Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (MHL discussion)

[fat and old]

Atencion! Attenzione! Vemendje! Aird! Aro Atu! Uppmarksamhet! Achtung! Attention!

I’ll be using various words, expressions and descriptors such as Anti MHLers, Anecdotes, !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !!, Data whores, Opinions, Pseudo science and more in this post. These are being used as an easy way to get my message across using a readily understood vernacular. They are not being used to denigrate nor cause offence. I'm gonna use unattributed quotes as examples, but not with the intent of being personal. I hope you don't get upset, but if that’s how you feel, then sorry, but not my fault. Look in the mirror.

It's been interesting just watching the ebb and flow of this thread these last few days. Baby Jesus would be happy. The discussion was so collegiate that the Virgin Mary herself could have joined in without fear of being offended. And Joseph could have stood off to the side, ignored as always but content with the world. Why is it so? Why indeed.

I believe that it’s because the Anti MHLers have been left to their own devices. They’ve even had a bit of kumbaya bonding when regaling us with their war stories of their dealings with the Dark Side of the Force. It’s so encouraging and wholesome I got…..excited .

What’s made it interesting (apart from the Pseudo Science of watching a human ant’s nest) is that it’s been chockas full of anecdotes! Yes, anecdotes. The very thing that the !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !! are pilloried for repeatedly. I personally asked about clothing etc regarding utility cyclists. Does wearing cycling gear mean you are not a utility cyclist was my gist. I had anecdotal evidence provided. And that was fine and made sense to me. But we all know what would have happened if I entered an anecdote to support any answer I gave regarding helmet use.

You have your opinion; I have my evidence.

Evidence. Another thing…maybe the major thing….that gets people all huffy and puffy. And again in the last few days there’s been some examples of the inconsistent approach some Datawhores will take. Evidence such as the Monash Study and Portland data was introduced by the !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !!. Relatively recent, relatively new. The antiMHL side was sick of this within a few days.

The Portland data and the Monash report have been comprehensively discussed. Can we pls move on?

It took two posts before Olivier was wheeled out and canned.

And here is the rub: efficacy is rarely defined but widely touted (and misquoted - see Olivier's works over the years)

Gee, I’ve never seen that before. Apparently, no one had, because no one complained about Olivier being “comprehensively discussed”. We dodged one there.

I asked a while back What can the anti MHL’ers learn from the e-scooter experience? I was jumped on. It wasn’t until I supplied a “fuller” explanation that an answer of sorts without angst was supplied. And even though it missed that mark at least it was civil. And the answers kept coming. Essentially, scooter riders seem to get away with stuff that cyclists would be nailed to the cross for. This was established in the usual Whataboutist manner many anti MHLers take. What about him? What about them? What about her? As a father, I recognize this behavior, and I can’t say I’ve seen it since my boys were in Grade 2. Of course this led to some argy bargy which established that essentially, if you’re not a loudmouth moron you won’t be fined. Unless the Police are on a mission, they won’t do more than talk. And lets face it, they’re rarely on a mission.

The galling part to all of this is that the answer to my question was there. It was being spoken about. It was being related. It was even raised and dismissed by one antiMHLer unknowingly. And in todays environment, it’s the only way forward that I can see.

Don’t wear a helmet if you don’t want to. Stop carrying on about the injustice of it all. Stop asking why the other bloke doesn’t have to. Just don’t wear it.

It’s established and accepted that increased numbers of wheeled vehicles on the road (I’m including scoots and ebikes here. If you really want to argue that they’re somehow different in establishing numbers on the road you go with that.) increases society’s recognition and attention to them, which leads to greater awareness.

My recent observation after a fair bit of riding over a half week in Sydney and Melbourne CBDs is that drivers were far more considerate of bikes compared to 10 or 20 years ago. My unscientific feeling was that this was due in large part to the incredible numbers of food delivery e-bike riders on the streets. Drivers might not like them, but they see them all the time, so they are just generally more aware of bikes. Raw numbers in themselves make cycling safer, because seeing cyclists (and scooter riders) becomes normalised.

