Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (MHL discussion)

brokenbus
Posts: 646
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:12 pm
Location: Blackhead NSW

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

Postby brokenbus » Fri Jun 26, 2015 2:09 pm

This may be o0f interest
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-26/s ... ry/6574670" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You have to press show transcript
Image

eldavo
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Contact:

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

Postby eldavo » Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:07 pm

No mention in this incident if the 3yo boy had a helmet on or not.

http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/new ... 7314105368" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Xplora
Posts: 8272
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
Location: TL;DR

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

Postby Xplora » Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:15 pm

Just couldn't see him... Hand your licence in, I can't think of any time that is an acceptable excuse.

User avatar
yugyug
Posts: 1826
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:27 am
Location: Sydney

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

Postby yugyug » Fri Jun 26, 2015 5:03 pm

And that cop should hand in his badge. "there was nothing he could have done" BS. He could have friggin looked where he was going!

Why is that in the helmet thread though? My suppose I'm glad the article didn't mention it, whether the kid was wearing one or not.

User avatar
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 » Fri Jun 26, 2015 5:07 pm

Leading Sen-Constable Basham said the boy sustained cuts and a blood nose.

“As the driver pulled out he just didn’t see him,” he said.

“It was no fault of the driver, there was nothing he could have done.”

Leading Sen-Constable Basham urged cyclists to remember that bike lanes are for riding with traffic flow.
EFFing huge cop-out by the copper :shock: :evil:

What, the driver had no eyes? One might expect a driver to see a bicyclist riding towards him in the bike lane, even if the act was illegal, and take suitable action to avoid the collision :?

Slam that driver in the lock-up !! (Fine the father of the boy too if you like).
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
yugyug
Posts: 1826
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:27 am
Location: Sydney

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

Postby yugyug » Fri Jun 26, 2015 5:10 pm

It's good to hear Leyonhjelm using the helmet issue as the exemplary case for nanny state reform, even if the libertarian aspect of MHL repeal is the weakest of its arguments. He came into the senate grumbling about bike helmets and he's still talking about it - in my political fantasies the coalition throw him a federal mandate for national repeal as a bone to get him on board some other tricky cross bench issue ( hopefully one I don't give a crabon about.)

eldavo
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Contact:

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

Postby eldavo » Fri Jun 26, 2015 8:57 pm

il padrone wrote:
Leading Sen-Constable Basham said the boy sustained cuts and a blood nose.

“As the driver pulled out he just didn’t see him,” he said.

“It was no fault of the driver, there was nothing he could have done.”

Leading Sen-Constable Basham urged cyclists to remember that bike lanes are for riding with traffic flow.
EFFing huge cop-out by the copper :shock: :evil:

What, the driver had no eyes? One might expect a driver to see a bicyclist riding towards him in the bike lane, even if the act was illegal, and take suitable action to avoid the collision :?

Slam that driver in the lock-up !! (Fine the father of the boy too if you like).
People would be looking to oncoming traffic they are pulling out into, driver wouldn't expect anything big/threatening in wrong direction after checking for any large immovable objects, so wouldn't look again when pulling out for a smaller object that may appear.

I wonder what the rule for default liability (I forget the term) is like in the countries that have it, when a cyclist goes against the rules. Our WA 3rd party person policy with vehicle rego says it doesn't apply to anyone not 100% not at fault.

There was a mention in another thread of foreigner peds/cyclists looking the wrong way for oncoming traffic and paying the price for it. Someone riding in wrong direction makes the same scenario.

On the topic, I was curious after child trailer habits were discussed last page, if anyone knew more of the incident (e.g. Whether child was fastened in, sounds like it from blood nose, not 'thrown from trailer'). No media mention of helmet either way,

User avatar
queequeg
Posts: 6479
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:09 am

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

Postby queequeg » Fri Jun 26, 2015 10:34 pm

eldavo wrote:
il padrone wrote:
Leading Sen-Constable Basham said the boy sustained cuts and a blood nose.

“As the driver pulled out he just didn’t see him,” he said.

“It was no fault of the driver, there was nothing he could have done.”

Leading Sen-Constable Basham urged cyclists to remember that bike lanes are for riding with traffic flow.
EFFing huge cop-out by the copper :shock: :evil:

What, the driver had no eyes? One might expect a driver to see a bicyclist riding towards him in the bike lane, even if the act was illegal, and take suitable action to avoid the collision :?

