Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
eveln

You can tell how much you are valued by how big the fine is for not wearing your helmet

Recommended Posts

And it would seem the NT does not place a very high value on it's cyclists, as the fine for not wearing a helmet is twenty-five dollars. If you live in NSW it's gonna cost you over three hundred dollars to let you hair flow freely .

Love to be a fly on the wall in the room revealing the thought process behind the decided fine amount

Personally I think it should be around what NSW demands.

edit https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-27/nsw-bike-helmet-fines-too-expensive-researchers-argue/11640722

Edited by eveln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The NSW Police and NSW Department of Revenue declined to comment."

 

methinks your thread title might be more accurate if it said "you can tell how much revenue your government wants to milk"

 

if all jurisdictions had a mandatory first warning, then all people would be equally valued, wouldn't they ?

 

 

 

Edited by scruffy1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, scruffy1 said:

 

methinks your thread title might be more accurate if it said "you can tell how much revenue your government wants to milk"

There's a UOW researcher by the name of Julia Quilter who says, and I quote from the article, " "That strikes me as a very high amount of money for what is really, very minor offending." "

She's talking about the hike in the NSW fine here. It's her comment that inspired my thread title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i read the link

 

you were agreeing with the $ nsw was gouging so i presumed the title reflected your opinion; sorry if that wasn't the case

 

$2million a year for the past 3 years in fines seems good money... barely pay the hospitalisation for a few catastrophic head injuries though

 

cycling in sydney is a very dangerous pass time really

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, scruffy1 said:

 

$2million a year for the past 3 years in fines seems good money... barely pay the hospitalisation for a few catastrophic head injuries though

cycling in sydney is a very dangerous pass time really

precisely.

And yet the researcher describes it as minor offending.

Which is why I used the title I did. Obviously in NSW they think highly enough of their cyclists that they'd like to give a clear incentive to wear their helmet.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh,

 

 Cycling most anywhere is not exactly safe, one thing I'll say of WA, they have seriously gone out of their way to separate bicyclists from traffic - not perfectly of course but in the denser traffic areas there are well separated bike tracks of good quality most everywhere.

 

On the other hand SA is kinda hopeless at it, just as it is at dealing with on-street parking, which also causes issues for cyclists. There is a promise of a dramatic increase in clearways but it has not happened as yet.

 

Somewhat amusing/bemusing aside: There has been an obviously abandoned, perhaps stolen and dumped car outside my unit since I moved in which is over six months now. The last few weeks Marion City Council have ticketed it, but they still haven't removed it... and they call WA "waitawhile" there it would be razor blades by now   🙂

 

To return to topic its a thorny one. I've not ridden a bike in a very long time, well before helmet laws came in. I take scruffy's point, head trauma cases are horrifyingly expensive to provide care for. On the other hand I would have thought a warning perhaps backed by an education evening might have more impact than bludgeoning people with fines all the time.

 

I honestly don't get it really. As a kid I rode everywhere, miles and miles of mostly country roads I grant you and yes, came off a few times, I suppose we all do, but I never bashed my head.

 

What is it with riders today ? Do they determinedly land on their noggin ?

 

In SA we are apparently close now to getting the invasion of the lycra brigade as my sister calls them. Every year, something to do with an annual bike race which fails to interest me but because as I mentioned SA is not very bike friendly they will for a few weeks disrupt traffic with pelotons weaving all over the roads including up and back from the city to the hills on the approaches to the Freeway. 

 

It's not really very friendly and they do not have a very good attitude, probably just as well South Australians are in the main very polite.

 

At great expense SA many years ago built a velodrome, perhaps they would be better off using it - I can't see how they are enjoying a ride in the country when they are head down, bum up following someone else's ass.

 

Still, at least they all wear helmets...

 

Reality check - bikes and cars do not mix, if you choose to ride be aware in a conflict you WILL lose. Ride safely and as best you can keep away from cars rather than expecting them to keep away from you. No one wants to hit you, I would hope, too much paper work, but a lot of bike riders seem to almost invite it.

 

I guess in our PC world you have to wear a helmet, but if you forget a reminder rather than a fine might make better sense. Otherwise we have to go the other, insane, way and make people get a license to ride a push bike, which has been tried some places.

 

As the law stands in Australia, aside from helmet law, which snuck in years ago, all the responsibility is with the drivers that cyclists share the roads with, and boy do some cyclists abuse that, especially at traffic lights when they suddenly decide to pretend to be pedestrians.

 

Just a pet peeve.. 🙂

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, chrisg said:

I take scruffy's point,

Well, some might say, " of course you do ". You can hardly take my point of view as you have me on ignore ;)

 

People generally don't pay too much attention to warnings, at least not in the long term they don't. They might remember the 'burned' feeling of a warning for a day if they're lucky where as a hefty fine hurts along time .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say you can tell how much you're valued by how you're treated when you're down on your luck, or even just not part of the majority. 

 

Lost your job? Get fucked. Disabled? Get fucked. Have to care for someone disabled? Get fucked. No private health insurance? Get fucked. Indigenous? Get fucked. Cyclist? Get fucked. Care about evidence-based policy? Get fucked. 

 

Coming soon: not a Xtian wacko? Get fucked. 

 

 

Edited by Kimmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, eveln said:

And it would seem the NT does not place a very high value on it's cyclists, as the fine for not wearing a helmet is twenty-five dollars. If you live in NSW it's gonna cost you over three hundred dollars to let you hair flow freely .

Love to be a fly on the wall in the room revealing the thought process behind the decided fine amount

Personally I think it should be around what NSW demands.

edit https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-27/nsw-bike-helmet-fines-too-expensive-researchers-argue/11640722

 

$300 is kinda excessive considering it's more than the price of an actual helmet unless it's something like this one

https://www.99bikes.com.au/bell-super-3r-mips-helmet-matte-black-grey-lg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way - a foam / plastic helmet and 25mm of lycra isn't going to save you if you decide to ride on a heavy haulage route (especially during harvest!)  ahh the "we have the right to cycle wherever we want" brigade...... 🙄  their common sense gene is defective.

Edited by DEVERE
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cycling actually isn't dangerous. Helmet laws aren't warranted. 

 

FACT: you're twice as likely to get a serious head injury being in a car. 

 

Hands up who thinks helmets for car occupants should be mandatory. 

 

1 hour ago, DEVERE said:

ahh the "we have the right to cycle wherever we want" brigade...... 🙄  their common sense gene is defective.

 

Tell you what's defective? The idea that roads are just for motorised transport. Take one guess who got you those roads in the first place. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bike helmet laws are mondo stoopid.

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/mar/21/bike-helmet-cyclists-safe-urban-warfare-wheels


"A major 2001 review of the research concluded that helmets reduce the risk of head injury by 60%. A 2011 examination of this study by Rune Elvik, a Norwegian academic and road safety expert...noted that whatever the benefits in each individual case, a population-wide increase in helmet use, for example after legislation, is not generally matched by similar reductions in overall head injury rates. "

...
"In 2006 the British Medical Journal carried an examination of the evidence by Dorothy Robinson, an Australian statistician, into what actually happened in New Zealand and Australia after helmet compulsion laws were passed. ...The conclusion? The idea that bike helmet laws directly improve overall safety for cyclists doesn’t appear to be backed by any evidence." [emphasis added]

 

 

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2018/10/21/i-do-not-wear-a-bicycle-helmet/

 

Let me qualify that headline: I do wear a helmet when mountain biking. But I don’t wear one when the sidewalk is icy – yet I could slip when walking and split my skull.

 

I do not don my bike helmet when I jump in the shower, despite the fact falling and hitting my head while covered in suds is far riskier than you might think.

 

Scooping leaves out of high gutters requires a ladder climb, and is decidedly dicy, but before I ascend to the residential roof I do not strap on a lid.

