Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (MHL discussion)

[brumby33]

I've been wearing a bicycle helmet for so long now that even if they repealed the mandatory law, I think I'd probably keep wearing in for the just in case initiatives.
In fact, I'm considering on buying a full face BMX Helmet for when the Magpies come out of hibernation and feeling randy and that when cyclists are fair game again.
Even in Japan they are trying to coax people to wear Helmets but i don't like their chances.

I think in most cases, the cops are in shorter numbers these days in basically all states, unless they are ordered to perform an operation Pedro, in most cases the cops don't really care even though they know they can enforce it. Here in Albury NSW, only about 60% wear helmets, the other 40% never do and they seem to get away with it.

[BobtheBuilder]

Here in Albury NSW, only about 60% wear helmets, the other 40% never do and they seem to get away with it.

That's good news. Hopefully it'll go the way of other irrelevant laws and be ignored. Pity the generations who were put off riding during the heavy enforcement of the 1990s/2000s, but maybe we'll see a rise in utility cycling to pre-MHL levels over time.

[bychosis]

I think in most cases, the cops are in shorter numbers these days in basically all states, unless they are ordered to perform an operation Pedro, in most cases the cops don't really care even though they know they can enforce it. Here in Albury NSW, only about 60% wear helmets, the other 40% never do and they seem to get away with it.

Unfortunately the lack of policing helmets is probably limited to people who can afford the fines anyway. Also, more unfortunately, it gives less scrupulous officers reasons to harass minorities and people 'with form' and can put them into a cycle of being in trouble with the law. Can't afford fine, don't pay fine, get chased by sheriff etc.

[brumby33]

I think in most cases, the cops are in shorter numbers these days in basically all states, unless they are ordered to perform an operation Pedro, in most cases the cops don't really care even though they know they can enforce it. Here in Albury NSW, only about 60% wear helmets, the other 40% never do and they seem to get away with it.

Unfortunately the lack of policing helmets is probably limited to people who can afford the fines anyway. Also, more unfortunately, it gives less scrupulous officers reasons to harass minorities and people 'with form' and can put them into a cycle of being in trouble with the law. Can't afford fine, don't pay fine, get chased by sheriff etc.

Even if they get dragged through the courts, they'll claim because they're on welfare for whatever reason and can't afford a helmet and the bicycle is their only form of transport and they can't afford the fine imposed, then the court generally dismisses the case.....just another waste of court's time......Cops get to the point in saying why bother...they'll only get out again with a slap on the wrist.
I do personally have a problem wearing helmets being mandatory, it should be our choice as adults but I'd wear one anyway coz it's like it keeps whatever hair i have left in place and I do have a problem with the outlandish fines that accompanies the lack of a helmet and bell laws set by the Duncan Gay ratbag of a decade and a half ago. The tripling of fine amounts by a Minister that has a hate for bicycles in public should have been knocked on the head by the Premier. Old Duncan was a fat cat that probably should've been on a bicycle himself. They should not be able to hike up fines due to a personal whim.

cheers

brumby33

[Mr Purple]

If we're talking ridiculous fines have a look at the cycling fines in Queensland.

Exactly the same as doing the same thing in a car. Or a 2.5 T SUV for that matter.

https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/fines/cycling

We're one of very few countries in the world that enforces speed limits on bicycles, and we charge as much as cars up here. $464 for 11-20km/hr over, which is achievable because we're the only idiots in the world who have 10km/hr speed limits in some places for bikes.

[brumby33]

If we're talking ridiculous fines have a look at the cycling fines in Queensland.

Exactly the same as doing the same thing in a car. Or a 2.5 T SUV for that matter.

https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/fines/cycling

We're one of very few countries in the world that enforces speed limits on bicycles, and we charge as much as cars up here. $464 for 11-20km/hr over, which is achievable because we're the only idiots in the world who have 10km/hr speed limits in some places for bikes.

I'm subscribed to a Brisbane cyclist and activist youtuber Chris Cox and he explained that one of the bridges/bikeways were restricted by a 10kph limit and there were cops at each end booking cyclists for going over that limit........wasn't that raised to 15 or 20kph? i don't mind his videos, he does cover a lot of good points.

[Mr Purple]

I'm subscribed to a Brisbane cyclist and activist youtuber Chris Cox and he explained that one of the bridges/bikeways were restricted by a 10kph limit and there were cops at each end booking cyclists for going over that limit........wasn't that raised to 15 or 20kph? i don't mind his videos, he does cover a lot of good points.

