Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)

Equipment and On Road Behaviour, Laws and Rules. Cycling Promotion and Advocacy

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby simonn » Fri Mar 01, 2013 5:52 am

Xplora wrote:
simonn wrote:
Hypotheticals and marketing slogans aside, are you really arguing that the graphic I linked to does not demonstrate that speed, once an accident has occurred, kills?


I think he's arguing that "speed kills" is a wimp out by the State.



He was also directly arguing against my point.

I sort of agree with the above. I would not say it is a "wimp out" though. The problem is that people, in general, appear to be stupid so you need a catchy slogan and also threaten them the might of the law, because it is about protecting other people - I do not really care if someone chooses to speed (or whatever) and kills just themselves. If people, in general, were clever and logical they would understand why speeding is a bad thing - and that it is not about them - and not do it, therefore no laws or catchy slogans would be necessary, especially for the sake of their personal entertainment or saving a few seconds or maybe minutes here and there. Clearly this is not the case.

Some emphasis that speed does actually kill in PSAs would probably be a good thing as, at least IME, quite a few people just do not seem to get it.

the mention of the helmet tells the reader that the helmet magically stops their whole body from injury.


Only anti-MHL proponents seem to think this is the case.
Image
User avatar
simonn
 
Posts: 3578
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:46 am
Location: Sydney

by BNA » Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:12 am

BNA
 

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby outnabike » Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:12 am

[quote="the mention of the helmet tells the reader that the helmet magically stops their whole body from injury.[/quote]

Only anti-MHL proponents seem to think this is the case.[/quote]

Ahhhh yes, the theory of being correct is easily used to divide and conquer the cyclist community. How simplistic it is to express spurious inflammatory statements.
Just imply complete stupidity and you have won a point. :D
outnabike
 
Posts: 852
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:53 pm
Location: Melbourne Vic

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby wizdofaus » Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:32 am

simonn wrote:Only anti-MHL proponents seem to think this is the case.


Only people in Australia and NZ would ever see a cyclist not wearing a helmet and think they were doing something wrong, and therefore likely to be at fault.

At least we have the magpies on our side (hint: they don't swoop if you're not wearing a helmet. It's pretty clear it's MHL they object to).
wizdofaus
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:39 am
Location: Kensington, Melbourne, VIC

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby wilddemon » Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:55 am

Xplora wrote:
simonn wrote:Hypotheticals and marketing slogans aside, are you really arguing that the graphic I linked to does not demonstrate that speed, once an accident has occurred, kills?

I think he's arguing that "speed kills" is a wimp out by the State. Autobahn was capable of handling speeds of 200kmh, and people did that totally OK.

snip

Agree with Simonn re intended understanding. Speed kills is related to once an accident occurs. The anti MHL brigade still seem to think they will never have an accident which makes perfect sense, apart from il padrone. How's your head btw? (actually heard that people are debating whether to regulate football players' game appearances once they have had a concussion or two because of a degenerative disease that you can acquire from concussions - yikes! Some players claim that they cant remember whole chunks of their career.)

And comparison to autobahn at 200kmh is a totally different kettle of fish. There are no pedestrians on the autobahn. The greatest RELATIVE velocity is going to be 200kmh, that is if you stop. The same as if you are doing 100 on our open roads, and pass another car doing 100 in the opposite direction. Again, not really relevant comparing us to Europe where the infrastructure is totally different. Probably more plausible to compare us to the moon: poor cycling infrastructure, no road rage towards cyclists and no MHL. Flame suit on :)

edit: smiley face added
Last edited by wilddemon on Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
wilddemon
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:09 am

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby simonn » Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:56 am

wizdofaus wrote:
simonn wrote:Only anti-MHL proponents seem to think this is the case.


Only people in Australia and NZ would ever see a cyclist not wearing a helmet and think they were doing something wrong, and therefore likely to be at fault.

At least we have the magpies on our side (hint: they don't swoop if you're not wearing a helmet. It's pretty clear it's MHL they object to).


Thinking someone is doing something wrong by not wearing a helmet is different to claiming that people think helmets act as some kind of magical item of invulnerability.

Image
Last edited by simonn on Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
simonn
 
Posts: 3578
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:46 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby simonn » Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:58 am

outnabike wrote:Ahhhh yes, the theory of being correct is easily used to divide and conquer the cyclist community. How simplistic it is to express spurious inflammatory statements.
Just imply complete stupidity and you have won a point. :D


I can't actually understand what your point is, but it is only anti-MHL proponents that bring this up. Nobody else seems to think that a helmet does more than possibly reduce the chance or severity of a head injury as the result of an accident.
Image
User avatar
simonn
 
Posts: 3578
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:46 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby simonn » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:02 am

wilddemon wrote:And comparison to autobahn at 200kmh is a totally different kettle of fish.


