Helmet Visor Law?

[fpsollie]

Hi there, I was interested in finding out the legality of different visors, i have found information on clear and tinted visors but nothing to do with mirrored visors, was wondering if anyone could clear it up for me!
Cheers.

[sinfull]

You must lift a mirror visor when approaching a popo, so he/she can see if you're guilty !

[p.dath]

I don't know the answer, and I doubt their would be a piece of legislation that would directly give your answer. I'm guessing that as long as you have a free and unobstructed view of the road you should be fine.

The only other thing I can think of that might apply is the window tinting legislation, usually applied to cars.

[FJRider]

Thre is only the Standards legislation in force at the moment. And seldom checked. If anybody (other than Helmet retailers) really know what they should be looking for ... to check.

Talking to Popo with a mirrored visor down is subject to a fine of a dozen donuts ... :shit:

Otherwise ... nobody really gives a toss. But don't wear a tinted visor at night because you can't see a dam thing.

[Gremlin]

The UK has laws about which visor can be used at what time (ie, no tinted visors at night).

We do not.

[Scruffygit]

The UK has laws about which visor can be used at what time (ie, no tinted visors at night).

We do not.


UK law states that any visor with a light transmission less than 50%, tint or mirrored, is illegal. No time of day considered.

ACPO guidelines recommend using common sense and giving "rider advice" if used during the day and to "consider" prosecution if used at night.

[AllanB]

Just buy one -I have been riding with mirrored and tinted visors for years. Police don't give a flying F as if you have been pulled over by them it usually relates to something more serious than a visor.

Here is a better question - why are crash helmets not inspected at WOF time in the same manner as a cars seat belt is?

[imdying]

The only time I've seen someone have trouble is when a pommie imported cop gave a mate a ticket for a tinted visor. Of course, we don't have any laws regarding that (unlike the UK where the cop came from), so when the receiver complained to his superiors, he was kicked in the arse by a superior and told something about only giving tickets when he knew the actual offence or something like that. But that was years ago.

[imdying]

Here is a better question - why are crash helmets not inspected at WOF time in the same manner as a cars seat belt is?That's an easy one... there's no money in it. If they did that, registering you instead of the bike would be next. And if they do that, they can't fuck you in the arse deep and hard if you have to register more than one motorcycle. If it were about safety and not revenue generation, then sure, it'd happen. It's all a have... luckily it's cheaper to pay tickets than registration, and a police car can't catch a motorcycle.

[haydes55]

Here is a better question - why are crash helmets not inspected at WOF time in the same manner as a cars seat belt is?

^This is a good idea. But is near impossible to enforce, people have more than one helmet just take a good one in then use a shittier one on the road (One has a tinted visor another clear or one open face one full face etc.). If a helmet isn't up to spec they could just take a mates helmet to the WOF. People ride on the road on friends bikes using their own helmet, that wouldn't be inspected. Only thing I could think of is an individual "Tag of Condition" or similar for individual helmets. But we already have enough costs with WOFs and Rego already. Easiest thing is to get police to enforce ticketing/warnings for riding with an inadequate helmet. If you are stopped they will check it has the approved safety standards stickers and isn't in poor condition.

[jafar]

It's all a have... luckily it's cheaper to pay tickets than registration,

I'll bet you'd be the first to complain if an ambulance left you on the side of the road due to unpaid ACC levies & took someone less injured but who had paid their dues. :blink:


and a police car can't catch a motorcycle .

Wouldn't bet on it :facepalm:

[imdying]

I'll bet you'd be the first to complain if an ambulance left you on the side of the road due to unpaid ACC levies & took someone less injured but who had paid their dues. :blink:You gormless fucktard... I register one of the bikes, I register two cars, I pay a worker levy, I pay an employer levy, ACC doesn't pay for ambulances, and I pay private medical insurance at over a surgical level. Take your stupid fucking comment and shove it up your arse dickhead. Just cause that slow old shitter you ride can't outrun anything, doesn't mean the rest of us are so crippled.