Chris is a good and sensible bloke, I enjoy his videos.

Yes - the Kurilpa Bridge had a 10km/hr limit that was enforced that was recently overturned. One of the factors involved in it being increased was the fact the guidelines actually state that a 10km/hr limit for bicycles is unrealistic and actually makes things more dangerous.

And yet we still have a 10km/hr limit around the casino works on the Bicentennial Bikeway. It's pretty much impossible to ride a bike slower than that, let alone my darty little Focus Izalco Max. I just accept I'm going to get an 'under 11km/hr' fine and keep it below 20km/hr through there. It's actually safer.

Notably it includes one of the only locations where a cyclist killed a pedestrian in Australia over the past few years. This I assume happened because they've got a blue hatched 'look for cyclists' crossing, and it wouldn't surprise me if the pedestrian assumed it was actually a pedestrian crossing. The only rectification they've made since he was killed is to put up a 'speed awareness' sign and another 10km/hr limit sign. Their negligence has contributed to this death and they absolutely haven't fixed it. It'll be interesting to see what the coroner report says.

[brumby33]

I'm subscribed to a Brisbane cyclist and activist youtuber Chris Cox and he explained that one of the bridges/bikeways were restricted by a 10kph limit and there were cops at each end booking cyclists for going over that limit........wasn't that raised to 15 or 20kph? i don't mind his videos, he does cover a lot of good points.

Chris is a good and sensible bloke, I enjoy his videos.

Yes - the Kurilpa Bridge had a 10km/hr limit that was enforced that was recently overturned. One of the factors involved in it being increased was the fact the guidelines actually state that a 10km/hr limit for bicycles is unrealistic and actually makes things more dangerous.

And yet we still have a 10km/hr limit around the casino works on the Bicentennial Bikeway. It's pretty much impossible to ride a bike slower than that, let alone my darty little Focus Izalco Max. I just accept I'm going to get an 'under 11km/hr' fine and keep it below 20km/hr through there. It's actually safer.

Notably it includes one of the only locations where a cyclist killed a pedestrian in Australia over the past few years. This I assume happened because they've got a blue hatched 'look for cyclists' crossing, and it wouldn't surprise me if the pedestrian assumed it was actually a pedestrian crossing. The only rectification they've made since he was killed is to put up a 'speed awareness' sign and another 10km/hr limit sign. Their negligence has contributed to this death and they absolutely haven't fixed it. It'll be interesting to see what the coroner report says.

I think they tried the 10kph in Melbourne as well on a public walkway (can't remember what it's called) but i have walked it and whilst it can be a busy walking thoroughfare, i think i read on here some time ago that there was heavy law enforcement of it.
Maybe someone here that lives and rides in Melbourne can update on this. I don't recall any Sydney locations having a 10kph bicycle speed limit..

[jasonc]

Brumby - southbank in Melbourne from memory

[trailgumby]

I think they tried the 10kph in Melbourne as well on a public walkway (can't remember what it's called) but i have walked it and whilst it can be a busy walking thoroughfare, i think i read on here some time ago that there was heavy law enforcement of it.
Maybe someone here that lives and rides in Melbourne can update on this. I don't recall any Sydney locations having a 10kph bicycle speed limit..

Shared pathway that takes you from Clarence St and up past the National Trust northbound to the Sydney Harbour Bridge cycleway is 10kph. Just noticed a stencil in blue and white on the ground for the first time a couple of weeks ago, Looked worn. Dunno how long its been there without me spotting it.

[CmdrBiggles]

Brumby - southbank in Melbourne from memory

Yes. And it remains a 10km/h limit. The path is designated as shared with pedestrians, in some areas, segregated by path markings.

The walk is regularly patrolled by police on weekends (busiest times), but they are not there exclusively for nabbing speeding cyclists, scooters/e-scooters or rollerbladers. Southbank, like Docklands, is interesting during the day, but not the sort of places I would go on a walk or ride after dark. From 6.30 to 8.30 in the morning and 3.30 to 5.30 in the afternoon on weekdays, it is chaotic as a major commuting route, a defacto bike-o-bahn if you will, where posted speed limits are blithely ignored in the absence of a visible presence of patrols.