Slam that driver in the lock-up !! (Fine the father of the boy too if you like).
People would be looking to oncoming traffic they are pulling out into, driver wouldn't expect anything big/threatening in wrong direction after checking for any large immovable objects, so wouldn't look again when pulling out for a smaller object that may appear.

I wonder what the rule for default liability (I forget the term) is like in the countries that have it, when a cyclist goes against the rules. Our WA 3rd party person policy with vehicle rego says it doesn't apply to anyone not 100% not at fault.

There was a mention in another thread of foreigner peds/cyclists looking the wrong way for oncoming traffic and paying the price for it. Someone riding in wrong direction makes the same scenario.

On the topic, I was curious after child trailer habits were discussed last page, if anyone knew more of the incident (e.g. Whether child was fastened in, sounds like it from blood nose, not 'thrown from trailer'). No media mention of helmet either way,
There is a bidirectional bike path I use every day that is on a road that only allows motorists to turn left. most drivers ignore the footpath and the cycleway and only look for cars in the adjacent traffic lane coming from their right. They never even consider that there might be bicycles or pedestrians coming from the other way, and there has been a number of collisions on this path as a result (including one where I got t-boned and thrown over the bonnet of a car that exited their driveway at speed while only looking to the right).
'11 Lynskey Cooper CX, '00 Hillbrick Steel Racing (Total Rebuild '10), '16 Cervelo R5, '18 Mason BokekTi

User avatar
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 » Fri Jun 26, 2015 10:37 pm

eldavo wrote:People would be looking to oncoming traffic they are pulling out into, driver wouldn't expect anything big/threatening in wrong direction after checking for any large immovable objects, so wouldn't look again when pulling out for a smaller object that may appear.
^^ This, being the 'incompetent' bit :|

A driver is about to move forwards. One should always be looking forwards before moving forwards :idea:
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

eldavo
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Contact:

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

Postby eldavo » Fri Jun 26, 2015 10:44 pm

Yeah I know about 'shoulds' they are usually the first thing people stop doing ;)

Queeqegs example where the bidirectional gives legal OK but same recipe for trouble.

All these sound like a case for automated/driverless vehicles. Imagine the boom in motorcycles and bicycles for people to want to feel 'in control again'. The rest would get their smartphone browsing freedom back for their whole slow journey, and we would then be convinced we still need MHL to be safe and sure ;)

User avatar
queequeg
Posts: 6479
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:09 am

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

Postby queequeg » Fri Jun 26, 2015 11:01 pm

Here is one video of the path o mentioned before.
Cyclist was a bit silly here, but driver only looking right.

Video is one from Boognoss

http://youtu.be/4fPhAVAOcuw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
'11 Lynskey Cooper CX, '00 Hillbrick Steel Racing (Total Rebuild '10), '16 Cervelo R5, '18 Mason BokekTi

User avatar
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 » Fri Jun 26, 2015 11:14 pm

eldavo wrote:Yeah I know about 'shoulds' they are usually the first thing people stop doing ;)
Shall I clarify that for you then by saying it is any driver's legal obligation ??

To keep alert to all other vehicles and to avoid collisions. Pretty basic stuff; no-one should be given a get-out-of-jail-free card because a copper is unwilling to expect safe behaviour.
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 6605
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Crikey vs Media Watch vs Radio National

Postby Thoglette » Sat Jun 27, 2015 12:54 am

warthog1 wrote:A radio national program aired an interview with an anti MHL proponent recently apparently.
thanks to Alan Davies at Crickey for an opinion piece on the Media Watch Program.

He included a link to the RN podcast


Which is time-stamped this Sunday coming. Pass me the spanner - the Tardis has a loose nut.
Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

human909
Posts: 9810
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Crikey vs Media Watch vs Radio National

Postby human909 » Sat Jun 27, 2015 12:31 pm

Thoglette wrote:thanks to Alan Davies at Crickey for an opinion piece on the Media Watch Program.
Its funny. A couple of years ago Alan Davies was writing pieces on the MHLs and sitting strongly on the side of mandatory helmets. More recently I've observed a mellowing in his position and now we have him calling out others for their stance.

I must say I always respect people who can change their opinion. Unfortunately it seems an ability that most adults are incapable of doing. Opinions of MHLs from most Australians is a good showcase of this. It is also one thing that has impressed me about Melbourne's Lord Mayor. Before he was elected he was proclaiming that he would open up Swanston St to cars and bikes and pedestrians never were mentioned. Within a year or so he had changed his tune completely and he has been enthusiastically supporting the councils expansion of cycling infrastructure.

