Scooter riders must wear a helmet under the Victorian road rules. And they cannot be ridden on roads with a speed limit above 50kmh, so they're really not so handyComedian wrote:That's why many women I know prefer to ride a scooter for short trips as it gets around the helmet thing which is a no go for them.
https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety ... index.html
Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (MHL discussion)
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby il padrone » Sun Nov 06, 2016 6:24 pm
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby il padrone » Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:44 pm
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby human909 » Fri Nov 25, 2016 9:57 pm
POT smoking protesters are free to blaze up illegal drugs in a city park under police nose
If only cyclists had as much freedom as some illicit drug users.POT smoking protesters are free to blaze up illegal drugs in a city park under police noses.
Victoria Police is not acting over illegal drug use at regular mass dope smoking picnics in Melbourne, describing the events as “freedom of expression”.
......
Police for years have turned a blind eye to the hundreds and sometimes thousands of drug users breaking the law at the events, run by pro-legalisation campaigners Free Cannabis Community.
Victoria Police confirmed they were aware of the gatherings but no arrests were made at the last picnic.
Spokeswoman Leonie Johnson said it was illegal to smoke cannabis, but police used discretion.
“Police were not required to attend Flagstaff Gardens, however monitored the event as they do for demonstrations every day across Melbourne,” she said.
She said it was believed “the actions of those taking part in the demonstration were to convey a freedom of expression” and police were in close contact with event organisers.
.........
He said they had a good relationship with police and the purpose was to “overcome the negative effect of prohibition and the isolation when there is nowhere for stoners to go”.
.........
“I back their judgment when it comes to how best to use their powers and when they need to intervene,” she said.
(I'm sure there are varied opinions on this forum about marijuana. But I'm not sure we need to open another can of worms! Personally I find beer refreshing enough after a ride, but I'm tolerant if other people enjoy other ways to relax...)
- Mulger bill
- Super Mod
- Posts: 29060
- Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
- Location: Sunbury Vic
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby Mulger bill » Sat Nov 26, 2016 9:52 pm
I know we don't and we won't.human909 wrote:But I'm not sure we need to open another can of worms!
London Boy 29/12/2011
-
- Posts: 14396
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm
- Location: Bendigo
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby warthog1 » Sat Nov 26, 2016 10:52 pm
- mikesbytes
- Super Mod
- Posts: 22179
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
- Location: Tempe, Sydney
- Contact:
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby mikesbytes » Sun Nov 27, 2016 8:20 am
And then the police used discretion when they drove home stoned?human909 wrote:While reading the local fish&chip wrapper I came across this story... It did ocurr to me that the police and Australian society in general seem to be more tolerant of people breaking the law with marijuana than with riding without helmets.
POT smoking protesters are free to blaze up illegal drugs in a city park under police nose
If only cyclists had as much freedom as some illicit drug users.POT smoking protesters are free to blaze up illegal drugs in a city park under police noses.
Victoria Police is not acting over illegal drug use at regular mass dope smoking picnics in Melbourne, describing the events as “freedom of expression”.
......
Police for years have turned a blind eye to the hundreds and sometimes thousands of drug users breaking the law at the events, run by pro-legalisation campaigners Free Cannabis Community.
Victoria Police confirmed they were aware of the gatherings but no arrests were made at the last picnic.
Spokeswoman Leonie Johnson said it was illegal to smoke cannabis, but police used discretion.
“Police were not required to attend Flagstaff Gardens, however monitored the event as they do for demonstrations every day across Melbourne,” she said.
She said it was believed “the actions of those taking part in the demonstration were to convey a freedom of expression” and police were in close contact with event organisers.
.........
He said they had a good relationship with police and the purpose was to “overcome the negative effect of prohibition and the isolation when there is nowhere for stoners to go”.
.........
“I back their judgment when it comes to how best to use their powers and when they need to intervene,” she said.
(I'm sure there are varied opinions on this forum about marijuana. But I'm not sure we need to open another can of worms! Personally I find beer refreshing enough after a ride, but I'm tolerant if other people enjoy other ways to relax...)