[Thoglette]

It's pretty much impossible to ride a bike slower than that, let alone my darty little Focus Izalco Max.

You need to practice your trackstanding

(As someone who never learnt to ride "hands free" as a kid I'm trying to teach this old dog how to do that trick.....it's taking some time )

[DavidS]

The more we give up the roads as cyclists the more unsafe they will become.

I understand that a lot of people feel unsafe cycling in traffic, I don't blame them, the driving is appalling a lot of the time.

But, bicycles are road vehicles and I have a real problem with surrendering to the almighty car. My road, I will ride on it and I shouldn't feel unsafe doing so with or without a lump of plastic on my head.

If it is not safe on the roads bicycle helmets make a very marginal contribution to changing this. The level of protection a cyclist wears is not the issue, and making it the issue by making helmets mandatory means that the authorities can avoid addressing the real issue which is an unwillingness to enforce basic road rules.

DS

Twaddle from go to whoa but if you really feel that way, again happy for you.

Convincing argument there, the intellectual rigour second to none.

I assume you are fine with being forced off the road by motorised vehicles and left to whatever remains. Plus, you presumably feel that making roads safe for all road vehicles is a less compelling solution than safety equipment which is of questionable value.

What twaddle.

DS

[baabaa]

The more we give up the roads as cyclists the more unsafe they will become.

I understand that a lot of people feel unsafe cycling in traffic, I don't blame them, the driving is appalling a lot of the time.

But, bicycles are road vehicles and I have a real problem with surrendering to the almighty car. My road, I will ride on it and I shouldn't feel unsafe doing so with or without a lump of plastic on my head.

If it is not safe on the roads bicycle helmets make a very marginal contribution to changing this. The level of protection a cyclist wears is not the issue, and making it the issue by making helmets mandatory means that the authorities can avoid addressing the real issue which is an unwillingness to enforce basic road rules.

DS

Twaddle from go to whoa but if you really feel that way, again happy for you.

Convincing argument there, the intellectual rigour second to none.

I assume you are fine with being forced off the road by motorised vehicles and left to whatever remains. Plus, you presumably feel that making roads safe for all road vehicles is a less compelling solution than safety equipment which is of questionable value.

What twaddle.

DS

No argument needed - you are saying that around the world dedicated off the road bike paths are not needed.
Good luck getting people, and more importantly children and teens to keep on cycling on that premise.

Sorry mate but the big big balls statements about how strong you think you can be on a bicycle by not "surrendering" on the road just make you look like a fool.

[fat and old]

I think they tried the 10kph in Melbourne as well on a public walkway (can't remember what it's called) but i have walked it and whilst it can be a busy walking thoroughfare, i think i read on here some time ago that there was heavy law enforcement of it.
Maybe someone here that lives and rides in Melbourne can update on this. I don't recall any Sydney locations having a 10kph bicycle speed limit..

As said, Southbank. Justified in this case. Rarely a time when it's safe to ride faster, very heavy ped traffic. Better to walk the bike at times.

[BobtheBuilder]

I think they tried the 10kph in Melbourne as well on a public walkway (can't remember what it's called) but i have walked it and whilst it can be a busy walking thoroughfare, i think i read on here some time ago that there was heavy law enforcement of it.
Maybe someone here that lives and rides in Melbourne can update on this. I don't recall any Sydney locations having a 10kph bicycle speed limit..

As said, Southbank. Justified in this case. Rarely a time when it's safe to ride faster, very heavy ped traffic. Better to walk the bike at times.

Sounds justified to me, but the apparent disproportionate policing response would indicate a bias towards targeting cyclists. Motorists routinely exceed the speed limit in crowded urban areas and there aren't regular, dedicated police patrols standing around on city street corners to catch them.

That said, I'm surprised about some of the comments here. Some cyclists obviously bring a motorists mentality - speed, speed, speed! - to their cycling.

[brumby33]

Whilst 10kph is considered slow but i don't think it's too slow not to be able to infringe on any balance issues, I've struggled up hills in granny gears on the Vivente often getting down as low as 6kph ( on a flat road, my 24t x 32t gearing gets me only 8.5kph before free peddling) so 10kph is reasonable in a high pedestrian area I think and 10kph is twice as fast as an average walking speed of 5kph so you're still quicker than walking.