Germany actually has a higher rate of road deaths/km than (even) Australia.
Image
User avatar
simonn
 
Posts: 3578
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:46 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby Xplora » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:12 am

Go back to my statement about subtext. What lesson do we learn about Xplora from this thread? H909? Paddy? Humans read in between the lines. We speak in between them as well. You deny the basic flaw in the comment about the 80kmh accident. There was no issue about a helmet, the CAR was the cause of death. Helmets would have to be mandated for anyone near a road to justify a comment about helmet use when a person is t boned at 80kmh. It implies fault by the rider. Implication means subtext. A further implication could be that the rider just should not be on the road at all, regardless of their otherwise flawless obedience to the law. MHL has failed because we don't have better casualty rates or higher numbers of riders. The subtext does not say you can be confident on the bike now. It says danger.
Xplora
 
Posts: 5828
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby wizdofaus » Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:48 am

simonn wrote:Thinking someone is doing something wrong by not wearing a helmet is different to claiming that people think helmets act as some kind of magical item of invulnerability.


Is it? At any rate, my response was a half-serious rejoinder, nothing more. Honestly don't think it's worth getting worked up about MHL for the most part. I'd be happy to see a serious push to get some exemptions made though (e.g. for bike-share schemes).
wizdofaus
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:39 am
Location: Kensington, Melbourne, VIC

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby wilddemon » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:02 am

Xplora wrote:Go back to my statement about subtext. What lesson do we learn about Xplora from this thread? H909? Paddy?

You like to use be thoroughly cryptic and use long words when short ones will do. If your arguments weren't so paper thin it wouldn't be necessary.
wilddemon
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:09 am

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby simonn » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:20 am

wilddemon wrote:
Xplora wrote:Go back to my statement about subtext. What lesson do we learn about Xplora from this thread? H909? Paddy?

You like to use be thoroughly cryptic and use long words when short ones will do. If your arguments weren't so paper thin it wouldn't be necessary.


:lol: +1
Image
User avatar
simonn
 
Posts: 3578
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:46 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby Xplora » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:41 am

wilddemon wrote:
Xplora wrote:Go back to my statement about subtext. What lesson do we learn about Xplora from this thread? H909? Paddy?

You like to use be thoroughly cryptic and use long words when short ones will do. If your arguments weren't so paper thin it wouldn't be necessary.

Not at all. The painfully obvious explanations and evidence have already proven that MHL has failed. I am now dealing with the next stage of the argument - if we will not change the law despite the incredible failure after 20 years, we must now demonstrate why it is hurting cycling and cyclists. I don't use short words because I have never tried to appeal to the lowest common denominator. I am no politician or lobbyist. I hope that thinking people can be engaged and start to consider what a massive problem we face as a community - the importance of safety on a commute, and the responsibility of all people to pay attention when they are using a footpath or road or share path. Negligence seems to be unpunished, yet it feels that a cyclist is treated as negligent if they don't wear a helmet. Our legal structure sucks for the most dangerous act we do every day, and MHL is a part of that picture.
Xplora
 
Posts: 5828
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby wilddemon » Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:56 am

Lowest common denominator? Sounds like you are suffering superiority complex. And if you've moved on from the MHL debate, why don't you move on from the MHL thread?
wilddemon
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:09 am

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby Kenzo » Fri Mar 01, 2013 11:54 am

I for one can totally understand Xplora without the need for a dictionary or thesaurus and I certainly do not consider myself an 'intellectual'.
I see the posts attacking his choice of words as against forum rules. Possibly simply to gain points in some perceived class war?

At any rate I agree - there does exist a need for further discussion. Laws change as society changes and I believe there has been a shift in the world.
we need to move away from motorised transport in urban areas and cycling is an option. Barriers to cycling need to be explored and if possible - removed.
User avatar
Kenzo
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 8:13 am
Location: Daisy Hill / Brisbane, Southside FTW

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby il padrone » Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:06 pm

Kenzo wrote:I for one can totally understand Xplora without the need for a dictionary or thesaurus and I certainly do not consider myself an 'intellectual'.
I see the posts attacking his choice of words as against forum rules. Possibly simply to gain points in some perceived class war?

Good point.

Play the ball, not the man.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18259
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby wilddemon » Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:49 pm

Smoke and mirrors won't save anyone that comes off a pushbike fellas.
wilddemon
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:09 am

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby wilddemon » Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:55 pm

What this thread needs is a mediator lol
wilddemon
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:09 am

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby human909 » Fri Mar 01, 2013 2:16 pm

wilddemon wrote:Smoke and mirrors won't save anyone that comes off a pushbike fellas.

What is a pushbike? :?

Mandatory helmet laws aren't saving anybody either. They are making cyclists LESS safe on the roads.
human909
 
Posts: 4766
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby il padrone » Fri Mar 01, 2013 2:23 pm

human909 wrote:
wilddemon wrote:Smoke and mirrors won't save anyone that comes off a pushbike fellas.

What is a pushbike? :?

Ya haf ta push it mon! But look...... no helmet :shock:

Image
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18259
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby Xplora » Fri Mar 01, 2013 4:01 pm

wilddemon wrote:Smoke and mirrors won't save anyone that comes off a pushbike fellas.

