i don't doubt it - but i'll save you the troublehuman909 wrote:And MANY of us strongly believe that judgment call was WRONG. Furthermore, if people want we can supply evidence to support our views.jules21 wrote:many or even most laws are made as a judgment call, as much as supported by empirical evidence.
Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (MHL discussion)
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby jules21 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 1:55 pm
-
- Posts: 1094
- Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:58 pm
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby jcjordan » Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:12 pm
The problem is that we no longer take responsibility for our own mistakes and judgments. We always need to find blame with someone else 'the pothole cause me to fall off and be injured so I will sue the transport authority rather than accepting that we were not riding to the conditions or were not paying attention.il padrone wrote:Actually..... yes! That is all a part of our freedom. I get to make my own mistakes, rather than have someone else say what mistakes I should and should not be making.jules21 wrote:including the freedom to exercise poor judgment and make mistakes.human909 wrote:It is so sad that Australians value freedom so very little.
This is why we have so many laws around 'Safety' to protect against the never ending stream of lawsuits.
Veni, Vidi, Vespa -- I Came, I Saw, I Rode Home
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby jules21 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:20 pm
that's not quite right. you don't even need to blame someone, we have a no-blame system that guarantees tax-payers will pick up the bill for any type of stupidity which results in injury.jcjordan wrote: The problem is that we no longer take responsibility for our own mistakes and judgments. We always need to find blame with someone else 'the pothole cause me to fall off and be injured so I will sue the transport authority rather than accepting that we were not riding to the conditions or were not paying attention.
This is why we have so many laws around 'Safety' to protect against the never ending stream of lawsuits.
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby human909 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 4:03 pm
I completely agree. But that is another discussion in another thread.jcjordan wrote:The problem is that we no longer take responsibility for our own mistakes and judgments. We always need to find blame with someone else 'the pothole cause me to fall off and be injured so I will sue the transport authority rather than accepting that we were not riding to the conditions or were not paying attention.
This is why we have so many laws around 'Safety' to protect against the never ending stream of lawsuits.
Sure when it comes to ROAD accidents TAC will cover medical, lost income, etc..... for accidents. Workcover will meet medical, lost income etc... for accidents. But heaven help you if you don't fall under either of those categories.jules21 wrote:that's not quite right. you don't even need to blame someone, we have a no-blame system that guarantees tax-payers will pick up the bill for any type of stupidity which results in injury.
Again the whether this is a good system or not is another discussion in another thread.
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
- greyhoundtom
- Posts: 3023
- Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 6:28 am
- Location: Wherever the sun is shining
- Contact:
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby greyhoundtom » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:29 pm
This study quotes the following;
I'm glad they at least got that part of their research data correct.For example, in Victoria, Australia, helmet use increased from 31% to 75%, and cycling fatalities
decreased by 48%, after the introduction of mandatory helmet laws, despite an increase in cycling among adults.
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby human909 » Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:17 am
Seriously?
Not wearing a helmet while cycling was associated with an increased risk of dying as a result of sustaining a head injury.
If we had helmets for drivers and pedestrians then you would see similar results.
- DavidS
- Posts: 3639
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:24 pm
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby DavidS » Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:23 am
That bit about the increase in adult cyclists is a shocker. Wonder if anyone has pointed out how wrong it is.greyhoundtom wrote:This study quotes the following;
I'm glad they at least got that part of their research data correct.For example, in Victoria, Australia, helmet use increased from 31% to 75%, and cycling fatalities
decreased by 48%, after the introduction of mandatory helmet laws, despite an increase in cycling among adults.
DS
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby human909 » Fri Dec 14, 2012 7:07 am
Well it isn't wrong. That is if you believe the "surveys".DavidS wrote:That bit about the increase in adult cyclists is a shocker. Wonder if anyone has pointed out how wrong it is.
Surveys in Melbourne also indicated a 36% reduction in bicycle use by children during the first year of the law and an estimated increase in adult use of 44%. (Straight from the abstract of the reference given.)
I think that is entirely accurate. For years Melbournites were oppressed by being FORCED to choose of what to wear on their heads while cycling. Now they have the freedom of not having to choose what to wear on their head. They are also free to choose whatever colour helmet they want as long as it has an AS/NZS 2063:2008 sticker on the inside!
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby jules21 » Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:01 am
- TailWind
- Posts: 1340
- Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 8:02 pm
- Location: Munich, Germany
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby TailWind » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:04 pm
Repeal!
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby human909 » Sat Dec 15, 2012 5:43 pm
MHL for tornado country?