Surely it follows that greater numbers of riders without helmets leads to a greater acceptance? Various members here have already stated this

The thing is that many ride around on a scooter without a helmet and they seem to get away with it

Now we don’t “know” this to be factual, but there’s no denying the basics. That’s what I believe anyway. More people riding without helmets will lead to a normalization of that activity.

So don’t wear a helmet. This is the way.

[BobtheBuilder]

Atencion! Attenzione! Vemendje! Aird! Aro Atu! Uppmarksamhet! Achtung! Attention!

I’ll be using various words, expressions and descriptors such as Anti MHLers, Anecdotes, !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !!, Data whores, Opinions, Pseudo science and more in this post. These are being used as an easy way to get my message across using a readily understood vernacular. They are not being used to denigrate nor cause offence. I'm gonna use unattributed quotes as examples, but not with the intent of being personal. I hope you don't get upset, but if that’s how you feel, then sorry, but not my fault. Look in the mirror.

It's been interesting just watching the ebb and flow of this thread these last few days. Baby Jesus would be happy. The discussion was so collegiate that the Virgin Mary herself could have joined in without fear of being offended. And Joseph could have stood off to the side, ignored as always but content with the world. Why is it so? Why indeed.

I believe that it’s because the Anti MHLers have been left to their own devices. They’ve even had a bit of kumbaya bonding when regaling us with their war stories of their dealings with the Dark Side of the Force. It’s so encouraging and wholesome I got…..excited .

What’s made it interesting (apart from the Pseudo Science of watching a human ant’s nest) is that it’s been chockas full of anecdotes! Yes, anecdotes. The very thing that the !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !! are pilloried for repeatedly. I personally asked about clothing etc regarding utility cyclists. Does wearing cycling gear mean you are not a utility cyclist was my gist. I had anecdotal evidence provided. And that was fine and made sense to me. But we all know what would have happened if I entered an anecdote to support any answer I gave regarding helmet use.

You have your opinion; I have my evidence.

Evidence. Another thing…maybe the major thing….that gets people all huffy and puffy. And again in the last few days there’s been some examples of the inconsistent approach some Datawhores will take. Evidence such as the Monash Study and Portland data was introduced by the !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !!. Relatively recent, relatively new. The antiMHL side was sick of this within a few days.

The Portland data and the Monash report have been comprehensively discussed. Can we pls move on?

It took two posts before Olivier was wheeled out and canned.

And here is the rub: efficacy is rarely defined but widely touted (and misquoted - see Olivier's works over the years)

Gee, I’ve never seen that before. Apparently, no one had, because no one complained about Olivier being “comprehensively discussed”. We dodged one there.

I asked a while back What can the anti MHL’ers learn from the e-scooter experience? I was jumped on. It wasn’t until I supplied a “fuller” explanation that an answer of sorts without angst was supplied. And even though it missed that mark at least it was civil. And the answers kept coming. Essentially, scooter riders seem to get away with stuff that cyclists would be nailed to the cross for. This was established in the usual Whataboutist manner many anti MHLers take. What about him? What about them? What about her? As a father, I recognize this behavior, and I can’t say I’ve seen it since my boys were in Grade 2. Of course this led to some argy bargy which established that essentially, if you’re not a loudmouth moron you won’t be fined. Unless the Police are on a mission, they won’t do more than talk. And lets face it, they’re rarely on a mission.

The galling part to all of this is that the answer to my question was there. It was being spoken about. It was being related. It was even raised and dismissed by one antiMHLer unknowingly. And in todays environment, it’s the only way forward that I can see.

Don’t wear a helmet if you don’t want to. Stop carrying on about the injustice of it all. Stop asking why the other bloke doesn’t have to. Just don’t wear it.

It’s established and accepted that increased numbers of wheeled vehicles on the road (I’m including scoots and ebikes here. If you really want to argue that they’re somehow different in establishing numbers on the road you go with that.) increases society’s recognition and attention to them, which leads to greater awareness.