[caseye]

OK so you do pay rego/ACC on a bike.
I got Marty's point though and like him, I'd be quite happy if the Ambo did leave the non ACC levy paying accident victim(whatever type of vehicle) behind to take away one who had.
So perhaps the last of your thread cold have been in front?
Any real need for the big mouthful?

[rastuscat]

You gormless fucktard... I register one of the bikes, I register two cars, I pay a worker levy, I pay an employer levy, ACC doesn't pay for ambulances, and I pay private medical insurance at over a surgical level. Take your stupid fucking comment and shove it up your arse dickhead. Just cause that slow old shitter you ride can't outrun anything, doesn't mean the rest of us are so crippled.

I'm not clear on your point.......is there something I've missed? Unhappy, are we?

[scumdog]

You gormless fucktard... I register one of the bikes, I register two cars, I pay a worker levy, I pay an employer levy, ACC doesn't pay for ambulances, and I pay private medical insurance at over a surgical level. Take your stupid fucking comment and shove it up your arse dickhead. Just cause that slow old shitter you ride can't outrun anything, doesn't mean the rest of us are so crippled.


Please be less tactful and get to the point you're trying to make..:shifty:

[Gremlin]

Debate and discussion of the original topic is fine, but member abuse is not acceptable.

This thread is also beginning to stray from the original topic of helmet law. There are other threads for discussing items such as rego.

[bogan]

Its my understanding that a mirrored visor, is technically a visor with a mirror tint; so any laws relating to tinted visors cover mirrored ones as well. But as others have said, I don't think we have laws on that. Which is kind of weird cos cars have tint restrictions.


I'm not clear on your point.......is there something I've missed? Unhappy, are we?


Please be less tactful and get to the point you're trying to make..:shifty:

Oh look, he did leave the cops in the dust scratching their noggins :shifty:

[FJRider]

Oh look, he did leave the cops in the dust scratching their noggins :shifty:

The cop's have donuts ... HE doesn't .... :shifty:

[mossy1200]

You gormless fucktard... I register one of the bikes, I register two cars, I pay a worker levy, I pay an employer levy, ACC doesn't pay for ambulances, and I pay private medical insurance at over a surgical level. Take your stupid fucking comment and shove it up your arse dickhead. Just cause that slow old shitter you ride can't outrun anything, doesn't mean the rest of us are so crippled.

I only have one bike because its all I can afford to register,warrent and insure. Thats called living within my income. So are you stating your living beyond yours or creating your own rules to suit yourself. If everyone made their own rules then no rules would apply.

Im not stating I like the way it works and if it becomes ACC per licence holder ill own more bikes but im not important enough to self regulate extra entitlements over and above the rest of the population.

I have a mirror visor(spare) but I dont use it as its harder to pick damp spots on the road etc.

[fpsollie]

Awesome, thanks for all the help guys!!

[p.dath]

You gormless fucktard... I register one of the bikes, I register two cars, I pay a worker levy, I pay an employer levy, ACC doesn't pay for ambulances, and I pay private medical insurance at over a surgical level. Take your stupid fucking comment and shove it up your arse dickhead. Just cause that slow old shitter you ride can't outrun anything, doesn't mean the rest of us are so crippled.

ACC pay for emergency transport in ambulances (aka, coming to the scene of an accident and taking you to hospital).

Private medical insurance, that I have seen, pay a top up on ACC to allow you to go to a private facility. If ACC didn't exist, then the medical insurer would have to pay the full amount, which means your private medical insurance would lot more.

[Swoop]

I'd be quite happy if the Ambo did leave the non ACC levy paying accident victim(whatever type of vehicle) behind to take away one who had.
I wonder how that would stand with the medical "profession" and their hippopotomus oath?

[imdying]

I only have one bike because its all I can afford to register,warrent and insure. Thats called living within my income. So are you stating your living beyond yours or creating your own rules to suit yourself.No, I can afford to register them all, and I did before they started trying to take the piss. I just decided where, for me, it went from fair tax to extortion, and cut them off there.