If you have had a genuine risk of suffering catastrophic injury AKA death or permanent disability every time you came off your bike, I would advise you to stop riding. I've had a lot of spills in my lifetime, and only one had a risk of catastrophic injury. Every single car journey carries a greater risk, yet people don't need helmets there. :?:

It's not smoke and mirrors - it's simply asking you to apply your brain to a simple subject. If you can't bear challenges to your opinions, you're missing out on an opportunity each time.
Xplora
 
Posts: 5828
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby wilddemon » Fri Mar 01, 2013 4:52 pm

Xplora wrote:
wilddemon wrote:Smoke and mirrors won't save anyone that comes off a pushbike fellas.

If you have had a genuine risk of suffering catastrophic injury AKA death or permanent disability every time you came off your bike, I would advise you to stop riding. I've had a lot of spills in my lifetime, and only one had a risk of catastrophic injury. Every single car journey carries a greater risk, yet people don't need helmets there. :?:

It's not smoke and mirrors - it's simply asking you to apply your brain to a simple subject. If you can't bear challenges to your opinions, you're missing out on an opportunity each time.

You do have genuine risk of suffering catastrophic injury every time you come off your bike. Thanks, but yours is the last advise I would take. You must be riding in a fantasy land far away from traffic and hard objects, and very slowly. Cycling doesn't NEED a helmet either. In fact, if you don't want to wear a helmet, don't. If you get done for it, and let's be honest, there is small chance that you will (IMO). And when you do, eventually, the money you saved on helmets will pay for the fine, and you won't have a criminal conviction.

I'm not refuting your claims that Every single car journey carries a greater risk (I'm assuming more risk than a bicycle, or pushbike, journey) but would you mind citing your reference? Thanks :)
wilddemon
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:09 am

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby high_tea » Fri Mar 01, 2013 4:57 pm

Xplora wrote:
wilddemon wrote:Smoke and mirrors won't save anyone that comes off a pushbike fellas.

If you have had a genuine risk of suffering catastrophic injury AKA death or permanent disability every time you came off your bike, I would advise you to stop riding. I've had a lot of spills in my lifetime, and only one had a risk of catastrophic injury. Every single car journey carries a greater risk, yet people don't need helmets there. :?:


Is there any evidence to support the claim that motoring is more risky than cycling?
high_tea
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby wizdofaus » Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:28 pm

high_tea wrote:
Xplora wrote:
wilddemon wrote:Smoke and mirrors won't save anyone that comes off a pushbike fellas.

If you have had a genuine risk of suffering catastrophic injury AKA death or permanent disability every time you came off your bike, I would advise you to stop riding. I've had a lot of spills in my lifetime, and only one had a risk of catastrophic injury. Every single car journey carries a greater risk, yet people don't need helmets there. :?:


Is there any evidence to support the claim that motoring is more risky than cycling?


Certainly in many European countries it's pretty clear you're more likely to be killed travelling for a certain amount of time in a motor vehicle vs on a bike. Stats for Australia are a bit murky unfortunately, going by, e.g. TAC figures, at best you can can say for sure is that cycling is no more likely to result in a fatality or permanent injury than driving. OTOH, you're definitely more likely to have some sort of minor (non-permanent) injury on a bike, including head injuries. For most of us however, that risk is well worth the pay off.
wizdofaus
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:39 am
Location: Kensington, Melbourne, VIC

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby high_tea » Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:06 pm

wizdofaus wrote:
high_tea wrote:
Xplora wrote:If you have had a genuine risk of suffering catastrophic injury AKA death or permanent disability every time you came off your bike, I would advise you to stop riding. I've had a lot of spills in my lifetime, and only one had a risk of catastrophic injury. Every single car journey carries a greater risk, yet people don't need helmets there. :?:


Is there any evidence to support the claim that motoring is more risky than cycling?


Certainly in many European countries it's pretty clear you're more likely to be killed travelling for a certain amount of time in a motor vehicle vs on a bike. Stats for Australia are a bit murky unfortunately, going by, e.g. TAC figures, at best you can can say for sure is that cycling is no more likely to result in a fatality or permanent injury than driving. OTOH, you're definitely more likely to have some sort of minor (non-permanent) injury on a bike, including head injuries. For most of us however, that risk is well worth the pay off.


Do you have a citation for this? or better still for head injury rates in Australia, that being what I understood Xplora's claim to be about?
high_tea
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby wizdofaus » Sat Mar 02, 2013 5:56 am

high_tea wrote:
wizdofaus wrote:Certainly in many European countries it's pretty clear you're more likely to be killed travelling for a certain amount of time in a motor vehicle vs on a bike. Stats for Australia are a bit murky unfortunately, going by, e.g. TAC figures, at best you can can say for sure is that cycling is no more likely to result in a fatality or permanent injury than driving. OTOH, you're definitely more likely to have some sort of minor (non-permanent) injury on a bike, including head injuries. For most of us however, that risk is well worth the pay off.


Do you have a citation for this? or better still for head injury rates in Australia, that being what I understood Xplora's claim to be about?


You can look up fatalities/permanent injuries on the TAC site. Offhand I don't have any other references saved anywhere, but I might have to dig them out again at some point.
wizdofaus
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:39 am
Location: Kensington, Melbourne, VIC

PreviousNext

Return to Cycling Safety and Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit