VIEW: Helmets or turbans?
Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2005 4:49 am
VIEW: Helmets or turbans? —Syed Mansoor Hussain
Intuitively it would seem that the sort of turbans the Sikhs wear would be most effective. Perhaps in these days of cross-border friendship, it might be worthwhile for those in our Punjab to emulate those in the Indian Punjab, entirely for the purposes of driver safety. Perhaps that was the idea all along
Recently the government mandated protective helmets for motorcyclists. Whatever else, this was the first time in quite a while that I saw the police in Lahore enforcing any law. The only time I have ever seen them this efficient is when they have to block local traffic to allow a VVVIP to pass. Perhaps this is a sign of good things to come, but then may be not and as a cynical friend suggested to me recently, the police are in with the helmet sellers. I, being an optimist, believe that the police are doing this because they actually want to save lives and enforce the law.
The more interesting thing about all this was the opinion given to us by a leading politician that turbans were as good as helmets. As I started to think about this, I realised that this may indeed be true, and if so, how could we prove it. If we could only devise a method of proving this we could for a change teach the cocky westerners something that they not only never knew, but being the non-turban wearing sorts, never could know. For things like this, they use dummies with sensors and then simulate crashes and see how much damage would have occurred in different types of accidents to different parts of the body.
It would seem to be a straightforward test to see how dummies wearing turbans and helmets fare in a collision. But, there are two essentially insoluble problems. First, dummies cannot ride motorcycles. And more importantly, even though Pakistan has many dummies, it does not have the sophisticated, electronically wired dummies needed for such a test. Another problem, of course, is that for any such test to be relevant it must mimic real life as closely as possible. A motorcycle on Pakistani roads has on the average two and a half riders. This usually includes the male driver, his wife and the half being a child. So, any testing must also examine the effect on the un-helmeted, un-turbaned wife and child.
The more I thought about such a test, the more gruesome and macabre the parameters became. Therefore it is probably best to abandon the entire concept and accept the possibility that turbans might actually be as effective as helmets in preventing serious brain injuries to motorcyclists involved in accidents. But, the problem of children being carried on motorcycles remains a matter of some concern. In the US, a motorist driving around a child without carefully tucking it away in a back seat safety harness can be arrested not only for unsafe driving but also for child endangerment. A motorcyclist doing something which is considered the norm in Pakistan would probably end up in jail in the US and have his children removed from his custody for good measure.
This brings us to an interesting series of questions. Is travelling with two or three children on a motorcycle child abuse or just child endangerment? And, if it is either of these two, then why is it not a crime? And, if it is a crime then why are those doing this not being stopped and fined? We can go through the usual litany of reasons why this is acceptable since there is no other means of transportation available to the majority of middle and lower middle class working people. Nevertheless, by any standards of road safety, carrying a number of children on a motorcycle is dangerous. Unfortunately this just meshes into the general disregard for child safety that is prevalent in this society.
What adults do is their business as long as they do not put others at risk. If a motorcyclist wishes to put his (I have yet to see a her driving a motorcycle) life in danger, that is his business but when he endangers the lives of others, especially children, then that is the business of society. We are all full of platitudes about how children are the future of any society, yet the scant attention we pay to their safety exposes the hollowness of such rhetoric. A child that grows up in an environment where the safety of children is of little concern will have little concern for the safety of children as an adult. So, I would rather see our “finest” stopping motorcyclists for driving around with children rather than for not wearing helmets.
Having vented my spleen about unprotected children on motorcycles, I can now return to the helmet versus the turban question. The traffic in a city like Lahore is worse than bad. The only saving grace is that because of its chaotic nature, the speed of the average vehicle is not very fast. Therefore, if and when an accident does occur, it is usually a low speed contact producing relatively minor damage. In such an environment, a turban might indeed be as effective as a helmet. So, I suppose, what we need is a law that forces motorcyclists to wear either helmets or turbans. Here, of course it might become necessary to legislate the bulk and heft of turbans that than can be used instead of helmets.
Intuitively it would seem that the sort of turbans the Sikhs wear would be most effective. This is so for two reasons. First, they have a lot of tightly wound hair underneath and second, their turbans are made up of quite a few layers of cloth that are remarkably well fixed on their heads and won’t fall off after an accident. This is in stark contrast to the turbans worn by many of our motorcyclists that are nothing more than a desultory twist or two of cloth around their heads. Perhaps in these days of cross-border friendship, it might be worthwhile for those in our Punjab to emulate those in the Indian Punjab, entirely for the purposes of driver safety. Or perhaps that was the idea all along.
Finally, what exactly is “pillion riding” and why does it get banned every so often? If it is indeed what I think it is then why don’t the traffic police stop people indulging in this proto-terrorist activity during times of national emergencies and VVVIP visits? This brings us back to the peculiarly vigorous policing of the helmet law. It was alleged by many distraught helmet buyers that many of those selling helmets made a fast buck by increasing the prices manifold. As we well know, to make a buck especially a fast one; in Pakistan like many other places you do need to have the law fully behind you or at least on your side. Perhaps my cynical friend was right after all.