(I don't think Doyle cycles or has and affinity towards cycling, I just think he saw the benefits cycling (and pedestrian) prioritisation brings a city.)

User avatar
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 » Sat Jun 27, 2015 5:57 pm

I think Robert Doyle was given a crash-course in sustainable transport by the council's traffic and infrastructure planners.
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
bychosis
Posts: 7250
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:10 pm
Location: Lake Macquarie

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

Postby bychosis » Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:06 pm

il padrone wrote:
eldavo wrote:Yeah I know about 'shoulds' they are usually the first thing people stop doing ;)
Shall I clarify that for you then by saying it is any driver's legal obligation ??

To keep alert to all other vehicles and to avoid collisions. Pretty basic stuff; no-one should be given a get-out-of-jail-free card because a copper is unwilling to expect safe behaviour.
It's exactly the sort of incident that presumed* liability laws would target.

* can't think at the moment. Is presumed the right word here.
bychosis (bahy-koh-sis): A mental disorder of delusions indicating impaired contact with a reality of no bicycles.

User avatar
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 » Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:23 pm

Paul Barry sees MHL campaigners as "contrary" ?

So globally, some 5.95 billion people are contrary :o :roll: Seems to me that the only ones who are truly contrary are the Australian suporters of MHL. The vast mass of the rest of the world has set the norms already.

Please go shake yourself awake out of your fantastical dreams Paul Barry :idea:
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

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

Postby mikesbytes » Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:27 pm

The "didn't see him" excuse should not be an excuse

And being directly in front of the motorist doesn't mean one is seen, even if its a police officer
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

User avatar
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 » Sat Jul 11, 2015 11:26 am

Helmets are no answer to dangers on the street. In the UK, most cyclists wear a helmet, yet cycling there is six times more dangerous than in the Netherlands (and that figure ignores the fact that hardly any children or elderly people cycle there).
Higher helmet use shouldn’t be a goal, it should be seen as a failure of policy, an embarrassing statistic. An increase in helmets is a sign that the government has failed miserably in their duty to provide safe streets.
Image

From the Alternative Department of Transport
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
yugyug
Posts: 1826
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:27 am
Location: Sydney

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

Postby yugyug » Sat Jul 11, 2015 5:20 pm

il padrone wrote:
Helmets are no answer to dangers on the street. In the UK, most cyclists wear a helmet, yet cycling there is six times more dangerous than in the Netherlands (and that figure ignores the fact that hardly any children or elderly people cycle there).
Unfortunately thats one of the top reasons MHL supporters give for why we should have MHL - because our streets are more dangerous than the Netherlands! Without appreciating the pseudo-paradox that most riders in Australia wear helmets too! Its exasperating.

That second bit you quoted is pretty good though.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

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

Postby mikesbytes » Sat Jul 11, 2015 7:01 pm

Which countries have the highest helmet usage rates that don't have MHL's?
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

User avatar
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 » Sat Jul 11, 2015 11:05 pm

USA I believe (though some states do have various helmet rules). UK is pretty high as well.

The home of the nanny-state of course. Personal liability insurance, consumer law, and working mothers' social conscience have pushed the use of helmets along there (along with helmet manufacturers).
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

human909
Posts: 9810
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

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

Postby human909 » Sun Jul 12, 2015 12:27 am

mikesbytes wrote:Which countries have the highest helmet usage rates that don't have MHL's?
That is a very interesting question. I have never seen it discussed much but from what I understand Canada, US, UK all are up there. The UK and their 'white' colonies seem to be strongly represented here.

softy
Posts: 1665
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:44 pm

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

Postby softy » Sun Jul 12, 2015 1:03 am

queequeg wrote:Here is one video of the path o mentioned before.
Cyclist was a bit silly here, but driver only looking right.

Video is one from Boognoss

http://youtu.be/4fPhAVAOcuw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That is the trouble with so called cycleways that are really a painted footpath. Motorist treat it as a footpath. Don't check it. Yes the driver should of looked, but also bad Infrustucture planning.

human909
Posts: 9810
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

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

Postby human909 » Tue Jul 14, 2015 11:13 am

softy wrote:That is the trouble with so called cycleways that are really a painted footpath. Motorist treat it as a footpath. Don't check it. Yes the driver should of looked, but also bad Infrustucture planning.
Calling that mess a cycleway is a bit of a joke. Bi-directional separated cycleways are bad enough, single direction is generally considered to be much safer. I also note that there is no signage or even a stop line for cars exiting the service station. This infrastructure design is quite frankly negligent and it puts limbs and lives at risk.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: uart, zebee