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby human909 » Sun Jan 13, 2013 12:18 am
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call- ... 2cmrd.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/call- ... z2HlblsXA7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Call for helmets amid surge in skateboard injuries
DOCTORS are calling for children to wear protective gear while riding skateboards and scooters amid fears they are causing serious injuries and, in some cases, permanent disability.
The director of trauma at the Royal Children's Hospital, Dr Joseph Crameri, said there had been an increase in the number of children with injuries from fast-moving toys, including bikes, rollerblades, scooters and skateboards, during the week after Christmas.
About 35 children came in that week compared with an average of 25 in previous years. About one in five needed to be admitted to hospital for at least one night.
Dr Crameri said although he did not know what had caused the surge, it was a good reminder for parents and children that helmets and protective gear, such as knee and elbow pads, were important.
Advertisement
''It's well accepted these days that kids who get on bikes wear helmets … but when kids sometimes get on scooters and skateboards and these sorts of things, there's not necessarily the same reaction to put a helmet on,'' he said. ''If they have a decent stack, they can get significant head injuries.''
Sydney neurosurgeon Brian Owler said he was seeing too many children injured while skateboarding. He said while broken bones were common, some children had died from their injuries or sustained blood clots on their brains from head injuries.
''There was one kid who ended up in a nursing home.''
Associate Professor Owler, who helped create the Don't Rush road safety campaign, said the message that helmets were important needed to be spread by young people. ''The only way that you can get teenagers to wear helmets is if other teenagers say it's a good idea.''
NSW Commissioner for Children and Young People Megan Mitchell said it was important for children to enjoy sporting activities outside, but parents should ensure they did so as safely as possible, by wearing helmets. She said injuries relating to so-called ''pedestrian conveyances'' - skateboards, scooters and rollerskates - had increased by an average of 2.6 per cent each year in the decade since 1998-99, while bicycle-related injuries dropped about 2.9 per cent each year.
Dr Crameri said among children coming into the Royal Children's Hospital, skateboards and scooters were collectively causing about 47 per cent of injuries compared with bikes, which were causing about 35 per cent. He said parents should also be cautious with motorbikes, which caused 12 per cent of injuries and quad bikes which caused 5 per cent.
Melbourne teenager David recommended protective gear after breaking his ankle in three places on Christmas Day while riding his mate's scooter at a skate park. The 14-year-old was taken by ambulance to the Royal Children's Hospital, where he underwent surgery. He is on crutches for six weeks and has to have more surgery in coming months. There is a chance the injury will stunt the growth in one of his joints, causing further problems.
''I won't be able to do any exercise for six months after the cast comes off. It sucks,'' he said.
EDIT:
Does this forum really change OM.G to OMGosh? Religious influence wow!
- 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 Thr
Postby Mulger bill » Sun Jan 13, 2013 2:05 am
And as for you, Dr Crameri you lost ALL cred with me when you called bikes toys
London Boy 29/12/2011
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby human909 » Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:44 am
My thoughts exactly.Mulger bill wrote:Wondering how young David from the last paragraph is going to get people to strap hemlets to their ankles?
- 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 Thr
Postby il padrone » Sun Jan 13, 2013 9:26 am
Bicycle-related injuries have been falling as kids have dropped their use of bikes, due to a combination of the restrictive helmet law and parental paranoia. Other injuries have increased as the more acceptable (to parents) and helmet-free scooters and skateboards have become more popular.The Age wrote:She said injuries relating to so-called ''pedestrian conveyances'' - skateboards, scooters and rollerskates - had increased by an average of 2.6 per cent each year in the decade since 1998-99, while bicycle-related injuries dropped about 2.9 per cent each year.
BTW, I do seem to recall that scooter use does (legally) require a helmet. Never enforced of course. Must check on it.
"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 Thr
Postby human909 » Sun Jan 13, 2013 10:35 am
But society had been drilling into us all these years that decreasing injury rates are important! It is all about safety improvement!!!!The Age wrote:She said injuries relating to so-called ''pedestrian conveyances'' - skateboards, scooters and rollerskates - had increased by an average of 2.6 per cent each year in the decade since 1998-99, while bicycle-related injuries dropped about 2.9 per cent each year.
Kids will be kids. I'd love to see that trend reverse and see more kids getting injured! (as peverse as that sounds) More kids being more active will improve society in so many different ways beyond simply the direct health benefits.
