Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

hope you're healing well pete.

i have further to add on helmets

il padrone wrote:human909 was not describing base-jumpers or the sport as 'insane'. You were the one who did that

maybe you should get that bump checked out.

Broken collar-bone confirmed. Overlapping and fore-shortened 3 cms. I now have to get an appointment with the orthapedic surgeon.

wilddemon wrote:

il padrone wrote:human909 was not describing base-jumpers or the sport as 'insane'. You were the one who did that

maybe you should get that bump checked out.

My head is just fine. Knocked out for 2 minutes and despite 4 hrs of observation I had no symptoms of concern.


Heal thyself, physician!

il padrone wrote:

wilddemon wrote:

il padrone wrote:human909 was not describing base-jumpers or the sport as 'insane'. You were the one who did that

maybe you should get that bump checked out.

My head is just fine. Knocked out for 2 minutes and despite 4 hrs of observation I had no symptoms of concern.


Heal thyself, physician!

Yet research suggests that (long term), it's a significant injury.

wilddemon wrote:human909, do you listen to 2UE?

No. An please don't read into my comments more than they say.

I described base jumping as reckless. That is a personal opinion of mine and my attitude to risk. I recognise that other people are different, they have different desires and different appetites for risk.

As far as I am concerned base jumping is too much risk for ME to participate in. However as I said everyone appetite for risk differers, most males, particularly young males, hunger for risk. Personally I avoid most risks that I don't feel I can control. Hence skiing and mountain biking I am conservative in whereas in rock climbing I take significant calculated risks.

twizzle wrote:

il padrone wrote: Heal thyself, physician!

Yet research suggests that (long term), it's a significant injury.

That was not a comment on my medical care nor recovery, but about wilddemon's inability to understand what he had posted (and his facetious implications about my 'bump'). Seems he has the "significant injury" ??

il padrone wrote:Broken collar-bone confirmed. Overlapping and fore-shortened 3 cms. I now have to get an appointment with the orthapedic surgeon.

All "tongue in cheek" aside, I'm glad you are still here and I wish you a speedy recovery. Firstly and foremost, we are fellow human beings as well as cyclists so that puts us on the same ship, albeit on different decks (I'll take first class thanks).

Also, I'm glad that you were wearing a helmet. Many people don't have your "common sense". By the way, do you have private health insurance? Cycling insurance?

human909, don't worry, I expect your posts to be opinion. Significant calculated risks? So you free solo?

wilddemon wrote:Also, I'm glad that you were wearing a helmet. Many people don't have your "common sense".

I have never seen ANYBODY not wearing a helmet while mountain biking. In fact many mountain bikers go far and beyond mediocre bits of foam as protection. Many use full face helmets and body armour. Your assertion that many people don't have "common sense" [to wear a helmet] does not seem to be supported when it comes to mountain biking.

human909 wrote:
I have never seen ANYBODY not wearing a helmet while mountain biking. In fact many mountain bikers go far and beyond mediocre bits of foam as protection. Many use full face helmets and body armour. Your assertion that many people don't have "common sense" [to wear a helmet] does not seem to be supported when it comes to mountain biking.

Does not seem to be supported by what? Your opinion? I have seen mountain bikers not wearing helmets. I have lent a friend a helmet because I couldn't stand to watch him ride single trail without one. He's still got it. I hope he uses it.

I'm disgusted that a law is needed ANYWHERE to stop people having a whizz in lifts

I'd call these people pigs but that's unfair to most pigs.

elevator....? urinal....? elevator.... ? urinal.....? elevator!!


Some people just have trouble with their spolung

One for the anti-MHL people - http://grist.org/cities/bike-sharing-go ... t-problem/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ross wrote:One for the anti-MHL people - http://grist.org/cities/bike-sharing-go ... t-problem/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks Ross, interesting link at the end of that article too: http://grist.org/article/2010-10-11-the ... -cyclists/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; regarding more cyclists equates to better safety.. and links to a 2003 academic paper on the topic.

Interesting that after hearing the no votes for helmets the mind is clearly made up with the word "Every body"

Houser says she’s happy to comply with the helmet law: “Everybody involved feels like it’s an important law that we don’t want to see go away.”

outnabike wrote:Houser says she’s happy to comply with the helmet law: “Everybody involved feels like it’s an important law that we don’t want to see go away.”

