Pushbike helmets

[ST]

Originally Posted by flappist

They would also help in car accidents too wouldn't they?

Do you think they should be mandatory in cars too?

A car has seatbelts, airbags and protection from all sides amidst various other safety equipment. A bike does not. Chances are if you get a knock on your bike that your head will make contact with something.

You don't need to be hit hard on a bike to get permanent head injuries, you do in a car.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by svo supporter

Yes, they're beneficial for pushy riders. I agree they should, be made compulsary for skateboard riders, scooters etc. They can all suffer the same fate as a push bike rider, if they cam off their "mode" of transport.

Tony Hawk used to wear kneepads and a helmet and he was one of the best pro skaters of his time (Famous for the first skater to successfully land "The 900").

[FPV8U]

Should be optional for adults (18 & Over) IMO.

[StealthAu]

Why 18+? Why should police waste their time doing what parents should be?

[Keepleft]

Wear the helmet, would insist family do so. Had a nasty concussion once whilst wearing one, ended up in hospital, staff noted I was lucky that I was wearing one.

Would NOT mandate it, would overturn the mandatory_to_wear legislation.

Don't see many around here wearing helmets.

[Peuty]

I don't understand the point of this thread. Like seatbelts, it's takes two seconds to put on and who knows, might be the difference between concussion and minor brain damage.

I suppose you lot think seatbelts should be optional as well?

By the way, I'm not one of these LCF's, you'll need to talk to RG to obtain the experts opinion....

[StealthAu]

Why should it be a legal requirement to wear a seatbelt? If it wasn't I'd still wear one, it just seems over the top to me.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Peuty

I don't understand the point of this thread. Like seatbelts, it's takes two seconds to put on and who knows, might be the difference between concussion and minor brain damage.

I suppose you lot think seatbelts should be optional as well?

By the way, I'm not one of these LCF's, you'll need to talk to RG to obtain the experts opinion....

The point of the thread is that people in Australia generally do not seem to ride pushbikes much anymore whereas in other parts of the world they do.

Both in my local inquiries and in many news articles detailed above MANDATORY helmets are denoted as a negative factor.

The poll also shows that MANDATORY helmets for adults is not in favour.

Which is better, a few fit people wearing helmets and a lot of fat people not riding or a lot of fit people some of whom wear helmets and a few fat people not riding.

If we had less heart attacks, diabetes and other conditions caused by obesity it might free up a few hospital beds for the bike injuries with a few left over to treat other things.

It is not like we don't have a problem with health.......

[Peuty]

Originally Posted by StealthAu

Why should it be a legal requirement to wear a seatbelt? If it wasn't I'd still wear one, it just seems over the top to me.

Because the burden shouldn't be placed on the health system when Left Wing Larry is in ICU for injuries that could have been prevented/lessened if the belt was worn in the first place.

It's a proven fact that seat belts save lives, you'd be ignorant to think otherwise.

[StealthAu]

Originally Posted by Peuty

It's a proven fact that seat belts save lives, you'd be ignorant to think otherwise.

Geese mate, ever thought of a carrier in politics? I never said anything in relation to the effectiveness of seatbelts, I know they work and as said if they were not enforced by law I would still wear one. I just don't understand why common sense and ones own safety needs to be enforced by law.

[fordomatic]

im with StealthAu on this one, it annoys me so much with Australia how everyone seems to tell us exactly what to do and how to do it, if someone doesnt want to wear a helmet that should be THERE decision, same goes for the seatbelt. they know the risks of not doing so.

[Mickxr8]

my 2c.
i have no problem with the laws as they are (especially for kids). what i have a problem with are adults that think wearing one makes them some how impervious,invincible,i have right of way on the road ( i WILLtake up the whole road, i will change lanes at my whim,i expect you to totally avoid me even though you`re doing the speed limit and i cut 2 mts`s in front of you ) grrr. sometimes a crash helmet would be the last of your problems. this rant is not intended for mr joe average riding down to the local shop.....nuff said.

[pottery beige]

Im only in it for the leg shaving.... hmmm......

[g220ba]

Originally Posted by StealthAu

Why should it be a legal requirement to wear a seatbelt? If it wasn't I'd still wear one, it just seems over the top to me.

You should talk to GeckoGT about the risks involved in not wearing seatbelts. He's one of the people called out to scoop people up when they've headbutted the windscreen.

Wearing a helmet is a simple preventative measure that should be taken by every cyclist regardless of it's law or not. The powers that be decided to enforce this on everyone to prevent potential injuries (right or wrong).

Remember in this country we legislate for the lowest common denominator.

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Tony Hawk used to wear kneepads and a helmet and he was one of the best pro skaters of his time (Famous for the first skater to successfully land "The 900").

Is it complusary for him to wear them? The whole thread seems to be whether or not we should make it complusary to wear a helmet when riding a pushy. I've just said it SHOULD be complusary for all forms of transport that was outlined by the OP at the beginning of the thread.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by 84ltd

You should talk to GeckoGT about the risks involved in not wearing seatbelts. He's one of the people called out to scoop people up when they've headbutted the windscreen.