My recent observation after a fair bit of riding over a half week in Sydney and Melbourne CBDs is that drivers were far more considerate of bikes compared to 10 or 20 years ago. My unscientific feeling was that this was due in large part to the incredible numbers of food delivery e-bike riders on the streets. Drivers might not like them, but they see them all the time, so they are just generally more aware of bikes. Raw numbers in themselves make cycling safer, because seeing cyclists (and scooter riders) becomes normalised.

Surely it follows that greater numbers of riders without helmets leads to a greater acceptance? Various members here have already stated this

The thing is that many ride around on a scooter without a helmet and they seem to get away with it

Now we don’t “know” this to be factual, but there’s no denying the basics. That’s what I believe anyway. More people riding without helmets will lead to a normalization of that activity.

So don’t wear a helmet. This is the way.

"I’ve come here with open arms, collegiate intentions" he said.

I'm anti-MHL, I've been saying it for years, he said.


But as things are moving forward, calming down, he needed to stir the pot and get things going again. More baiting, more stirring, more looking for arguments.

Seriously, what is the point? Can't we just get on with discussing what to do about MHLs rather than just returning to these boring arguments yet again?

[bychosis]

We’ve got a different government n NSW for now. Probably time to write to MPs again.

[BobtheBuilder]

We’ve got a different government n NSW for now. Probably time to write to MPs again.

Perhaps we can use this thread to work up a model letter or letters that people could use to write to MPs?

Have you got an example or a draft you'd like to share?

[fat and old]

"I’ve come here with open arms, collegiate intentions" he said.

I'm anti-MHL, I've been saying it for years, he said.


But as things are moving forward, calming down, he needed to stir the pot and get things going again. More baiting, more stirring, more looking for arguments.

Seriously, what is the point? Can't we just get on with discussing what to do about MHLs rather than just returning to these boring arguments yet again?

Bob, nothing I posted makes me any less anti MHL than you. Nothing I posted was a falsehood, misrepresentation of fact or fictional. Yeah, it was a dig. Not gonna deny that. But it was a fair dig, and more importantly it carried what I believe is the way forward.

Don’t get carried away with yourself.
Don’t expect others to agree with you.
Don’t make a mountain out of a molehill.

Just

Don’t wear your helmet.

Be part of the solution. Grow the numbers. People Power!

Right on baby

[BobtheBuilder]

"I’ve come here with open arms, collegiate intentions" he said.

I'm anti-MHL, I've been saying it for years, he said.


But as things are moving forward, calming down, he needed to stir the pot and get things going again. More baiting, more stirring, more looking for arguments.

Seriously, what is the point? Can't we just get on with discussing what to do about MHLs rather than just returning to these boring arguments yet again?

Bob, nothing I posted makes me any less anti MHL than you. Nothing I posted was a falsehood, misrepresentation of fact or fictional. Yeah, it was a dig. Not gonna deny that. But it was a fair dig, and more importantly it carried what I believe is the way forward.

Don’t get carried away with yourself.
Don’t expect others to agree with you.
Don’t make a mountain out of a molehill.

Just

Don’t wear your helmet.

Be part of the solution. Grow the numbers. People Power!

Right on baby

As you know from our interminable discussions, I don't wear a helmet, because the NT is the only place that doesn't require them by law on footpaths (where you're allowed to ride) and barely enforces them elsewhere.

I wear one on the rare occasions I cycle interstate, because I don't want to pay hundreds of dollars in fines. It's disingenuous to suggest just disobeying a law like this will achieve much, unless you're prepared to get obsessive and fight it in court (which some absolute legends have). And it's completely consistent to wear one to avoid the fine and still think the law is stupid.

So, please, can we move on to actually doing something about these ridiculous laws, rather than going back over the same arguments and insults? (yes, I've mixed it with the best of them, but let's all move past that to something more productive)

[DavidS]

Fat and Old, happy not to wear a helmet, are you happy to pay any fines I get?

DS

[fat and old]

As you know from our interminable discussions, I don't wear a helmet, because the NT is the only place that doesn't require them by law on footpaths (where you're allowed to ride) and barely enforces them elsewhere.

