browser icon
You are using an insecure version of your web browser. Please update your browser!
Using an outdated browser makes your computer unsafe. For a safer, faster, more enjoyable user experience, please update your browser today or try a newer browser.

What’s Your Damages?

Posted by on May 18, 2017
"Enough about the helmets," they said.

"A helmet saved my life," they said.

"Your disdain for safety is foolhardy and irresponsible," they said.

Oh yeah?

Well one day either you're all going to thank me for slowly chipping away at our obsession with helmet-shaming, or else you're going to wish you'd pitched in, because it's becoming clearer and clearer every day that there is no greater tool in the oppression of cyclists than the foam hat:

(via @Pflax1)

A cyclist who suffered a brain injury when he was hit by a Dublin van driver has been awarded €3 million.

However, the court was told that the injured man was deemed to have contributed 20 per cent of the negligence to the collision.

That percentage was reflected in the settlement he received, meaning the full sum he would have been awarded was €3.75 million.

Yeah, that's right.  If you're not wearing an EPS yarmulke when an unlicensed and uninsured driver slams into you it's 20% your fault:

The injured man, Alexandru Doroscan (33), was hit by a van while cycling in Blanchardstown in the west of the city on August 2nd, 2013.

The collision occurred at the junction of Ongar Distributor Road and Sheridan Road where he was struck by van driven by Declan Meade, Lisbrack Rd, Longford.

The hearing was told Meade was neither licenced nor insured at the time. And in a separate criminal case he was jailed for 3½ years, with 2½ years suspended.

And would a helmet even have helped?

Mr Doroscan, a married father of one child, was thrown around three meters into the air when Meade’s van hit him.

The Garda estimated the van was travelling at 57km per hour.

But sure, it certainly makes sense that the cyclist was 20% responsible for this.  In fact they should have docked him another million for not wearing a parachute.  After all, if only he had been then after being thrown into the air he might have floated gently to safety.

By this logic pedestrians, slip-and-fall victims, and really anybody who's injured in any conceivable situation should be partially responsible if they were not wearing a petroleum beanie:

People already think you're being irresponsible somehow by riding a bike, so reinforcing that idea by buying into the bareheaded riding taboo will only make it worse.

Meanwhile, from the Land of Helmets comes Wheely, a new bicycle light system:

Cyclists must take extra precautions when they ride. We often share roadways with vehicles, other cyclists and pedestrians, which can cause a host of incidents.

This is true, so for maximum safety always use on a bicycle with no brakes:

It's a funny thing about brakeless fixies: on one hand, when the trend hit full steam back in the late aughts it didn't exactly result in the mass carnage you might have expected.

Then again, on the other hand, it did and still does necessitate a completely idiotic style of riding.

Getting stuck behind some doofus whip-skidding his way down the Manhattan Bridge was annoying back then, and now that we've got an actual bicycle rush hour it's doubly stupid.

It's like walking on a crowded street and getting stuck behind someone doing this:

Please accept my apologies for posting the Monty Python silly walks skit.  That is Peak Dork.  I might as well add three or four Simpsons clips for good measure*.

*[Insert "Worst Blog Post Ever" image here.]

Lastly, where would we be without Bicycling?  For example, did you know you're making six (6) mistakes with your oatmeal?
Mistake #1: Not allowing it to cool before using it as a chamois cream.

Comments are closed.