 

Why do I do all of these dangerous things without even giving a passing thought to protecting my brainbox with a helmet, yet I am said by some to be naked if I ride my bike without one? It’s illogical.

 

Why is bicycling perceived to be an activity that’s so perilous that it requires head protection? If it were, indeed, this dangerous there would be an epidemic of head injuries in the Netherlands, where bicyclists rule (literally: the Dutch Royal family dot around on bikes – lidless, of course).

 

Ah, some might say, there are gazillions of cycleways in the Netherlands so cycle helmets are not required. Thing is, cycle helmets are designed for precisely this sort of scenario – slow speed crashes on to curbs from head height. They are not intended to offer protection against being hit by a car or truck (they’re polystyrene blocks, not force fields).

 

You know what’s really dangerous? Driving. Getting behind the wheel of a car is perhaps the riskiest thing we do every day yet few of us give head safety while driving a second’s thought. Individual motor journeys are not particularly risky, but they are so routine and frequent that the overall risk, over time, becomes more significant than normally understood.

 

Driving to a skydiving airstrip is far riskier than jumping out of the airplane yet parachutists are not nagged to wear motoring helmets.

 

And such products do exist. Well, did. Davies Craig motoring helmets are sometimes available on eBay (that’s where I bought mine, pictured).

 

helmet-box.jpg.860x0_q70_crop-scale.jpg

 

“Motoring is a dangerous activity,” said Richard Davies, managing director of Davies Craig, an Australian manufacturer of automotive parts. “If a motorist is not killed in a crash one of the most common injuries is a head injury and they can produce permanent and long-term damage.”

 

Despite the prevalence of car airbags, motorists still die from head injuries; head injuries that could have been prevented had those motorists been wearing helmets. [emphasis added]  In the 1980s Davies’s company added a Motoring Helmet to a long list of its other automotive products. (Davies Craig is a manufacturer of electric water pumps, fan clutches and other automotive components, exported all over the world.) The company’s Motoring Helmet was available globally – 500 were sold between 1985 and 1987.

 

“Commonly a head injury arises when the head strikes the A or B pillar, windscreen, or the head of another occupant,” Davies once told me by email from Australia.

 

Using an argument that is often wheeled out on social media for helmet-less cyclists, he added: “Medical treatment is a drain on society.”

 

The Davies Craig Motoring Helmet wasn’t for motorsports, it was for everyday driving. The helmet’s packaging featured families wearing helmets for urban motoring, and a businessman was shown wearing one while being driven by a similarly-clad chauffeur.

Sales spiel on the helmet’s box claimed that one day “motoring helmets will be commonplace.”

 

But they are not. Why do we not wear motoring helmets today for every single car journey, even for just popping down to the shops? Part of the reason for the product’s lack of success could be the widespread belief that motoring isn’t dangerous to car occupants. “Motorists perceive they [are] safe, strapped in a steel cage,” said Davies.

 

His helmet’s packaging stressed that “driving even for the most proficient is dangerous.” Use of the helmet was recommended for all car journeys but especially “after dark and during twilight … or when roads are wet.” The use of a motoring helmet was also recommended for “long trips when you may become tired” but also “within five kilometres of your home or destination.”

 

Pretty much for every car journey, then.

 

Statistically, and logically, it would make sense to take every safety precaution necessary when driving, including wearing helmets – but no brain injury organizations lobby for their use, never mind their mandatory use. Unlike for cycling, there are no campaigns urging the adoption of motoring helmets because “if it saved just one life it would be worth it.”[emphasis added]

 

It’s almost as though we’re culturally programmed to mollycoddle motoring and erect barriers for bicycling.

 

<snip>

 

driving+without+dying.jpg

 

 

 

Edited by @~thehung
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kimmo said:

Cycling actually isn't dangerous. Helmet laws aren't warranted. 

 

FACT: you're twice as likely to get a serious head injury being in a car. 

 

Hands up who thinks helmets for car occupants should be mandatory. 

 

 

Tell you what's defective? The idea that roads are just for motorised transport. Take one guess who got you those roads in the first place. 

