Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (MHL discussion)

[DavidS]

So I don't see any historical precedent for this being the beginning of the end for MHLs.

The beginning of the end occurred some time ago. It is just a long ending.

On a related cycling note. My sister is having to wear less form fitting clothes while riding her bike because of a number of comments about her cycling while pregnant!? There really is something wrong with this country and their attitudes to cycling. She plans on buying a Bakfiets to transport the child of course the legality of all that is questionable.

Ooh, she'll get into trouble carrying a kid on a bike, way way too dangerous. Must carry kids in a truck for their own safety.

Yep, big attitude problem here, not helped by the helmet laws promoting the myth that cycling is so dangerous we need protective helmets.

DS

[Xplora]

It really does come down to "imbecile" thinking levels once you realise what the issue is... they think the road is dangerous because of all the cars, so their solution is more cars.

I ask everyone who talks about danger if they've been in a serious car accident before. If you honestly thought that would happen on a regular basis, would you still travel by car? Do you realise that the seriousness of your accident was BECAUSE of the car, not DESPITE it? I am willing to bet that people with whiplash injuries wouldn't have them if they had ridden a bike and were thrown from the saddle. Perhaps they might have travelled in a way that would have reduced their risk?

The cognitive dissonance involved in car transport is just so mind blowing it hurts my head. I find it equally amazing that cyclists can safely travel at 40kmh within 6 inchs of another bike on all sides and serious accidents are incredibly rare. Try doing that with a car

[human909]

It really does come down to "imbecile" thinking levels once you realise what the issue is... they think the road is dangerous because of all the cars, so their solution is more cars.

I ask everyone who talks about danger if they've been in a serious car accident before. If you honestly thought that would happen on a regular basis, would you still travel by car? Do you realise that the seriousness of your accident was BECAUSE of the car, not DESPITE it? I am willing to bet that people with whiplash injuries wouldn't have them if they had ridden a bike and were thrown from the saddle. Perhaps they might have travelled in a way that would have reduced their risk?

Its the car culture combined with our absurdly distorted attitude to risk. The constant warnings about this that and the other doesn't help. Many people are actually afraid to WALK on our streets because of fear of muggings an attacks. If we aren't cocooned in our cars then what is there to protect us!

[jules21]

I would argue that the common assertion by motorists that "the roads are too dangerous for cycling" is an attempt to lower expectations of driving standards. they would prefer that it was acceptable to charge along and not have to keep a look out, much less slow down, for vulnerable road users. it's the same thing when you see motorists charge through pedestrian crossings in front of pedestrians - it's their crude means of normalising such behaviour, saying to pedestrians "don't think you have right of way!"

we're missing the point when we constantly discuss the ignorance of motorists in over-estimating the dangers of cycling. they know what they're doing.

[human909]

I would argue that the common assertion by motorists that "the roads are too dangerous for cycling" is an attempt to lower expectations of driving standards. they would prefer that it was acceptable to charge along and not have to keep a look out, much less slow down, for vulnerable road users. it's the same thing when you see motorists charge through pedestrian crossings in front of pedestrians - it's their crude means of normalising such behaviour, saying to pedestrians "don't think you have right of way!"

we're missing the point when we constantly discuss the ignorance of motorists in over-estimating the dangers of cycling. they know what they're doing.

I get what you are saying and I think there is some truth to it. However the genuine fear from loved or work colleagues is real. Most people really do consider that the roads are too unsafe for cyclists. In fact many cyclists believe so to, my sister cycles to work EVERYDAY but she the vast majority of roads including most of the ones with bike lanes too dangerous.

[jules21]

there are 2 different statements there:
1. the roads are not yet safe enough for cyclists (good)
2. the roads are too unsafe for cyclists to use them (bad)

[human909]

2. the roads are too unsafe for cyclists to use them (bad)

I can agree with you that it is "bad" that this sentiment is held. But nonetheless it is a belief that many motorists and some cyclists still hold. It would be unproductive to ignore it, particularly of the cyclists. I personally rarely feel at risk on the streets of Brunswick (Lygon, Nicholson, Sydney Rd) yet the same streets my sister feels uneasy on.

(I'm not meaning to argue, I'm just posing the harder questions. )

[Xplora]

Jules, the behaviour you describe is 100% sociopathic, and should be treated as such. It doesn't matter if its conscious or unconscious or subconscious, it has to removed because the consequences of vehicular social immaturity are basically unacceptable. I can't really add anything beyond that. Apart from advocating open carry gun policies...