Wearing a helmet is a simple preventative measure that should be taken by every cyclist regardless of it's law or not. The powers that be decided to enforce this on everyone to prevent potential injuries (right or wrong).

Remember in this country we legislate for the lowest common denominator.

The point here is being missed completely.

It is NOT are helmets safer?

The point is WILL NON MANDATORY HELMETS INCREASE THE NUMBER OF BIKE RIDERS?

The idea being maybe a few less people dying of being overweight and unfit.

Of course we could all not eat crap and exercise every day but then the road toll would drop if all people who lived near public transport were not allowed to own cars......or do you prefer to drive....

I wonder I we legislate for the lowest common denominator because we vote for the lowest common denominator?

[fordomatic]

yeh for sure, i reckon if the rule was lifted more people would ride there bikes, especially middle aged people. anything to make our fat population get out there and do some exercise (excepting the ones that have a medical reason for not being able to exercise)

[pauljh74]

Why would anyone suggest kids should wear one and adults don't? An adult can reach higher speeds consistently. All it takes is a dodgy drain, a deep pothole and the cyclist goes head first over the bars. I creased a rim when I was unable to avoid or jump over a strip of road dug up and under filled during road works. I would argue that the occasional cyclist is at higher risk of injury (per km cycled) as their riding skills aren't as sharp as a regular cyclist.

The reduction in cycling - apparently more new bicycles are sold than new cars every year, so the reduction in riding can't be that great if at all. If anything if there has been a reduction in riding, it is due to the "you don't pay rego, get off the road" attitude of many motorists. The seasoned riders keep riding, the person who wants to start again by commuting for example, gets scared off by aggro drivers.

[Geez Louise]

Less people cycling is not a result of people not wanting to wear helmets. There can not be that many "vain" people on the planet!

The nation is getting fatter because of lifestyle changes. We are working more, paying more and exercising less than previous generations.

Our lifestyles are faster and so is our food!

Sorry Flappist, I just don't see the point of your poll.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Geez Louise

Our lifestyles are faster and so is our food!

You forgot to add that parents have been terrified into not letting their children outside. As there are rapists everywhere....apparently.

[sgt_doofey]

Originally Posted by Geez Louise

Less people cycling is not a result of people not wanting to wear helmets. There can not be that many "vain" people on the planet!

The nation is getting fatter because of lifestyle changes. We are working more, paying more and exercising less than previous generations.

Our lifestyles are faster and so is our food!

Sorry Flappist, I just don't see the point of your poll.

Well said Geez Louise. I agree whole heartedly. I offer myself as a perfect example of this. I'm overweight (slightly) and I know it. Have I really bothered to try and do something about it. No.
I have signed up to do a couple of 60km bike rides (Amy's Ride and Tour Down Under), but am still yet to get off my fat backside to do any training and the first ride is in just over a month!
I've chosen bike riding as a means to losing some weight, along with some running and swimming. Is the fact that I have to wear a helmet stopping me from getting on my bike to get fitter? No, being lazy is though, as I haven't done any of those three things since I've returned from OS.

[JazManXII]

Originally Posted by vztrt

You forgot to add that parents have been terrified into not letting their children outside. As there are rapists everywhere....apparently.

well ... yeah ... sorry

[Venomous1]

No, there is too much nannyism in Australia

[wrongwaynorris]

I ride every day and would'nt dream of going without a helmet . Something to do with if your dumb enough not to wear a helmet there's probably no need to because there's nothing between your ears to protect . Like the "rebellious freedom loving " XXXXwits who ride a certain brand of American motorcycle with a bandana wrapped around their empty heads . I really dont give a rats if you kill yourselves but it's the ones who survive and become a burden on the taxpayers for the rest of their miserable lives all because they have " Rights " and are " Free Spirits " that give me the irrits .

[Dave R]

If people aren't riding bikes anymore because it's compulsory to wear safety equipment, I'm afraid they already have brain damage.

The reason they are compulsory is because people are inherently stupid. If you were to tumble off a pushbike at full flight aiming your head into the rear of my Falcon at say, 25km/h, in that split second the merits behind wearing a helmet will have become quite apparent. Then again, why bother potentially saving people from brain damage/death with a layer of foam when they really do deserve to die? And by "deserve", I mean darwinism says that stupid people should not breed/die and I tend to agree with old mate Charles. If the tumble doesn't kill you, the brain damage will lower your prospects of breeding. And if you aren't killed or injured, I'm going to kill you because dented my Falcon. And if you have already bred, I'm probably going to go after your offspring as well because they are just cyclists waiting to happen. So really, cyclists without helmets should die; be kind to humanity and let them die.

Unfortunately our evil government doesn't want them to die (which is probably tied into their end game of making us all fat since cycling is the only way to get fit/ keeping us in cars/ increasing potential "safety" camera revenue/ working our way to budget surplus in 2012/ the world is ending in 2012 anyway so who cares?). Or is it that such a simple piece of safety equipment could potentially lessen the blow to the most important part of the body and as people are inherently stupid they won't wear them unless they are told to, much like if wearing a seat belt wasn't the law then people wouldn't wear them either? The mind boggles.

