Should helmets be compulsory for cyclists?

TO REDUCE the death toll of cyclists, there are calls for helmets and hi-viz jackets to be compulsory. But police reports show that more than 90 per cent of cyclist casualties are due solely to driver error, such as driving at excessive speed. The car crash that killed five in Leeds, including three boys, was caused by speed. If speed limiters were made compulsory for all motor vehicles, except emergency vehicles, it would save hundreds of lives a year and our roads would be safer for cyclists. Transport companies that want to save fuel, minimise collisions and promote a responsible brand use speed limiters. Driverless cars will surely be fitted with this technology. But as long as there’s an addiction for speed and a love of racing cars, senseless road deaths will never be eradicated. Whose children will we be mourning next week? A. RAMSAY, Radcliffe, Gtr Manchester.

IT HAS been argued that the compulsory wearing of a helmet wouldn’t protect a cyclist from a 40-ton lorry cutting across him. But it would protect him if he fell off his bike and banged his head on the pavement. Head injury is the most common injury suffered by cyclists. Motorcyclists have to wear helmets, drivers have to wear seatbelts and toddlers have to be strapped into car seats, all in the name of safety. So why don’t cyclists want to be held responsible for their actions — no insurance, no lights, no reflective apparel, no blame if they are involved in an accident with a vehicle? If a cyclist comes off his bike and is seriously injured, who pays for the consequences and who would be responsible for perhaps a lifetime of medical care? MIKE CATTERALL, Accrington, Lancs.