> I find it strange that someone in the UK can argue that requiring bicycle helmets is the best way forward, or even one of the ten best things to do, when two neighbouring countries have had massively more success than the UK, and and those two don't require helmets, or even use helmets very much.
I think it's because these arguments generally are bad-faith attempts to distract from doing things that would be effective. Most of these people aren't interested in more or safer cycling.
That’s the sad beauty of this kind of bad faith argument - it doesn’t have to have any merit at all just “flood the zone” with alternate crap so real solutions aren’t given the time of day.
The real audience for this MP are the people out there who would prefer to blame cyclists for everything including their own demise.
I think it's because these arguments generally are bad-faith attempts to distract from doing things that would be effective. Most of these people aren't interested in more or safer cycling.