Which is my point.

You can do that because a handful of Indigenous kids didn't, wouldn't pay the fines and a groundswell of common sense resulted in what you have today.

In the South and East, we have multitudes of scoot, ebikes and cyclists doing the same. Look at the figures. To late 2022 less than 250 fines for helmets had been handed out. In that time Lime recorded over 1,000,000 individual trips. That's just one of the providers, and doesn't count the privately owned scoots, bikes and ebikes. You said it yourself

I would follow the Dutch example and organise mass civil disobedience. Which I have participated in, up to the point of being arrested many times.

It's happening now! Before your very eyes. Get on board.

So, please, can we move on to actually doing something about these ridiculous laws, rather than going back over the same arguments and insults? (yes, I've mixed it with the best of them, but let's all move past that to something more productive)

There is nothing stopping you from doing that. Nothing at all. Go ahead, I'm trying to be proactive and advocate for the method I believe will have the best results.

Don’t wear your helmet.

Be part of the solution. Grow the numbers. People Power!

Right on baby

[fat and old]

Fat and Old, happy not to wear a helmet, are you happy to pay any fines I get?

DS

Why? Are you unemployed?

There's just been a page of assorted stories about how a little intelligent fast talking sees off the Police. It's worked for you before. Keep it up.

Don’t wear your helmet.

Be part of the solution. Grow the numbers. People Power!

Right on baby

[BobtheBuilder]

Fat and Old, happy not to wear a helmet, are you happy to pay any fines I get?

DS

Why? Are you unemployed?

There's just been a page of assorted stories about how a little intelligent fast talking sees off the Police. It's worked for you before. Keep it up.

Don’t wear your helmet.

Be part of the solution. Grow the numbers. People Power!

Right on baby

Don't feed the troll.

[BobtheBuilder]

Fat and Old, happy not to wear a helmet, are you happy to pay any fines I get?

DS

DS - I'm pretty sick and tired of all the transparent attempts to create (or re-create) argy-bargy for its own sake. Especially when said troll (and others) then turns around and tells people to do something rather than just talk about it.

So, on that note, I propose working on positive solutions here, such as sample letters to politicians, collating clear arguments against MHL (perhaps grading them in terms of likely acceptability to the general reader in contemporary Australia) and discussing likely successful change strategies.

And not feeding the troll/s!

[bychosis]

Fat and Old, happy not to wear a helmet, are you happy to pay any fines I get?

DS

DS - I'm pretty sick and tired of all the transparent attempts to create (or re-create) argy-bargy for its own sake. Especially when said troll (and others) then turns around and tells people to do something rather than just talk about it.

So, on that note, I propose working on positive solutions here, such as sample letters to politicians, collating clear arguments against MHL (perhaps grading them in terms of likely acceptability to the general reader in contemporary Australia) and discussing likely successful change strategies.

And not feeding the troll/s!

In NSW the helmet fine is north of $400. There’s not a lot of people who will consistently and deliberately risk that sort of money.

Yes, I do actually skip the helmet on occasion, but only for short footpath rides away from areas where a police officer might just decide that ‘revenue raising’ is worth their time.

[MichaelB]

In NSW the helmet fine is north of $400. There’s not a lot of people who will consistently and deliberately risk that sort of money.
…

It’s interesting that people will wear a helmet to avoid a fine (and a sensible choice), but people seem mostly indifferent to the penalty for using the mobile fine whilst driving ….

Why ?

Sample letters to Pollies etc is a great way to start. I’d even assist and suggest when a good example is provided, despite being one that thinks MHL isn’t a silly idea.

Let’s get the ball rolling !

[warthog1]

Fat and Old, happy not to wear a helmet, are you happy to pay any fines I get?

DS

DS - I'm pretty sick and tired of all the transparent attempts to create (or re-create) argy-bargy for its own sake. Especially when said troll (and others) then turns around and tells people to do something rather than just talk about it.

