[QUOTE=Pocket Pony;8648759]
Here’s what I wonder about western style helmets…English helmets as they are fit to the shape of the head (profile on the outside), so they are round/oval-ish. When a rider falls, then the helmet presumably protects the head in all directions (fall where the back or side of head hits the ground, but not the face).
With a western helmet, I wonder about the brim and how that affects any torque on the neck from the head not impacting the ground in a head-like shape… [/QUOTE]
But the brim is just squishy felt, isn’t it? So it shouldn’t have any effect.
I think aktill is right - this helmet isn’t sufficiently cowboy hat-like to make anyone who isn’t already wearing a helmet start wearing one.
As far as wearing or not wearing a helmet, I wear one every time I ride. I haven’t always been of that mindset. But, older, wiser…
And the risks of other things that I may or may not do are irrelevant to the consideration. Wearing a helmet is going to reduce my risk of a head injury while riding. That is the only element in the calculation. The fact that I may or may not have eaten lunch at McDonalds this week is irrelevant to my risk of head injury while riding. It’s relevant to my risk of diabetes and cardiovascular disease, but that’s a separate calculation.
However, the “or” of probabilities is additive (more or less), so, by reducing the probability of dying prematurely from a head injury sustained in a fall from a horse, I can also reduce my overall probability of dying prematurely from any cause. So the argument that wearing a helmet doesn’t matter because you smoke, eat fatty foods, and don’t wear a seatbelt is false.
In general, I don’t really have a problem with adults making their own decisions about wearing or not wearing helmets. But, I think all organizations ought to adopt the 4-H practice of requiring all kids to wear helmets at all of the organization’s events.