[lturner]

Australia being singled out for our failed helmet law policy in Britain:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22297750

[martinjs]

236 pages and what do we get?

Same !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !!, different smell.


and "Shakes head"

[human909]

236 pages and what do we get?

Same showtime, different smell.


and "Shakes head"

What do you expect? While we continue to house absurd laws there will continue to be debate about them and a desire to abolish them.

[Howzat]

More likely, it demonstrates that specious furphies - my favourite is that helmets cause head injuries - are hard to kill.

[KenGS]

My observation is that the discussion is mainly about the value of pursuing MHL abolition versus pursuing other measures to accelerate the uptake of cycling.

There is the occasional red herring about loony arguments emanating from either pro or anti MHL

[human909]

More likely, it demonstrates that specious furphies - my favourite is that helmets cause head injuries - are hard to kill.

It is hard to kill because people like you keep bringing it up!

[mikesbytes]

Figured you guys would enjoy reading this article

http://crag.asn.au/2826#.UYD8JDAl8GM.facebook

[twizzle]

Ahhhhh! Mike has turned into a Troll!

[Howzat]

Figured you guys would enjoy reading this article

Thanks for the link!. I'll get to that right after some vital reading on the global climate change hoax, the area 51 cover-up, and how fluoride was introduced so the population would placidly accept mandatory helmet laws

[human909]

Thanks for the last 3 posts which pretty much confirmed my prior post!

[mikesbytes]

Ahhhhh! Mike has turned into a Troll!

LOL

[g-boaf]

Someone on a ride yesterday went down heavily. Badly injured - but if it weren't for the helmet - he might have had nasty head injuries too. The helmet cracked - but it did its job.

Perhaps what is needed is for cyclists to be required to wear full shoulder padding too, like in American Football? Go on AGF or SCA, surprise us by supporting such a necessary safety initiative.

[Ross]

http://www.scotsman.com/news/fury-at-sh ... -1-2920362

Fury at sheriff’s helmet claim in cyclist death case

Sheriff Scott said that Mrs Fyfe “contributed significantly” to her own death because she was not wearing a helmet – a safety measure not required by law.

[human909]

Someone on a ride yesterday went down heavily. Badly injured - but if it weren't for the helmet - he might have had nasty head injuries too. The helmet cracked - but it did its job.

Perhaps what is needed is for cyclists to be required to wear full shoulder padding too, like in American Football? Go on AGF or SCA, surprise us by supporting such a necessary safety initiative.

If you partake in higher risk forms of cycling then it makes sense to take appropriate precautions and if necessary wear helmets and armour. Conversely having laws that require equipment normally reserved for higher risk activities encourages high risk participation at the expense of low risk.

(Most of my cycling I would consider quite low risk.)

[The zob]

G'Day. New here, and this was the last (type of) thread I expected to find tbh. I've had a random lookee through maybe 30 pages but I can't find any examples of how helmets can hurt you......which I thought was the issue. Is that it? Or is this more a "I don't need to be told what to do" thread?

[human909]

G'Day. New here, and this was the last (type of) thread I expected to find tbh. I've had a random lookee through maybe 30 pages but I can't find any examples of how helmets can hurt you......which I thought was the issue. Is that it? Or is this more a "I don't need to be told what to do" thread?

Hey! Welcome to the forum!

Most people in this world ride bikes without the need for a helmet. Most people in the world a free to choose what to wear on their heads. In Australia we don't have this choice that most of the world has. Instead, Australia discouraged cycling by disallowing cycling without a helmet.


Of course you are free to wear a helmet if you choose and I see no problem with that. Unfortunately those of us who don't wear helmets get fined.

[Xplora]

... I can't find any examples of how helmets can hurt you......

In summary, it has been found that helmet laws discourage cycling. It has also been found that reducing the number of cyclists on the road creates significant danger for the remaining cyclists. Anything that discourages cycling therefore is hurting cyclists. Helmet laws don't directly hurt cyclists, but they create a situation does hurt them.

Any activity is inherently dangerous. Helmets should reduce the danger of injury, but we don't have dramatically better cyclist injury outcomes than other countries, so the helmet law doesn't help cyclists. Paradoxes are weird like that. Welcome to the octagon