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 » Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:24 am

Pastafarians from the Colandarial denomination should be ok then. May you be touched by his noodley appendage. rAmen.
Image
User avatar
simonn
 
Posts: 3599
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:46 am
Location: Sydney

by BNA » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:47 pm

BNA
 

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

Postby Ken Ho » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:47 pm

high_tea wrote:
Ken Ho wrote:Yay !!
That looks encouraging.
Meanwhile, here in Qld, where the law has been modified to allow an exemption on religious grounds, I'm going to try this.

officer - why aren't you wearing a helmet, sonny ?
Me - it's against my religion, sir
Officer -what religion would that be now ?
Me - why would that matter officer, are you planning on discriminating between religions ?

Of course, I have a medical exemption to fall back on, but I'm seeing a pissy, but thwarted copper. Bells and reflectors will be fitted, so the fallbacks of fining me for whatever other crap they can come up with are not available either.

FYI you have to have some kind of headwear on for the religious exemption to apply, and it has to make wearing a helmet impractical....
You have officially become your parents.
Ken Ho
 
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:28 pm
Location: Pikey, based on Southern Gold Coast

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

Postby Ken Ho » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:51 pm

high_tea wrote:
Ken Ho wrote:Yay !!
That looks encouraging.
Meanwhile, here in Qld, where the law has been modified to allow an exemption on religious grounds, I'm going to try this.

officer - why aren't you wearing a helmet, sonny ?
Me - it's against my religion, sir
Officer -what religion would that be now ?
Me - why would that matter officer, are you planning on discriminating between religions ?

Of course, I have a medical exemption to fall back on, but I'm seeing a pissy, but thwarted copper. Bells and reflectors will be fitted, so the fallbacks of fining me for whatever other crap they can come up with are not available either.

FYI you have to have some kind of headwear on for the religious exemption to apply, and it has
high_tea wrote:
Ken Ho wrote:Yay !!
That looks encouraging.
Meanwhile, here in Qld, where the law has been modified to allow an exemption on religious grounds, I'm going to try this.

officer - why aren't you wearing a helmet, sonny ?
Me - it's against my religion, sir
Officer -what religion would that be now ?
Me - why would that matter officer, are you planning on discriminating between religions ?

Of course, I have a medical exemption to fall back on, but I'm seeing a pissy, but thwarted copper. Bells and reflectors will be fitted, so the fallbacks of fining me for whatever other crap they can come up with are not available either.

FYI you have to have some kind of headwear on for the religious exemption to apply, and it has to make wearing a helmet impractical....


And if my religion requires my head to be bare at all times ? Where does that leave me ? Very impractical to wear a helmet then. As it is, my religion prefers me to wear a pork-pIe hat, which makes a helmet at least as impractical to wear as a Sikh turban does.

to make wearing a helmet impractical....
You have officially become your parents.
Ken Ho
 
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:28 pm
Location: Pikey, based on Southern Gold Coast

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

Postby Ken Ho » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:56 pm

Sorry for that rubbish post above, I can't seem to fix it. My point being, that it should not matter what my religion is, and as such the copper has no right to inquire. Mere inquiry implies potential discrimination.
The Pastafarians proved this quite nicely in their campaign. All religions have arbitrary rules, and my personal one should not be treated with less respect as a result. Th Jedi Knights also received official recognition after the last census.
You have officially become your parents.
Ken Ho
 
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:28 pm
Location: Pikey, based on Southern Gold Coast

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

Postby Xplora » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:30 pm

Don't try claim Jedi as an excuse; Red Five, standing by.... :D
Xplora
 
Posts: 6080
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

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

Postby high_tea » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:43 pm

Ken Ho wrote:Sorry for that rubbish post above, I can't seem to fix it. My point being, that it should not matter what my religion is, and as such the copper has no right to inquire. Mere inquiry implies potential discrimination.
The Pastafarians proved this quite nicely in their campaign. All religions have arbitrary rules, and my personal one should not be treated with less respect as a result. Th Jedi Knights also received official recognition after the last census.