- ColinOldnCranky
- Posts: 6734
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby ColinOldnCranky » Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:20 am
It's the same in most jurisdictions.Comedian wrote:That's the case in QLD.mikesbytes wrote:FindBruce has stated, as part of another conversation that a unicycle is not a bicycle, its a wheeled recreational vehicle. I think that means that Helmets are not mandatory for unicycle riding
That's why many women I know prefer to ride a scooter for short trips as it gets around the helmet thing which is a no go for them.
https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety ... index.html
Though SA did, up until a couple of years back, treat WRDs a little differently. Skateboarders and cyclists could not ride on paths, nor even Rundle St Mall and similar (yet could ride on major roads like Henley Beach Road) and had to wear helmets.
I know that they changed some of their related legislation since including the right to use footpaths but I am not sure about helmets.
But by and large states tend to frame their legislation to mirror the national model legislation.
- Comedian
- Posts: 9166
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
- Location: Brisbane
-
- Posts: 14396
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm
- Location: Bendigo
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby warthog1 » Mon Jan 16, 2017 4:05 pm
Are they cowed and subservient sheeple like us now?
- Comedian
- Posts: 9166
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
- Location: Brisbane
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby Comedian » Mon Jan 16, 2017 4:12 pm
There is a little part of me.. as a parent that says "maybe it's not such a bad thing" as my boy and girl both had some epic crashes while they were learning to ride. Having said that, I think the benefit would be so small that the disadvantage would likely out weigh it.warthog1 wrote:What has happened to the proud, revolutionary heritage of the French people?
Are they cowed and subservient sheeple like us now?
I think in Australia that if we ever had a repeal it would be packaged with something like this. I think it's critical that children can ride without a helmet after the age the french have selected - as that's when they are forming their transport habits for their adult life. Up until that age, they probably aren't so concerned about the helmet thing.
-
- Posts: 14396
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm
- Location: Bendigo
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby warthog1 » Mon Jan 16, 2017 4:22 pm
My kids had a few bingles, as did I. They had helmets on, I did not, on the sturmey archer t-bar equipped dragster
- Mulger bill
- Super Mod
- Posts: 29060
- Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
- Location: Sunbury Vic
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby Mulger bill » Mon Jan 16, 2017 6:54 pm
Now is the chance for proper research into takeup and retention rates amongst the younger riders. It'd be cool if likely unintended consequences could be examined too.Comedian wrote:Interesting news from France..
http://road.cc/content/news/215619-fran ... -and-under
Of course noone will fund something as subversive as that...
London Boy 29/12/2011
- Thoglette
- Posts: 6621
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby Thoglette » Mon Jan 16, 2017 10:42 pm
No, not when the numbers are well in from NZ and here. NZ about 50% (transport.gov.nz 2012). AU cycling to school rates dropped by 85% (Heart Foundation study 2012).Mulger bill wrote:Now is the chance for proper research into takeup and retention rates amongst the younger riders. It'd be cool if likely unintended consequences could be examined too.
Of course noone will fund something as subversive as that...
The pro-helmet LAW crowd have to hang their hats on dodgy statistics. A slip-slop-slap type campaign would be much more effective than MHL for France. Based on the NT experience it's only going to exacerbate their internal problems with the internally dispossessed (who already hate the gendarmes).
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ
- yugyug
- Posts: 1826
- Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:27 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby yugyug » Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:51 pm
I can think of several reasons why this is bad policy.Comedian wrote:Interesting news from France..
http://road.cc/content/news/215619-fran ... -and-under
As mentioned, it might become a 'thin edge of the wedge' tactic to broaden its scope to older kids and adults.
As well discussed, helmets can be deterrent to cycling. So it was just argued that kids under 12 likely don't feel the stigma of a helmet, nor are deterred by the message of risk it communicates. But their parents certainly are. Therefore: 1. parents may not encourage their kids to ride because they don't appreciate the look, which may trivially be about style, but also comfort and social expression, and 2, more consequentially, parents will be deterred by the message of risk it communicates. Is cycling really so dangerous for kids it requires a helmet? Some cycling like BMX, sure, but not riding around the playground or the lake, and parents should be able to assess that risk rather than have a blanket law without exclusion.The end result is that kids will be wearing helmets for safe forms of riding, and this will send a false message that safe forms of riding are actually unsafe, a big deterrent for ill-informed parents.