So, on that note, I propose working on positive solutions here, such as sample letters to politicians, collating clear arguments against MHL (perhaps grading them in terms of likely acceptability to the general reader in contemporary Australia) and discussing likely successful change strategies.

And not feeding the troll/s!

So those now who correct information that is posted, claiming helmets are ineffective and activities such gardening are more dangerous than cycling (which is always safe), are trolls.
Isn't it interesting how perspectives can be so different.
Somebody who posts outright falsehoods and basically posts only on this one subject is now claiming it is others who are trolls.

[fat and old]

It’s interesting that people will wear a helmet to avoid a fine (and a sensible choice), but people seem mostly indifferent to the penalty for using the mobile fine whilst driving ….

Why ?

I'll go you one better.

Like me, Davids smokes (unless he's given up in the last 12 months....in which case good onya!). 5 packs = helmet fine. What's more important? How can anyone argue the impact of MHL's on a health basis and fill themselves with that poison?

As for being called names....meh. I've been married over 35 years. Think being called names is gonna worry me?

[baabaa]

How about...


Dear [Politician's Name],

I am writing to you to express my concern about the current bicycle helmet laws in Australia.

While I understand the importance of wearing a helmet while cycling, I believe that the current laws are too strict and should be revised.

As you may know, Australia has mandatory helmet laws that require all cyclists to wear an approved helmet while riding a bicycle. While this law was put in place with the intention of promoting safety, it has had some unintended consequences. For example, some people may be discouraged from cycling due to the inconvenience of wearing a helmet, which can lead to a decrease in physical activity and an increase in health problems.

I believe that adults should be allowed to decide whether they want to wear a helmet while cycling. This would give people the freedom to make their own choices about their safety while cycling, and could encourage more people to take up cycling as a form of exercise and transportation.

I urge you to consider revising the current bicycle helmet laws in Australia to allow adults to make their own decisions about wearing a helmet while cycling.

Thank you for your attention to this important issue.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]

[find_bruce]

Mod Says: please remember what unites us when discussing issues on which opinions differ. In accordance with the forum rules, personal attacks are not permitted. Apart from the forum rules, derogatory comments, name calling and similar are unlikely to advance your argument

[BobtheBuilder]

How about...


Dear [Politician's Name],

I am writing to you to express my concern about the current bicycle helmet laws in Australia.

While I understand the importance of wearing a helmet while cycling, I believe that the current laws are too strict and should be revised.

As you may know, Australia has mandatory helmet laws that require all cyclists to wear an approved helmet while riding a bicycle. While this law was put in place with the intention of promoting safety, it has had some unintended consequences. For example, some people may be discouraged from cycling due to the inconvenience of wearing a helmet, which can lead to a decrease in physical activity and an increase in health problems.

I believe that adults should be allowed to decide whether they want to wear a helmet while cycling. This would give people the freedom to make their own choices about their safety while cycling, and could encourage more people to take up cycling as a form of exercise and transportation.

I urge you to consider revising the current bicycle helmet laws in Australia to allow adults to make their own decisions about wearing a helmet while cycling.

Thank you for your attention to this important issue.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]

I think that's a good sample letter. Is there somewhere here or elsewhere we could store these?

Another variation could de-emphasise the personal liberty angle (for those, like me, who are happy to have my liberties taken away with seatbelt laws, etc.) and emphasise the public health benefits of cycling. I'll put something together in the next day or so for consideration.
Also, the NT allows cycling on footpaths and there is no mandatory helmet law for adult cyclists on footpaths. I'm leery of making that too well known though, in case it prompts the powers that be to bring us more in line with the rest of the country!

[baabaa]

How about...


Dear [Politician's Name],

I am writing to you to express my concern about the current bicycle helmet laws in Australia.

While I understand the importance of wearing a helmet while cycling, I believe that the current laws are too strict and should be revised.

As you may know, Australia has mandatory helmet laws that require all cyclists to wear an approved helmet while riding a bicycle. While this law was put in place with the intention of promoting safety, it has had some unintended consequences. For example, some people may be discouraged from cycling due to the inconvenience of wearing a helmet, which can lead to a decrease in physical activity and an increase in health problems.