Shrug. The statute doesn't say anything about how big the religious group has to be, or how widely recognised or anything like that. It does, however, require that you wear some sort of headwear that gets in the way of wearing a helmet. A general religious prohibition on wearing any headwear, for example, wouldn't enliven the exemption. Nor would having dreadlocks or something, as I understand it. Which is a pretty whacky result. I don't think much of how this exemption was drafted.
high_tea
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

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

Postby high_tea » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:59 pm

Xplora wrote:The joys of inflammatory behaviour and remarks ;) Yep the religious exemption is just gold. I reckon you might get something up in the High Court if you hired an expensive enough barrister. There is clear discrimination where a Sikh's head does not need to be protected and an Anglican's head does.


This hypothetical constitutional challenge is doomed. Restrictions on the legislative powers of states are few, and MHLs don't run into any of them.
high_tea
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

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

Postby Ken Ho » Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:45 am

As noted, I'm required to wear a hat, which gets in the way of my helmet.
As for the state having a say, while politicians and teh general public too often forget about at little thing called the Doctrine of the Separation of Powers, lucky for us all, the judiciary never does.
You have officially become your parents.
Ken Ho
 
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:28 pm
Location: Pikey, based on Southern Gold Coast

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

Postby Xplora » Thu Aug 29, 2013 10:07 am

It's not a separation of powers issue, it's a "appeal escalation" issue. High Court is the best place to get some very real, overarching repeal of any laws. ;)
Xplora
 
Posts: 6080
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

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

Postby high_tea » Thu Aug 29, 2013 10:35 am

Xplora wrote:It's not a separation of powers issue, it's a "appeal escalation" issue. High Court is the best place to get some very real, overarching repeal of any laws. ;)

Uh huh. On what grounds would you have this law invalidated? Discrimination is no answer; I'm not aware of state legislation ever being struck down for being discriminatory per se (except for s92 issues, which clearly don't apply).
high_tea
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

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

Postby Ken Ho » Thu Aug 29, 2013 11:02 am

My point was, that once the legislation is enacted, then intention of the minister becomes irrelevant. It's the way the court interprets it that counts. I'm just seeing a glance for an Un-intended consequence. Which btw , is punning on the fact that MHL had a ton of negative unintended consequence. I just want to re-dress the balances bit.
You have officially become your parents.
Ken Ho
 
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:28 pm
Location: Pikey, based on Southern Gold Coast

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

Postby diggler » Sun Sep 08, 2013 4:42 pm

A Liberal Democrat has been elected to the Senate. This party is for freedom such as no compulsory bicycle helmets.

Congratulations to all those behind this successful campaign. No doubt a lot of shoe leather was spent door knocking getting this result.

Only a cynical person would say this success is due to a preference swap deal, confusion with the Liberals, a donkey vote or the position on the ballot paper.
That's what a fool does. I'm invincible, I'm paying money ... uh ... The girl's happy, she's got no money, I got my rocks off. How good is this?
diggler
 
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:23 pm

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

Postby Mulger bill » Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:16 pm

Shoulda known it'd be a waste of time reading the above :roll:
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 25793
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

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

Postby il padrone » Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:40 pm

diggler wrote:A Liberal Democrat has been elected to the Senate. This party is for freedom such as no compulsory bicycle helmets....

Is that a specific policy statement or just a conclusion drawn from his general philosophy?

Beware, he's also an advocate of 'shooters rights' so god knows where this will take us. Hunting in National Parks, anyone? Re-introduction of recreational semi-automatic rifles?
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18389
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

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

Postby ldrcycles » Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:48 pm

il padrone wrote:
diggler wrote:A Liberal Democrat has been elected to the Senate. This party is for freedom such as no compulsory bicycle helmets....

Is that a specific policy statement or just a conclusion drawn from his general philosophy?

Beware, he's also an advocate of 'shooters rights' so god knows where this will take us. Hunting in National Parks, anyone? Re-introduction of recreational semi-automatic rifles?


And what exactly would be wrong with either of those things?
When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.
User avatar
ldrcycles
 
Posts: 6656
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 2:19 pm
Location: Kin Kin, Queensland

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

Postby Mulger bill » Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:54 pm

+1 to that. Well managed hunting in NPs just might go a long way towards controlling the introduced vermins species that do a great job of outcompeting the native fauna.
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 25793
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

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

Postby il padrone » Sun Sep 08, 2013 7:32 pm

Mulger bill wrote:+1 to that. Well managed hunting in NPs just might go a long way towards controlling the introduced vermins species that do a great job of outcompeting the native fauna.