Additionally, I don't believe the efficacy science for helmets on children is adequate. I know of few studies. There are key issues with helmets for children. Firstly, the weight and size of helmets are relatively greater than for adults. This means the risk of rotational concussion and neck injuries caused by helmets may be greater than for adults. Secondly, the greater relative size increases the target area of the head. This is may increase the risk of a head impact. Kids, like adults, have a natural kinaesthetic awareness of their body and I suspect that a helmet messes with this perception, especially in young kids.
There is also the risk of strangulation that has been documented by kids getting their straps caught on trees and play equipment etc - the broader point of this is that helmets are safety equipment that require skill and responsibility to use, and young kids may not be mature enough to have that skill and responsibility. Conversely, there is nothing required to go sans helmet and rely on the natural evolved properties of the human skull to protect your head, which seems to be working very well given the number of adults walking around alive.
I question whether there is really even a problem outside of outside of BMX or other obviously risk forms of cycling. Kids are low to the ground and don't ride as fast as adults. Yes, you can say that their skulls are less developed, but then so are their neck muscles and ability to remove the helmet in adverse situations.
If some health experts use data to argue there is a problem, I suspect its probably because, like with adults, the the data does not distinguish between different forms of cycling. And like with adults, any such data is probably contaminated by automobile caused conditions, in which kids are suffering heads injuries from automobile collisions that are traumatic enough a helmet probably wouldn't help anyway. If motorists can't stop mowing down kids on footpaths and on quiet back streets, a helmet law isn't going to improve the situation much, we have a much bigger problem (which we do).
FFS I see kids wearing their helmets for the most benign forms of play. Kids on tricycles with rear adult steerer attachments. Its crazy.
FYI I let my 5 year old kid ride helmetfree in the park most of the time. He is gutsy and fast and has loads of spills as you would expect, and not once has he had a head injury. No injury greater than a scraped palm or knee. I monitor him very closely when he is riding because I have a strong personal interest in cycling risk and safety and the helmet issue and want to observe his cycling development with and without a helmet. I have seen him fall many times and avoid head contact by involuntarily lifting his head (in the same way as seen over and over in that famous clip of the Dutch cyclists falling on the icy corner). I suspect that if he was wearing a helmet some of these falls would result in head strikes. I also suspect that not wearing a helmet has helped develop this instinct, and that wearing a helmet all the time could retard it. I also feel better knowing he is not burdened by the weight of the helmet, or susceptible to being accidentally strangled or given a neck injury.
- biker jk
- Posts: 7010
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby biker jk » Sun Jan 22, 2017 12:19 pm
- trailgumby
- Posts: 15469
- Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:30 pm
- Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
- Contact:
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby trailgumby » Sun Jan 22, 2017 3:18 pm
Also completely ignores the depressive impact that the compulsory nature of our helmet legislation has on participation rates and the flow-through to increased obesity rates and inactivity-related disease.
Otherwise, a good piece on showing that helmets do, on balance, help reduce injury severity once you're in an accident.
- Thoglette
- Posts: 6621
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby Thoglette » Sun Jan 22, 2017 4:48 pm
Which is the point.trailgumby wrote:Also completely ignores the depressive impact that the compulsory nature of our helmet legislation has on participation rates and the flow-through to increased obesity rates and inactivity-related disease.
We don't have mandatory slip-slop-slap laws.
We don't have mandatory life jacket laws.
We don't have laws stopping you mowing in your thongs.
We don't have swimming licenses.
We don't have MHL for showering and bathing for the over eighties.
Yet all of these things are much more likely to result in serious injury or death.
Helmets are useful for specific types of cycling activity: those involving high speeds and high likelihood of single-vehicle accidents: BMX, MTB, road racing. Those of us with long exposure times to medium levels of risk (high speed commuters and those doing training miles) are likely to benefit. Strangely enough these are exactly the sorts of people who wore helmets BEFORE MHL.