I believe that adults should be allowed to decide whether they want to wear a helmet while cycling. This would give people the freedom to make their own choices about their safety while cycling, and could encourage more people to take up cycling as a form of exercise and transportation.

I urge you to consider revising the current bicycle helmet laws in Australia to allow adults to make their own decisions about wearing a helmet while cycling.

Thank you for your attention to this important issue.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]

I think that's a good sample letter. Is there somewhere here or elsewhere we could store these?

Another variation could de-emphasise the personal liberty angle (for those, like me, who are happy to have my liberties taken away with seatbelt laws, etc.) and emphasise the public health benefits of cycling. I'll put something together in the next day or so for consideration.
Also, the NT allows cycling on footpaths and there is no mandatory helmet law for adult cyclists on footpaths. I'm leery of making that too well known though, in case it prompts the powers that be to bring us more in line with the rest of the country!

Yeah pretty proud of *that, what’s next?



*took about 8 seconds to do with Perplexity AI but thanks for confirming you can make anything up here and get away with it.

[BobtheBuilder]

How about...


Dear [Politician's Name],

I am writing to you to express my concern about the current bicycle helmet laws in Australia.

While I understand the importance of wearing a helmet while cycling, I believe that the current laws are too strict and should be revised.

As you may know, Australia has mandatory helmet laws that require all cyclists to wear an approved helmet while riding a bicycle. While this law was put in place with the intention of promoting safety, it has had some unintended consequences. For example, some people may be discouraged from cycling due to the inconvenience of wearing a helmet, which can lead to a decrease in physical activity and an increase in health problems.

I believe that adults should be allowed to decide whether they want to wear a helmet while cycling. This would give people the freedom to make their own choices about their safety while cycling, and could encourage more people to take up cycling as a form of exercise and transportation.

I urge you to consider revising the current bicycle helmet laws in Australia to allow adults to make their own decisions about wearing a helmet while cycling.

Thank you for your attention to this important issue.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]

I think that's a good sample letter. Is there somewhere here or elsewhere we could store these?

Another variation could de-emphasise the personal liberty angle (for those, like me, who are happy to have my liberties taken away with seatbelt laws, etc.) and emphasise the public health benefits of cycling. I'll put something together in the next day or so for consideration.
Also, the NT allows cycling on footpaths and there is no mandatory helmet law for adult cyclists on footpaths. I'm leery of making that too well known though, in case it prompts the powers that be to bring us more in line with the rest of the country!

Yeah pretty proud of *that, what’s next?



*took about 8 seconds to do with Perplexity AI but thanks for confirming you can make anything up here and get away with it.

I'd suggest a database of sample letters that people could use to write to politicians or for writing letters to the editor, etc.

Does anyone have any ideas of where these could be stored? Is there capacity on this website to do so?

[fat and old]

Just make a pinned topic, same as the Template for Reporting post. Each letter is a post, cut and paste to whatever format you want. Simplest way is the easiest

[MichaelB]

How about...


Dear [Politician's Name],

I am writing to you to express my concern about the current bicycle helmet laws in Australia.

While I understand the importance of wearing a helmet while cycling, I believe that the current laws are too strict and should be revised.

As you may know, Australia has mandatory helmet laws that require all cyclists to wear an approved helmet while riding a bicycle. While this law was put in place with the intention of promoting safety, it has had some unintended consequences. For example, some people may be discouraged from cycling due to the inconvenience of wearing a helmet, which can lead to a decrease in physical activity and an increase in health problems.

I believe that adults should be allowed to decide whether they want to wear a helmet while cycling. This would give people the freedom to make their own choices about their safety while cycling, and could encourage more people to take up cycling as a form of exercise and transportation.

I urge you to consider revising the current bicycle helmet laws in Australia to allow adults to make their own decisions about wearing a helmet while cycling.

Thank you for your attention to this important issue.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]

Well done baabaa.

It only took 462 pages ….

