What’s it like hauling nuclear weapons across the country?

Re:What’s it like hauling nuclear weapons across the country? by lmm on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @08:56PM (#27901089)

> Please do not downplay the risks of being hit by a 120 kg+ object moving at, say, 10-15 mph. It is similar to the risk that the cyclist himself faces if he suddenly falls of his bike, namely, brain damage from cracking your skull against the pavement.

Please do not imply this is remotely comparable to the risks of being hit by a car. It is not. In that context, downplaying the risks of being hit by a bicycle is absolutely correct.

> Cyclists wear biking helmets to protect themselves against this possibly fatal event.

Cyclists in countries with decent road laws, such as the Netherlands, do not generally wear helmets. Cyclists in some countries wear helmets, mainly to protect themselves from bad laws passed by ignorant non-cyclists.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What’s it like hauling nuclear weapons across the country? by himinlomax on Wednesday July 21, 2021 @03:31AM (#27903385)

Wearing a helmet is a good thing. Forcing people to wear a helmet is a bad thing.

The former reduces risk for the wearer, the latter increases risk for cyclists as a whole indirectly.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:What’s it like hauling nuclear weapons across the country? by lmm on Wednesday July 21, 2021 @03:38AM (#27903420)

It's misleading to imply that cyclists are (hypocritically) exposing pedestrians to a level of danger for which they would themselves want to wear a helmet. The level of danger of head injury that a cyclist or a nearby pedestrian is exposed to is below the level at which most people would feel a helmet was appropriate. (Notably, it's many times lower than the level that car drivers and passengers - people who do not normally feel a need to wear helmets - are exposed to).

[ Parent | on HN ]