bike I typically wear a helmet partially because I perceive the risks as higher and therefore the benefit greater, but mostly because the cost is lower. I can simply lock my helmet up with my bike, making it hardly a hassle at all, therefore any benefit makes it worth it.

Permalink Reply by Justin B Newman on August 13, 2013 at 6:36am

The only riding that was NOT on faster streets (near the downtown convention center, and in the areas between there and the zoo, botanic gardens, and capitol) was on the path running along the river... the Platte River Trail. As a mixed use path, it has its own hazards. IIRC, the only on-street bicycle-specific facilities we used were unprotected, unbuffered bicycle lanes.

Generally, we felt that traffic was more accommodating to bicycles than Chicago traffic. That may, of course, have just been perception. Or a Mary-poppins-esque response to the bike share bicycles.

As a side note, the Platte River Trail was a lovely urban hideaway.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service