I don't have an issue with most cyclists per se - but those few who ride on designated heavy haulage routes 3 or 4 abreast and expect trucks carrying 100+tonne to stop on a dime... and them blame the truck drivers.... that's a little bit special.  

 

We live in a fairy hilly region, with often meandering roads, so imagine cresting a hill, hauling a shit tonne of grain, and finding a group of cyclists sitting not quite on the edge of the road puffing and panting, and having another truck coming the other way - I've seen some damned close calls and if not for the truck drivers skills, could well have ended in disaster.   The local Shire have invested/spent a butt tonne of money creating a massive network of cycling paths so people can ride safely. I don't know about you, but when I ride my bicycle, I stay the hell away from those trucks and utilise the paths our tax dollars and rates paid for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DEVERE said:

Either way - a foam / plastic helmet and 25mm of lycra isn't going to save you if you decide to ride on a heavy haulage route (especially during harvest!)  ahh the "we have the right to cycle wherever we want" brigade...... 🙄  their common sense gene is defective.

Yep. Pretty much agree.

I think anyone that chooses to ride on country roads that routinely cater to haulage vehicles and the grey nomad type autos, is sick of living.

Not long ago their was a group of about eight doing a training cycle on the highway. From all accounts at least one hit rough surface which sent them tumbling mostly into the bank and relative safety, one though chose to ride around ,straight into an oncoming truck. Wearing a helmet he died on impact. All the others that fell over each other and into the bank on the side ( all wearing their helmets ) survived.

 

No helmet will totally keep a fool safe, but it might help those random others they come in contact with. I shudder to think of what the truck driver ^^ would be like today if more of the cyclists had chosen to go round his fallen mates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, @~thehung said:

Why is bicycling perceived to be an activity that’s so perilous that it requires head protection? If it were, indeed, this dangerous there would be an epidemic of head injuries in the Netherlands, where bicyclists rule (literally: the Dutch Royal family dot around on bikes – lidless, of course).

 

Ah, some might say, there are gazillions of cycleways in the Netherlands so cycle helmets are not required. Thing is, cycle helmets are designed for precisely this sort of scenario – slow speed crashes on to curbs from head height. They are not intended to offer protection against being hit by a car or truck (they’re polystyrene blocks, not force fields).

 

I've known this since 1990; it's fucking obvious. As a sixteen year old then, the new law struck me as profoundly condescending and misdirected. It serves to 'other' cyclists; performing activities that require a helmet isn't something most people do, and it never will be. Thus, it killed casual cycling - the kind of utilitarian usage that used to be much more common, jumping on the bike to go to the shop, or to school or work or whatever, that was once something a much larger proportion of people did. 

 

Its been calculated that by scaring folks off bikes, the resulting lack of fitness in the general populace has cost twenty years of life for every year of life that mandatory helmet legislation has saved. Then there's the resulting congestion both on the roads and in public transport systems to consider. 

 

So anyone coming at me with some public health finger-wagging for not wearing a helmet can totally go blow a goat. Put your fucking brain in gear and question whether a law that virtually no other place in the world has is remotely justified. 

 

Cycling shouldn't be something that's restricted to hardcore commuters and lycra warriors. It's the answer to several pressing issues we face, and it should be encouraged and regarded as totally normal. You should be thankful to every cyclist you see, for not being in yet another fucking car. For not being another sardine on a train. For not being a sedentary burden on the health system. The risk of head injury is half that of being in a car, which everybody considers negligible. So the next time you see a cyclist without a helmet, don't even consider having the unbridled temerity to blurt the same old ignorant shit at them. Open your eyes to reality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh,

 

Nanny state depriving people of basic liberties - been going on for a long, long time.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be a lack of awareness of the fact that legislation has costs, not just benefits. This is entirely upside-down when it comes to the business lobby however, who have managed to persuade many folks that regulation is an unwarranted hindrance... but those same folks are often perfectly fine with government overreach when it comes to individuals. 