What they were saying in Melbourne when the bikeshare concept was first launched here. How misguided they were (or hamstrung by Vicroads and the road rules)

We have 0.6 hires per bike per day. International bikeshare hire rates (with no helmet rule) are about 6 per bike per day.

I rode my bike for the first time since I was overseas last without a helmet today...just a couple of km along a dedicated bike trail, riding at no more than 15 k/h. Boy did it feel good, and I can see exactly why having to wear a helmet could be all the difference for many casual cyclists being able to enjoy getting on their bike with no stress or hassle and see it as a relaxing, safe way to get around rather than some method of transport so inherently risky and out-of-the-ordinary that we have to strap these bits of polystyrene to our heads before we getting on, and hence likely to go in the 'too hard' basket.

Anyway, 'nuff said.

News tonight, bloke in brisbane went to court defending his not wearing helmet charge because he wears a turban as part of his religion.

How do you wear a helmet with a turban? Does a turban provide any form of protection?

He rattled out the old "no statistics proving the benefit of helmets" argument, case adjourned to allow him to seek legal counsel.

EDIT: Can't find a link, was on nine news this arvo

Sikhs. Don't ever ask a Sikh to remove his turban.

http://fateh.sikhnet.com/s/WhyTurbans" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Guru has given his Sikh specific instructions to keep his or her natural form as created by God. Thus, all hair is maintained, uncut, and untrimmed. The Guru has given his Sikh a standard of dress which distinguishes him or her as a human being dedicated to a life of truthful living. The Guru has instructed his Sikhs to maintain high moral character, symbolized by the wearing of the steel bracelet, ("kara") and to stand prepared to defend righteousness, wearing the "kirpan" or sword.

In some states an exemption can be granted. Rani is apparently having trouble in NSW.

She’d love to be able to ride here as freely as she did in Holland. But she has the problem of her Dumalla. That’s her Sikh turban.

Sikhs never cut their hair, rather they wind it round in clothe under the Dumalla.

This makes it impossible for Rani to wear a helmet. So every day she has to run the gauntlet of cops who’d like to ticket her for breaking our laws.

If he gets the turban defence through, that pretty much spells the end of MHL in Australia IMO. The lady in Scone defended against it successfully, I'm sorry but "God will look after me" is an unacceptable legal position from the perspective of the State (and I'm a Christian, I understand the motivation!)...

I'd have to say that if the whims of religion can't be accommodated by the law then the religious either have to accept exclusion, or the law must change. Facial identification and burquas are a similar situation where the needs of the religious don't outrank the needs of the State without consideration inconvenience for the Muslim lady.

Ultimately, the fact remains... if the helmet doesn't automatically stop injury and danger, and a guy in a turban doesn't have to wear it, then why should anyone else? Sikhs don't have stronger bones or tougher skin than everyone else

Xplora wrote:If he gets the turban defence through, that pretty much spells the end of MHL in Australia IMO.

I only this was the case!

Special treatment for minorities and the magic of helmets is too ingrained in our society.

Xplora wrote:If he gets the turban defence through, that pretty much spells the end of MHL in Australia IMO. The lady in Scone defended against it successfully, I'm sorry but "God will look after me" is an unacceptable legal position from the perspective of the State (and I'm a Christian, I understand the motivation!)...

I'd have to say that if the whims of religion can't be accommodated by the law then the religious either have to accept exclusion, or the law must change. Facial identification and burquas are a similar situation where the needs of the religious don't outrank the needs of the State without consideration inconvenience for the Muslim lady.

Ultimately, the fact remains... if the helmet doesn't automatically stop injury and danger, and a guy in a turban doesn't have to wear it, then why should anyone else? Sikhs don't have stronger bones or tougher skin than everyone else

Alternatively, Sikhs could campaign to have their turbans classified as helmets meeting the necessary approved standards

Plenty of Sikh cricketers manage to wear a helmet while batting and fielding at stupid point, bat pad and other such positions.

Interesting point. What's the very biggest AS compliant helmet out there?

AKO wrote:Plenty of Sikh cricketers manage to wear a helmet while batting and fielding at stupid point, bat pad and other such positions.

Monty Panesar is a sikh.


With their belief in never cutting their hair, I'd guess Monty is either very young or he has extremely slow-growing hair