I might be old and decrepit but I always leave home at least 15-20 minutes earlier than I may estimate my normal commute in case of hold ups or congestion and can relax without working too hard. These days I'm near retired so nothing is a hurry much anymore

[Mr Purple]

Whilst 10kph is considered slow but i don't think it's too slow not to be able to infringe on any balance issues, I've struggled up hills in granny gears on the Vivente often getting down as low as 6kph ( on a flat road, my 24t x 32t gearing gets me only 8.5kph before free peddling) so 10kph is reasonable in a high pedestrian area I think and 10kph is twice as fast as an average walking speed of 5kph so you're still quicker than walking.

It depends on the bike. I'd imagine your Vivente is a lot more stable at low speeds than my XS 2017 Izalco Max on 25mm tyres with 38cm wide bars. It's possible to ride that bike at 10km/hr, but it's far more dangerous than riding it at 15km/hr. Far less wobbling involved at higher speeds.

My gravel bike is way more stable and definitely my preference for riding around pedestrians. Also means you can jump curbs/onto the grass without any concerns.

When I was running I could average over 15km/hr anywhere up to half marathon distance. Setting a speed limit for bicycles lower than that is pointless.

[fat and old]

Sounds justified to me, but the apparent disproportionate policing response would indicate a bias towards targeting cyclists. Motorists routinely exceed the speed limit in crowded urban areas and there aren't regular, dedicated police patrols standing around on city street corners to catch them.

Actually Bob, we get both in and around the CBD in Melbourne. Close to the same frequency as well, leaning towards the roads

[zebee]

Whilst 10kph is considered slow but i don't think it's too slow not to be able to infringe on any balance issues, I've struggled up hills in granny gears on the Vivente often getting down as low as 6kph ( on a flat road, my 24t x 32t gearing gets me only 8.5kph before free peddling) so 10kph is reasonable in a high pedestrian area I think and 10kph is twice as fast as an average walking speed of 5kph so you're still quicker than walking.

It depends on the bike. I'd imagine your Vivente is a lot more stable at low speeds than my XS 2017 Izalco Max on 25mm tyres with 38cm wide bars. It's possible to ride that bike at 10km/hr, but it's far more dangerous than riding it at 15km/hr. Far less wobbling involved at higher speeds.

I ride on the Cook's River path a lot to get to places I go to. Often I have to sit at walking pace behind a ped until there's room to pass. If I couldn't do that then I don't belong in that environment. If my choice of bike means I can't then I ride another bike or ride elsewhere.

(Been riding there over 15 years. Actually had to stop for the first time on the weekend as elderly lady with walker and her companion were going more slowly than even I could ride and there was traffic. So I stopped and waited till I it was clear enough to pass)

[Mr Purple]

I ride on the Cook's River path a lot to get to places I go to. Often I have to sit at walking pace behind a ped until there's room to pass. If I couldn't do that then I don't belong in that environment. If my choice of bike means I can't then I ride another bike or ride elsewhere.

(Been riding there over 15 years. Actually had to stop for the first time on the weekend as elderly lady with walker and her companion were going more slowly than even I could ride and there was traffic. So I stopped and waited till I it was clear enough to pass)

The area I'm talking about is the works for the new casino in Brisbane. Which used to be a bikeway until they closed it and rerouted it - it's the only link between the Bicentennial Bikeway and the Goodwill Bridge so there's not really any options or ways around.

If I had a choice I'd avoid it! To make it worse apparently it's going to be eternally a shared zone from now. The motoring equivalent would be closing the riverside expressway, making it a 'shared zone' and routing a bunch of drunk pedestrians through it. We had good cycling infrastructure there, and now we do not.

To make it worse they've carpetted parts of it for some reason. That's great fun on a wet day.

[DavidS]

Twaddle from go to whoa but if you really feel that way, again happy for you.

Convincing argument there, the intellectual rigour second to none.

I assume you are fine with being forced off the road by motorised vehicles and left to whatever remains. Plus, you presumably feel that making roads safe for all road vehicles is a less compelling solution than safety equipment which is of questionable value.

What twaddle.

DS

No argument needed - you are saying that around the world dedicated off the road bike paths are not needed.
Good luck getting people, and more importantly children and teens to keep on cycling on that premise.

Sorry mate but the big big balls statements about how strong you think you can be on a bicycle by not "surrendering" on the road just make you look like a fool.

So you agree with drivers when they tell you to get your road vehicle off the road?

Where do you ride? What if there is no bike path?