Intuitively it would seem that the sort of turbans the Sikhs wear would be most effective. Perhaps in these days of cross-border friendship, it might be worthwhile for those in our Punjab to emulate those in the Indian Punjab, entirely for the purposes of driver safety. Perhaps that was the idea all along
Recently the government mandated protective helmets for motorcyclists. Whatever else, this was the first time in quite a while that I saw the police in Lahore enforcing any law. The only time I have ever seen them this efficient is when they have to block local traffic to allow a VVVIP to pass. Perhaps this is a sign of good things to come, but then may be not and as a cynical friend suggested to me recently, the police are in with the helmet sellers. I, being an optimist, believe that the police are doing this because they actually want to save lives and enforce the law.
The more interesting thing about all this was the opinion given to us by a leading politician that turbans were as good as helmets. As I started to think about this, I realised that this may indeed be true, and if so, how could we prove it. If we could only devise a method of proving this we could for a change teach the cocky westerners something that they not only never knew, but being the non-turban wearing sorts, never could know. For things like this, they use dummies with sensors and then simulate crashes and see how much damage would have occurred in different types of accidents to different parts of the body.
It would seem to be a straightforward test to see how dummies wearing turbans and helmets fare in a collision. But, there are two essentially insoluble problems. First, dummies cannot ride motorcycles. And more importantly, even though Pakistan has many dummies, it does not have the sophisticated, electronically wired dummies needed for such a test. Another problem, of course, is that for any such test to be relevant it must mimic real life as closely as possible. A motorcycle on Pakistani roads has on the average two and a half riders. This usually includes the male driver, his wife and the half being a child. So, any testing must also examine the effect on the un-helmeted, un-turbaned wife and child.
The more I thought about such a test, the more gruesome and macabre the parameters became. Therefore it is probably best to abandon the entire concept and accept the possibility that turbans might actually be as effective as helmets in preventing serious brain injuries to motorcyclists involved in accidents. But, the problem of children being carried on motorcycles remains a matter of some concern. In the US, a motorist driving around a child without carefully tucking it away in a back seat safety harness can be arrested not only for unsafe driving but also for child endangerment. A motorcyclist doing something which is considered the norm in Pakistan would probably end up in jail in the US and have his children removed from his custody for good measure.
This brings us to an interesting series of questions. Is travelling with two or three children on a motorcycle child abuse or just child endangerment? And, if it is either of these two, then why is it not a crime? And, if it is a crime then why are those doing this not being stopped and fined? We can go through the usual litany of reasons why this is acceptable since there is no other means of transportation available to the majority of middle and lower middle class working people. Nevertheless, by any standards of road safety, carrying a number of children on a motorcycle is dangerous. Unfortunately this just meshes into the general disregard for child safety that is prevalent in this society.
What adults do is their business as long as they do not put others at risk. If a motorcyclist wishes to put his (I have yet to see a her driving a motorcycle) life in danger, that is his business but when he endangers the lives of others, especially children, then that is the business of society. We are all full of platitudes about how children are the future of any society, yet the scant attention we pay to their safety exposes the hollowness of such rhetoric. A child that grows up in an environment where the safety of children is of little concern will have little concern for the safety of children as an adult. So, I would rather see our “finest” stopping motorcyclists for driving around with children rather than for not wearing helmets.
Having vented my spleen about unprotected children on motorcycles, I can now return to the helmet versus the turban question. The traffic in a city like Lahore is worse than bad. The only saving grace is that because of its chaotic nature, the speed of the average vehicle is not very fast. Therefore, if and when an accident does occur, it is usually a low speed contact producing relatively minor damage. In such an environment, a turban might indeed be as effective as a helmet. So, I suppose, what we need is a law that forces motorcyclists to wear either helmets or turbans. Here, of course it might become necessary to legislate the bulk and heft of turbans that than can be used instead of helmets.
Intuitively it would seem that the sort of turbans the Sikhs wear would be most effective. This is so for two reasons. First, they have a lot of tightly wound hair underneath and second, their turbans are made up of quite a few layers of cloth that are remarkably well fixed on their heads and won’t fall off after an accident. This is in stark contrast to the turbans worn by many of our motorcyclists that are nothing more than a desultory twist or two of cloth around their heads. Perhaps in these days of cross-border friendship, it might be worthwhile for those in our Punjab to emulate those in the Indian Punjab, entirely for the purposes of driver safety. Or perhaps that was the idea all along.
Finally, what exactly is “pillion riding” and why does it get banned every so often? If it is indeed what I think it is then why don’t the traffic police stop people indulging in this proto-terrorist activity during times of national emergencies and VVVIP visits? This brings us back to the peculiarly vigorous policing of the helmet law. It was alleged by many distraught helmet buyers that many of those selling helmets made a fast buck by increasing the prices manifold. As we well know, to make a buck especially a fast one; in Pakistan like many other places you do need to have the law fully behind you or at least on your side. Perhaps my cynical friend was right after all.