-
- Posts: 187
- Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:23 pm
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby DentedHead » Sun Jan 13, 2013 11:33 am
+100human909 wrote: Kids will be kids. I'd love to see that trend reverse and see more kids getting injured! (as peverse as that sounds) More kids being more active will improve society in so many different ways beyond simply the direct health benefits.
My boy (8yo) has stacked his trike and BMX several times. Each time, I asked if he OK, then complimented him on the impressiveness of his (minor) injuries, and the stoicism with which he handled himself post-crash. We then stop for a few mins and discuss how the crash happened, and I'm careful to be specific about the cause. It's no good just saying "you went too fast around the round-about" when the actual cause was "you were turning at speed when you hit that gravel patch. That made your front wheel slip out" and he now see's stacks as a kind of lesson in physics. His attitude has changed from "I can't ride that far/up that hill/through that etc" to "Lets ride to there/up that hill/through that etc".
Don't get me wrong, I'll always make sure he wears a helmet even though I oppose MHL on principle (after all, kid-stacks are pretty much what they're designed for), but kids need to get out and push their physical boundaries even more than we adults do. Holding them back for fear of what are realistically minor injuries is, to my mind, detrimental to healthy growth and experience.
Dent.
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby human909 » Sun Jan 13, 2013 12:30 pm
Surely it is better to hold them back their whole childhood from independence, speed, physical danger and the risk of injuries. Then when they become and finally turn 18 and become an adult they will be well equipped to handle a V6 on the roads. This is especially so for young males as they abhor risk taking activities of all kinds.DentedHead wrote:Holding them back for fear of what are realistically minor injuries is, to my mind, detrimental to healthy growth and experience.
Recently a "facebook friend" posted about being in the UK and the joy of riding helmetless. I'm sure you can all guess at most of the responses of her well meaning Australian friends expressing care and concern. I responded in kind by posting helmetfreedom.org videos.
- 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 Thr
Postby Mulger bill » Sun Jan 13, 2013 5:01 pm
+Even more, well put DentDentedHead wrote:+100human909 wrote: Kids will be kids. I'd love to see that trend reverse and see more kids getting injured! (as peverse as that sounds) More kids being more active will improve society in so many different ways beyond simply the direct health benefits.
My boy (8yo) has stacked his trike and BMX several times. Each time, I asked if he OK, then complimented him on the impressiveness of his (minor) injuries, and the stoicism with which he handled himself post-crash. We then stop for a few mins and discuss how the crash happened, and I'm careful to be specific about the cause. It's no good just saying "you went too fast around the round-about" when the actual cause was "you were turning at speed when you hit that gravel patch. That made your front wheel slip out" and he now see's stacks as a kind of lesson in physics. His attitude has changed from "I can't ride that far/up that hill/through that etc" to "Lets ride to there/up that hill/through that etc".
Don't get me wrong, I'll always make sure he wears a helmet even though I oppose MHL on principle (after all, kid-stacks are pretty much what they're designed for), but kids need to get out and push their physical boundaries even more than we adults do. Holding them back for fear of what are realistically minor injuries is, to my mind, detrimental to healthy growth and experience.
Dent.
London Boy 29/12/2011
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby jules21 » Sun Jan 13, 2013 5:21 pm
so you've made your own MHL in the DH household, but you oppose MHLs? isn't that a contradiction?DentedHead wrote:Don't get me wrong, I'll always make sure he wears a helmet even though I oppose MHL on principle
-
- Posts: 1047
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:41 am
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby Percrime » Sun Jan 13, 2013 5:30 pm
Not so. He opposes MHL in the democracy known as 'Oz' but enforces them for the subjects in the benign dictatorship known as the DH household.jules21 wrote:so you've made your own MHL in the DH household, but you oppose MHLs? isn't that a contradiction?DentedHead wrote:Don't get me wrong, I'll always make sure he wears a helmet even though I oppose MHL on principle
- 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 Thr
Postby il padrone » Sun Jan 13, 2013 7:07 pm
A 'personal choice' decision made by Dent on behalf of his son, in his legal role as 'parent'jules21 wrote:so you've made your own MHL in the DH household, but you oppose MHLs? isn't that a contradiction?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
-
- Posts: 187
- Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:23 pm
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby DentedHead » Sun Jan 13, 2013 9:10 pm
Dent.
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr
Postby jules21 » Sun Jan 13, 2013 10:05 pm
but it's mandatory for your kid(s). the only difference is, it's your decision, not the govt's. is that the issue? i'm not trying to take a shot at you, just trying to define what it is about MHLs that people object to.DentedHead wrote:As for my opposition to MHL's, it's the "M" I oppose, not so much the "H".
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.