Ross wrote:There would still be sticks, rocks, other cyclists of varying abilities and speeds and likely to be the odd pedestrian and stray animals as well, which can cause crashes.
Or my favourite, the fine gravel on bends that washes across Canberra cycle paths after every spot of rain.
Helmets in any individual case are a good idea. They prevent injuries to the rider and medical costs to everyone else. But they are a PITA for bike share schemes. And perhaps for riding at <15 kmh - the "soft focus long-haired model with flowers in the basket" kind of riding we see in photo shoots - are helmets necessary? Maybe not.
But does making an exception mean we going to have a policy that requires bike cops with radar guns ticketing the helmetless who go above a certain speed? And, with a relaxation of the rules we can be pretty sure that the first people to not wear helmets would be the same guys who
commute through red lights every morning So a relaxation may mean higher medical costs for taxpayers - and maybe we'd rather spend that money on decent infrastructure, something more than the spot of green paint on the road stuff we tend to get fobbed off with.
From a pragmatic/political point of view, I don't think MHLs are likely to be repealed, especially after the UNSW Rissel/Voukelatos anti-MHL paper got pulled last year for being junk science. That really was a hit below the waterline for anti-MHL credibility as far as policy makers are concerned.