Comments on: Bike-Crash Study Fuels Discord Among Agencies

By: Aaron

Aaron — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 14:31:51 +0000

It’s not published yet. They are still working on it at City Hall.

By: gavin

gavin — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 13:48:06 +0000

Where can I find this study?

By: Clarence

Clarence — Sat, 15 Jul 2006 18:24:20 +0000

People are crazy not to wear bike helmets, but it should never be a law and is not the kind of tactic that is going to make the streets any safer for cyclists.

By: Brent

Brent — Sat, 15 Jul 2006 17:07:45 +0000

This is yet one more example of the incompetence and lack of vision of the NYC DOT, under the inept leadership of Iris Weinshall. This organization has continually demonstrated that they are unwilling to balance the needs of motorists with the city’s non-motoring majority. A lack of bike lanes, too- narrow sidewalks, chain link fencing on the 59th st bridge- all absurd. I, for one, am in favor of a complete restructuring of the NYC DOT. Incidentally, helmet laws will not prevent the cause of head injuries.

By: mfs

mfs — Sat, 15 Jul 2006 15:25:21 +0000

having a helmet is not going to prevent you from falling under truck tires if you’re doored. but a bike lane might.

also why do we want to give cops another reason to ticket bikers?

By: Glenn

Glenn — Sat, 15 Jul 2006 02:57:29 +0000

I’m sorry, but the types of crashes I have heard about would not have really been prevented by helmets. In my mind helmets are only protection from simply falling off my bike for some reason. They are not an effective level of protection against cars or trucks. I do always wear a helmet on the street, but less often in parks.

By: mike

mike — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 23:27:33 +0000

I am continually perplexed as to why the City insists on applying bandaids instead of actually solving the problem.

A helmet law will do nothing but reduce the number of cyclists on the streets, making things more dangerous for both cyclists and drivers.