Helmets are little or no use to those doing short distances or at low speed: i.e, those who don't need a shower afterwards. School kids, people nipping down to the shop, people riding 1km to the trainstation or bus stop, university students, and people tootling around generally. Strangely enough these are exactly the sorts of people who stopped riding after we got MHL.
The efficacy of helmets is, it turns out, irrelevant to the MHL question.
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ
- Alex Simmons/RST
- Expert
- Posts: 4997
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm
- Contact:
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Sun Jan 22, 2017 6:57 pm
France is an unusual one in that last chart. Aside from Sydney of course !
- Comedian
- Posts: 9166
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
- Location: Brisbane
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby Comedian » Sun Jan 22, 2017 7:14 pm
https://twitter.com/JSadikKhan/status/8 ... 2846287872NYC has no helmet law, 38 million bike share trips & 0 deaths.
Seattle has a helmet law & 1 dead bike share system
-
- Posts: 657
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:26 pm
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby Mike Ayling » Sun Jan 22, 2017 7:59 pm
We do in Victoria.Thoglette wrote:
We don't have mandatory life jacket laws.
Mike
- bychosis
- Posts: 7269
- Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:10 pm
- Location: Lake Macquarie
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby bychosis » Sun Jan 22, 2017 8:19 pm
And in NSW, admittedly not for all water activities though. Kayaking, small boats, children, ocean bar crossing. (I will admit I'm not fully up with it though so won't be 100% correct)Mike Ayling wrote:We do in Victoria.Thoglette wrote:
We don't have mandatory life jacket laws.
Mike
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby human909 » Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:44 pm
Compulsory life jackets seems to be focused on people not even in the water. Even rock fishermen have been considered as targets. Yet swimmers where most drownings occur and where there is the most benefit of compulsory life jacket laws are the majority and thus not targeted.
The compulsory life jacket laws seem a little ridiculous when you have friends playing with inflatable craft on small rivers. This includes the Yarra Inflatable Regatta.
Again the real risk takers on the water normally don't need government encouragement. I dabble in white(ish)water kayayking and have friends who take it more seriously. Pretty much nobody jumps into whitewater kayaking without a life jacket and a helmet*.
*helmets are not compulsory, but they are a damn good idea in whitewater.
- Mulger bill
- Super Mod
- Posts: 29060
- Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
- Location: Sunbury Vic
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby Mulger bill » Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:49 pm
Nor climbing if I recall your earlier posts correct...human909 wrote:*helmets are not compulsory, but they are a damn good idea in whitewater.[/i]
The law is an ass
London Boy 29/12/2011
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby human909 » Sun Jan 22, 2017 10:10 pm
Yep. I find the climbing scene as an amazing example of SELF regulation. If the government got involved I would expect things to be LESS safe. Climbers go out knowing what they do has risk and they make intelligent choices regarding that. They buy equipment from reputable manufactures and use it after being trained in its use (self or peer trained). They have peer assessment of guide books that give guidance on climbing areas and they take individual and collective responsibility for maintaining a safe environment.Mulger bill wrote:Nor climbing if I recall your earlier posts correct...human909 wrote:*helmets are not compulsory, but they are a damn good idea in whitewater.[/i]
The law is an ass
Overall the drive to the destination and home is pretty much as risky as the activity.
Oh and if you have some downtime to watch a movie. I highly recommend this documentary. It is totally palatable and humourous even for people who have no idea or context about rock climbing. It is just a good laugh!
Politics:
Individual and community regulation over safety has existed for millennia. We don't need government poking their heads into everything.
Thankfully the fundamental structure of our laws regulate what we CAN'T do not what we CAN do. So plenty of things go completely unregulated. Sadly however, there are plenty of people in government/society who think we DO need to regulate what people do.
I wholeheartedly support a generous society that looks after its citizens (AKA socialist society). But I'm also a libertarian. If it doesn't cause harm to others then let people be free.
- Thoglette
- Posts: 6621
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)
Postby Thoglette » Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:37 am
Mandatory possession or mandatory wearing?bychosis wrote:And in NSW,Mike Ayling wrote:We do in Victoria.Thoglette wrote:We don't have mandatory life jacket laws.
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ
Return to “Cycling Safety and Advocacy”
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+10:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.