 

And regarding surveillance and all that Orwellian stuff, people seem not to notice or care what's rammed through in the name of national security. Labor just rolls over every time, either scared of being wedged on that score, or equally happy to embrace governmental mission creep towards a police state. Ubiquitous facial recognition, criminalising public interest journalism and whistleblowing, that's all fine. 

 

But heaven forfend a democracy might want to place restrictions on the activities of business to protect human rights and dignity, or maintain a level playing field, or protect what's left of nature. 

 

Only the Greens want to keep government out of our business, and to protect ourselves and the planet from Business. But somehow they're loopy. People don't get called sheeple for nothing. Well I for one am not keen on the taste of Rupert's dick cheese. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for anyone struggling to entertain the "sacrilegious" side of this debate, maybe try this account Why I stopped wearing a bike helmet, by Peter Flax, former editor-in-chief of Bicycling (a long running and successful magazine)

 

heres a taste:

 

..

I lacked the time or the skill to navigate my way around this obstacle, and I went down. Hard. I can still remember the force of my face hitting the road, and had an awareness in that instant that it was enough to kill someone.

 

The impact was fierce. I sheared five of my teeth at the gum line, shattered my jaw, and broke bones in my hands, arms, and shoulder. My body bounced and slid about 25 yards from the point of impact until it came to a stop.

 

It is true that I continue to deal with the implications of that crash — I have a titanium plate in my chin and recurring dental problems and I still feel pain in my right hand when I open a jar of tomato sauce — but it also is true that it didn’t change the arc of my life.

I’ve always felt that the bike helmet I was wearing that day had something to do with that.

...

 

or, for those not invested enough to read that, but still open to challenging their convictions the lazy way:

 

 

 

Edited by @~thehung
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, rally drivers and race car drivers and motorcyclists all wear helmets ... perhaps it's time that was expanded to include all auto transports

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2019 at 12:41 PM, Kimmo said:

I'd say you can tell how much you're valued by how you're treated when you're down on your luck, or even just not part of the majority. 

 

Lost your job? Get fucked.

 

 

Here we go again.
I lost my job about 6 months ago. I got made redundant. Did I get on the internet and have a fucking SOOK about ThE MaJoRiTy? 
No, I got another job. Problem solved! Nobody told me to get fucked. So I am not sure what you are crying about with that one.
Why is it so hard for you to understand? If people want to work, they will. I still managed to pay my bills while I was unemployed and looking for work.

Wow, how did I do that? Because I'm not a fucking lazy cunt, that's how.
I even managed to fit in a Thailand holiday in between jobs LOL


You poor, down trodden human. It must be so hard for you wasting all your time complaining about not having enough. When you could actually get motivated and get more.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, twinair said:

You poor, down trodden human. It must be so hard for you wasting all your time complaining about not having enough. When you could actually get motivated and get more.

 

I'm not complaining about my own situation, fuckwit. Like most other places, this country is run by a pack of corrupt morons who are driving it off a cliff.

 

You know all those homeless people? Where were they twenty years ago? Have we suddenly had an increase in the proportion of alleged shit cunts who deserve to be homeless?

 

Fucking arsehole. Here's hoping you find out what I'm talking about one day...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kimmo said:

 

I'm not complaining about my own situation, fuckwit. Like most other places, this country is run by a pack of corrupt morons who are driving it off a cliff.

 

You know all those homeless people? Where were they twenty years ago? Have we suddenly had an increase in the proportion of alleged shit cunts who deserve to be homeless?

 

Fucking arsehole. Here's hoping you find out what I'm talking about one day...

If this country is so bad, why don't you just leave?
We'd be better off without you tbh.

I bet you were either a part of the retarded protests in Melbourne over the last few weeks or at the very least fist pumping.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such a fuckwit. You make it look like a professional sport.

 

Who are your sponsors for the fuckwit championship? News Ltd?  Palmer Company?

 

Dicks you vote for fuck up my country and you tell me to leave? Die in a fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Not sure that would cut it mate, he's kinda soggy   🙂

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×