I really doubt that is the sort of nobler goals the shooter rights mob have in mind

http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/201 ... 568593.htm

The whole deal is on hold in NSW because of the incompetence and corruption of the Game Council.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18389
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

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

Postby il padrone » Sun Sep 08, 2013 7:39 pm

ldrcycles wrote:
il padrone wrote:Beware, he's also an advocate of 'shooters rights' so god knows where this will take us. Hunting in National Parks, anyone? Re-introduction of recreational semi-automatic rifles?


And what exactly would be wrong with either of those things?

It's a joke, right ?? :o
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18389
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

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

Postby Mulger bill » Sun Sep 08, 2013 7:41 pm

No idea, haven't read their manifesto.

That lot weren't hunters but Bogans with guns. The SSAA and other state groups are working hard to get this kind out and away from the sport.
You did read further down where mention was made that suitable volunteers will be permitted to hunt ferals in NPs? This is a good thing.
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 25793
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

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

Postby ldrcycles » Sun Sep 08, 2013 7:57 pm

il padrone wrote:
ldrcycles wrote:
il padrone wrote:Beware, he's also an advocate of 'shooters rights' so god knows where this will take us. Hunting in National Parks, anyone? Re-introduction of recreational semi-automatic rifles?


And what exactly would be wrong with either of those things?

It's a joke, right ?? :o


As the secretary of the local shooting club and holder of Category A, B and H licences I can assure you i'm not joking. MB has already pointed out the environmental (and consequent economic) benefits of hunting, allowing it in a strictly controlled manner (which is what is proposed) in National Parks is quite simply the BEST way of dealing with feral animal control.

Even with the issues that lead to the abolition of the Game Council, it was estimated that in the 2012/13 financial year the program was responsible for the culling of 1.25 million feral and game animals (I would suggest the vast majority would have been ferals such as rabbits and foxes) and the economic value of that hunting was estimated at nearly $80m.

With regards to the link you posted, does that mean I can post a link to an article about a cyclist running a red light and use that as evidence that all cyclists are lawless?
When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.
User avatar
ldrcycles
 
Posts: 6656
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 2:19 pm
Location: Kin Kin, Queensland

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

Postby il padrone » Sun Sep 08, 2013 11:13 pm

Mr Leyonhjelm described his party as libertarian and said it advocated less government control, assisted suicide, a flat 20 per cent income tax rate and giving people right to carry concealed weapons for their personal safety.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national-news/fe ... z2eJ40W6cA


Not the sort of 'freedoms' I am interested in.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18389
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

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

Postby human909 » Mon Sep 09, 2013 12:23 am

I have no big objection to hunting or pest control. But more guns in the hands of people desperate to have more of them and bigger ones doesn't normally lead to improved civil liberties for all. :wink:

So about those helmets?
human909
 
Posts: 4853
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

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

Postby high_tea » Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:20 am

In other Senate news, the Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party looks to be half a chance of winning a seat, despite getting outpolled 4:1 on primary votes by the Sex Party (which speaks well of Victorian voters IMO; if that's the choice, the car can go hang for mine). They're also pushing national road rules and minimal government interference so who knows? they might come at MHL repeal. Sadly they aren't pushing for an end to above-the-line voting in the Senate, which is just hopelessly broken.
high_tea
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

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

Postby Xplora » Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:31 am

LOL yeah in the race for cars, girls and rock and roll, girls must win. Not sure how the Senatr situation got so nutty. Expect the Coalition to direct the AEC to fix up the situation if they have to go double dissolution. I think that a focus on roads will be very helpful at this time - sitting in parliament has a calming effect on the grandiose ideas generated in a party meeting.
Xplora
 
Posts: 6080
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

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

Postby lturner » Tue Sep 10, 2013 11:26 pm

Liberal Democrats are definitely opposed to helmet laws:

http://ldp.org.au/policies/1166-victimless-crimes

I heard their senator on the radio a day ago and he specifically mentioned opposition to helmet laws as an example of their political outlook.
lturner
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 2:11 am

PreviousNext

Return to Cycling Safety and Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Tim



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