DS

[baabaa]

Convincing argument there, the intellectual rigour second to none.

I assume you are fine with being forced off the road by motorised vehicles and left to whatever remains. Plus, you presumably feel that making roads safe for all road vehicles is a less compelling solution than safety equipment which is of questionable value.

What twaddle.

DS

No argument needed - you are saying that around the world dedicated off the road bike paths are not needed.
Good luck getting people, and more importantly children and teens to keep on cycling on that premise.

Sorry mate but the big big balls statements about how strong you think you can be on a bicycle by not "surrendering" on the road just make you look like a fool.

So you agree with drivers when they tell you to get your road vehicle off the road?

Where do you ride? What if there is no bike path?

DS

So you agree with drivers when they tell you to get your road vehicle off the road?

What does this even mean? I ride a bike not a road vehicle but it raises the question -
How many drivers tell ( so they must in fact be shouting) you?

In my decades of biking I have had one shout at me, and that was on a hot and humid afternoon in 2012 from an old Greek guy in a beaten up Camry heading east on a near empty on Lyons Road West.
I was not even close to him so just put it down to him just having an extra bad day and needed to shout at someone.

If you are getting told (shouted) at so often, maybe it is the hows and the ways that you bike which I originally highlighted as twaddle and not the drivers?

Suggest you watch this and from memory it mentions biking in Melbourne maybe 6 or 7 times



No bike paths about?

Simple, just pick the safest route with less traffic to get you safely from A to B. Could be wrong but I would have thought this would be simple common sense that any functioning grown adult would comprehend.

Oh and re your comments above about helmets, what do you see in this pic?

Yes it is - the father of vehicular cycling- John Forester who with his discredited anti-bikeway credo held back cycling decades

https://www.cycling-embassy.org.uk/dict ... ar-cycling
Vehicular cycling
A term coined by John Forester to describe riding a bicycle as if it were a motor vehicle. The Embassy does not believe vehicular cycling is an option that most people would choose; it effectively excludes the majority of the population from cycling.
In the vehicular cycling model, cyclists must constantly evaluate traffic, looking back, signalling, adjusting lateral position and speed, sometimes blocking a lane and sometimes yielding, always trying to fit into the “dance” that is traffic. Research shows that most people feel very unsafe engaging in this kind of dance, in which a single mistake could be fatal. Children as well as many women and elders are excluded. While some people, especially young men, may find the challenge stimulating, it is stressful and unpleasant for the vast majority. It is no wonder that the model of vehicular cycling, which the USA has followed de facto for the past forty years, has led to extremely low levels of bicycling use.
From The Walkable City, by Jeff Speck.

and then for a current take on life with less cars this is well worth a look

[am50em]

a bike not a road vehicle

According to the road rules it is.

ROAD RULES 2014 - REG 15 What is a vehicle
ROAD RULES 2014 - REG 15
What is a vehicle
15 WHAT IS A VEHICLE
A
"vehicle" includes--

(a) a motor vehicle, trailer and tram, and
(b) a bicycle, and
(c) an animal-drawn vehicle, and an animal that is being ridden or drawing a vehicle, and
(d) a combination, and
(e) a motorised wheelchair that can travel at over 10 kilometres per hour (on level ground), and
(f) an electric skateboard, unless a person is driving the electric skateboard in the circumstances set out in rule 228- 1,
but does not include another kind of wheelchair, a train, or a wheeled recreational device or wheeled toy.

https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/view ... 4/s15.html

[Cyclophiliac]

a bike not a road vehicle

According to the road rules it is.

ROAD RULES 2014 - REG 15 What is a vehicle
ROAD RULES 2014 - REG 15
What is a vehicle
15 WHAT IS A VEHICLE
A
"vehicle" includes--

(a) a motor vehicle, trailer and tram, and
(b) a bicycle, and
(c) an animal-drawn vehicle, and an animal that is being ridden or drawing a vehicle, and
(d) a combination, and
(e) a motorised wheelchair that can travel at over 10 kilometres per hour (on level ground), and
(f) an electric skateboard, unless a person is driving the electric skateboard in the circumstances set out in rule 228- 1,
but does not include another kind of wheelchair, a train, or a wheeled recreational device or wheeled toy.

https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/view ... 4/s15.html

More importantly, a bicycle is stated in our states' road rules to be a vehicle, and it's the states' road rules that are mandatory.