JC> He ignores everything, including the fact that most head
JC> injuries are suffered by auto passengers.  I asked him at
JC> least 4 times why he didn't wear a helmet in the car, and
JC> each time he completely ignored it.
Maybe he's bright enough to realize that the fact that the majority of head 
injuries are from auto accidents, isn't germane to the bicycle helmet 
discussion?  Could it be that the reason this is a fact is there are 
significantly more people riding around in automobiles at significantly 
higher speeds?
JC> If motorists aren't required to wear helmets, then neither
JC> should bicyclists be required to wear them.  You don't give
JC> up your right to personal choice the minute you step outside
JC> of the gas guzzler.
Not that it's going to make any difference in your mind, and I know I'm 
wasting my time and breath here, but I just can't stand it anymore. Actually, 
you have far more government regulation to contend with while operating an 
automobile as compared to a bicycle.  When you look at things logically, the 
above paragraph is just as ridiculous as the first one.  I might add your 
entire argument.
Ah, but now I'm trying to teach a pig to sing.  I apologize in advance for 
annoying you and promise to not respond again.
                                  Dewey

--- timEd-B11
---------------