[AussieAV]

Guys, no one is saying cycle helmets are a bad idea. The question is more about whether legislating it is necessary, whether the existing legislation is effecting if/how often people cycle, and maybe even if there are better ways to achieve safer cycling.

For all those saying only idiots wouldn't wear one all the time, and how dare you risk potentially using up public health funding, take a look at this link.

http://www.tacsafety.com.au/jsp/cont...ull&pageID=175

You'll notice that in Vic in 2009 there were 6 cyclist deaths, and 50 pedestrian deaths. Now by your reasoning we should be immediately making helmets compulsory for pedestrians. Everyone should wear one as soon as they step out of the house or car. Is this actually what you want???

Now interestingly, under the Dutch system (no compulsory helmets), they would have statistically only had one third (2) cycling deaths for the same size population. Obviously they've found a better solution (cars, cyclists and pedestrians are far more separated). Their system not only protects cyclists, it encourages more people to cycle. This is not just because they don't wear helmets, but also because there is an infrastructure to make cycling more convenient and enjoyable.

There is obviously a benefit to society, both morally and financially, to help reduce how many people are injured and killed by accidents. However, the knee-jerk reaction of "wrap everyone up and make them wear protective gear" is obviously not the only, or even the best solution.

[Jim Goose]

Now interestingly, under the Dutch system (no compulsory helmets), they would have statistically only had one third (2) cycling deaths for the same size population. Obviously they've found a better solution (cars, cyclists and pedestrians are far more separated). Their system not only protects cyclists, it encourages more people to cycle. This is not just because they don't wear helmets, but also because there is an infrastructure to make cycling more convenient and enjoyable.

There are plenty of European cities where the town has a "car free area" and also plenty of cities where the narrow lane ways dot the cities and pedestrian and cycle traffic is the only thing you have to worry about there.

Name one Australian city where bikes and cars are intergrated safely?
How many time on here have people whinged about bike riders being on the road?
What about the media frenzy earlier this year about bike riders being on the receiving end of road rage and cars deliberatly forcing them off the road or trying to run them down?

If people dont ride bikes because they "look silly" in a helmet, then too bloody bad.
At a job site your made to wear a hard hat, steel cap boots, gloves etc etc...
Its not a fashion show.

I tried bike riding to get fit several years ago and within the space of 3 weeks I had almost been run down 7 times by drivers who were in laa laa land.
I daresay THIS is the reason people dont ride as much, the fear of being hit by a car.
Also it appears that hit and runs are more and more common these days.
Make it safe enough for bikes on the road and you wont need a helmet....

[StealthAu]

Originally Posted by 84ltd

You should talk to GeckoGT about the risks involved in not wearing seatbelts. He's one of the people called out to scoop people up when they've headbutted the windscreen.

It really amazes me how people can take whatever they want from any given statement hey.

[GTP owner]

There are luite a few issues with bike helmets.

Firstly, parents believe that if bike riding needs helmets, then it must be dangerous, so they do not encourage kids to learn how to ride. We lose yet another great joy of childhood in the name of safety.

Next, kids grow. So if you buy a helmet this year, it will not fit next year. Or they are no longer fashionable. Or they have spiders in them from sitting in the shed all winter.

Then they are forgotten, lost, broken, dirty etc. So the kids don't wear them.

Helmets are also not fully enclosed, like a motorbike helmet. Therefore the protection they provide is minimal. If you are serious about the safety aspect, you need a full face motorbike style skid lid.

Next issue is that it reduces your hearing. Kids have enough trouble with working out speed differentials and directions compared to adults. Wearing a helmet makes this difficulty worse.

Then there is the fact that if people are discouraged from riding, then obesity becomes a bigger issue. It is all well and good to pontificate about lying in a hospital bed with a brain injury, but when it comes to the epidemic of obesity we all look at our feet and shuffle around saying "do something about it". Obesity kills. Fact. Diabetes, strokes, myocardial infarctions, pulmonary emboli, etc etc etc. People are lying in hospital right now dieing from obesity-related problems. Far more than from not wearing helmets on bikes.

The final point is that if these laws for compulsory helmet wearing worked, we would see a fall in the number of head injuries from bike-related crashes. Guess what the results are.....no change. The reduction in injuries parallels the reduction in the number of people riding pushies.

So I say get rid of these stupid laws. If you want to wear a helmet, or want your kids to wear one - you go for it. Me? No thanks

[DBourne]

I don't see any reason they shouldn't be mandatory, I put mine on without thinking.

Reason I don't ride to work is simple, crazy drivers. The distance is no issue (26km) but I would be dead within the first few K's.

Also: I just notice your observation Flap that people stopped riding once they became mandatory. I think that point is null and void now as most kids (ie me at 23yrs old) have grown up with the idea that you HAVE to wear a helmet.

So that wouldn't be the reason for not riding.