Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (MHL discussion)
-
- 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
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
-
- 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
http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/new ... 7314105368" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- 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
- 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
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.
- 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
EFFing huge cop-out by the copperLeading 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.
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).
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- 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
-
- 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
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.il padrone wrote:EFFing huge cop-out by the copperLeading 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.
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).
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,
- 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
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).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.il padrone wrote:EFFing huge cop-out by the copperLeading 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.
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).
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,
- 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
^^ This, being the 'incompetent' biteldavo 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.
A driver is about to move forwards. One should always be looking forwards before moving forwards
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
-
- 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
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
- 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
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;
- 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
Shall I clarify that for you then by saying it is any driver's legal obligation ??eldavo wrote:Yeah I know about 'shoulds' they are usually the first thing people stop doing
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.
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- 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
thanks to Alan Davies at Crickey for an opinion piece on the Media Watch Program.warthog1 wrote:A radio national program aired an interview with an anti MHL proponent recently apparently.
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.
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ
-
- 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
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.Thoglette wrote:thanks to Alan Davies at Crickey for an opinion piece on the Media Watch Program.
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.)
- 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
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- 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
It's exactly the sort of incident that presumed* liability laws would target.il padrone wrote:Shall I clarify that for you then by saying it is any driver's legal obligation ??eldavo wrote:Yeah I know about 'shoulds' they are usually the first thing people stop doing
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.
* can't think at the moment. Is presumed the right word here.
- 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
So globally, some 5.95 billion people are contrary 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
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- mikesbytes
- 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
And being directly in front of the motorist doesn't mean one is seen, even if its a police officer
- 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.
From the Alternative Department of Transport
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- 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
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.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).
That second bit you quoted is pretty good though.
- mikesbytes
- 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
- 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
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).
"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 Jul 12, 2015 12:27 am
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.mikesbytes wrote:Which countries have the highest helmet usage rates that don't have MHL's?
-
- 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
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.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;
-
- 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
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.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.
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
- 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
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Cycling Brands
- Cannondale
- Garmin
- Giant
- Shimano
- Trek
- All times are UTC+11:00
- 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.