[brumby33]

Problem is that I often feel that writing letters to politicians often falls on deaf ears or eyes at that point and all you get is standard replies from a Secretary and not from the Politician themselves thanking you for your letter and contribution and (......name of pollies...) will certainly take your idea into consideration and that'll be the very last you hear of it.
They are not interested in community ideas or complaints outside of election campaigns ......just like many of the other advocacy groups I know complaining about having to box their bikes up just to travel on Country trains in NSW.....I'm one of them who wrote directly to Chris Minns befoore his election to NSW Premier and I'm one who just got a thankyou for your communication, we'll be looking into it standard letter.

[DavidS]

Could be a pinned topic of letters, no debate.

That letter is quite good, let's have a good look at it and maybe pass it on to Freestyle Cyclists too although I'm sure they have been sending lots of material to pollies for years.

On a slightly related note, there was an article on the ABC app about Austin Robertson (star forward for Subiaco in the 60s and 70s, I lived in Perth as a kid and was a Subiaco supporter, great player) and his concussion issues, the full article is here: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-03/ ... /102294224

In the article there is a quote from a researcher at Curtin Uni as follows:

"The evidence is showing more and more that helmets help for severe injuries … things like penetrating injuries that we might see more often in car accidents where you'll have a skull fracture and the brain tissue will have a physical lesion or a penetrating injury.
"But for things like concussions, the evidence is really showing that they don't help."

I reckon the jury is definitely still out on the effectiveness of helmets for concussion (not easy to test either). Likely a more pressing issue for Australian Rules Football as it is hard to see how the sport can totally avoid collisions which can lead to concussion. A lot can be done but it will improve but not solve the problem.

DS

[baabaa]

Problem is that I often feel that writing letters to politicians often falls on deaf ears or eyes at that point and all you get is standard replies from a Secretary and not from the Politician themselves thanking you for your letter and contribution and (......name of pollies...) will certainly take your idea into consideration and that'll be the very last you hear of it.
They are not interested in community ideas or complaints outside of election campaigns ......just like many of the other advocacy groups I know complaining about having to box their bikes up just to travel on Country trains in NSW.....I'm one of them who wrote directly to Chris Minns befoore his election to NSW Premier and I'm one who just got a thankyou for your communication, we'll be looking into it standard letter.

Yup 100% correct fella!
The bikes on country trains in NSW is a shocker and yes spamming Politicians can make them even less engaged

Funny thing is that artificial intelligence generated letter (above) is so very close to what I sent Mike Baird around 2014 or 2015.
Took me about 40 mins to prep up and send back then, but one above took a few seconds to draft. Mine was requested by him as a follow up for a meeting and bike ride together about reconsidering the anti bike mission that Duncan Gay had when he ramped up the fines.

Every day Mike could see people biking around without helmets just by looking outside his Manly office window so he knew it would make locals cranky. But yes I got a nice thanking you for your letter back, but the meeting was important part and he did indicate later he tried to rope in Gay but... his side of politics lost out and the Nats won.

Anyway, if you get a few minutes try these AI sites and see what bounces out in seconds.
Is quite fun and I do like the easy read no jargon style that can come back – refreshing to just read simple words. AI makes it pretty easy to see how simple it is to make stuff up that sounds good and why you should not have faith around what you read on the internet. (Also think it is quite exciting as it continues to develop so worth getting in and having a play early on)

That one above came from

https://www.perplexity.ai/
but try the Google AI out via

https://bard.google.com/?hl=en

and then suggest something like the following prompts

Write a letter to a NSW Politician on bicycle helmet laws
and then
Write a letter to a NSW Politician against bicycle helmet laws

So, sure write letters to Politicians but they better be very good ones and not some AI generated fluff like that one above.

Also be very aware that a good letter may also led to a goggle type online search to things like the Monash study which is recent and has credibility and then this very discussion full of embarrassing claims about bicycle helmet efficiency.

To make change you have to get off the rear end and engage a group of people first. Then try and get a like-minded, smart, emotional intelligence community established from that group of people and sometimes, if the topic is worthy of consideration, local, state and federal Politicians do tend to start to listen.