I have a mirror visor(spare) but I dont use it as its harder to pick damp spots on the road etc.Try the gold/yellow mirrored visors, might be just the ticket for those damp days :yes:


private medical insurance would lot more.That doesn't bother me in the slightest. As far as ACC goes, I'm happy to pay my fair portion. Beyond that, they'll have to chase me for it.

[BoristheBiter]

And just throw a curve ball, If visors/windows are covered by a max tint limit what about sunglasses?

[mossy1200]

No, I can afford to register them all, and I did before they started trying to take the piss. I just decided where, for me, it went from fair tax to extortion, and cut them off there.


Personally I dont mind what anyone else does within reason if they are prepared to take the risk of fines etc. But the problem with self regulating what you do is that if on a scale of acceptable standard in society someone goes well above the average standard set and then tells people it provokes a negative reaction from others. These people have a view that is equally against not breaking the rules as you are for stretching them so they will get as angry as you do on the topic. Normally this will produce a heated arguement with no resolve.

I could afford two regos or even three or more but seeing as I would only end up doing a equal amount of riding in total or very close too I dont spend the extra money because owning more than one bike would be nice but not that important to me.
If rego was removed and registered drivers license including ACC content was introduced idd think again about multiple bikes.




With the visor tints it may well be that due to being partly colour blind between browns and greens, more so in dim light I might not be the best person to judge visors mirror or tint as I struggle with telling if patches of ground are dry or wet in areas that havent finished drying after rain. Normally these areas are in the shade also so lower in light levels.

[Berries]

I could afford two regos or even three or more but seeing as I would only end up doing a equal amount of riding in total or very close too I dont spend the extra money because owning more than one bike would be nice but not that important to me.
If rego was removed and registered drivers license including ACC content was introduced idd think again about multiple bikes.
And in a way it backfires on ACC. It was snowing here this morning but I took the bike in as per usual. Coming home was a pain because of sudden and severe hailstorms where I had to stop for a few minutes until some tyre tracks appeared to save me. In an ideal world I would have hopped on to a smaller winter hack this morning where I would have been less likely to fall off, or at least have been travelling slower. But I don't agree with paying two ACC levies for two bikes so I stuck to the mildly unsuitable SV1000 for the trip. If the levy was per rider I might have took a safer option and been less of a risk of making a claim.

Still had my tinted visor on though. Cos I look cool init.

[imdying]

Personally I dont mind what anyone else does within reason if they are prepared to take the risk of fines etc. But the problem with self regulating what you do is that if on a scale of acceptable standard in society someone goes well above the average standard set and then tells people it provokes a negative reaction from others.I totally accept that, and of course there are more related problems in a similar vein. I have to say though, I don't feel one iota of guilt; I contribute more than my fair share, and for them to insist my obligations extend further than that... well, good luck with that Mr Key.

Having said that... If my wife decided she wanted to ride my bikes, then I'd register at least the two of them... but as it sits, nobody but me rides my bikes, and I've still not learnt how to ride more than one at once.

I consider this bullshit to be a direct affront to my lifestyle which I've happily maintained for nearly 20 years now without ever having to collect on my ACC. I've always paid my rego and WOF (ok, that's a lie, I missed it a bit when I was under 18), I've always kept my bikes clean, serviced, and fully insured... As far as I'm concerned I'm completely lived up to my part of the bargain, and this bullshit which has for the most part put me off collecting more bikes... it's not acceptable and I won't tow the line.

My personal preference is for the status quo to remain, which is convenient for most riders I expect. But I would like to see it supplemented with a registered owner status so that I can collect as many bikes as I want, riding them when it suits. Taxing the arse out of me just because I make a heap of tin and blow some of it on motorcycles... never going to accept that. Using our police force as little more than tax collectors, never going to accept that. Why the hell spend all that money training quality officers if you're going to make them chase motorists all day? Plenty of tech these days to do all that automatically. The only reason they're not investing in that tech as it's impossible to disguise it's true purpose, where as misusing the police force is fine... they take all the shit.


With the visor tints it may well be that due to being partly colour blind between browns and greens, more so in dim light I might not be the best person to judge visors mirror or tint as I struggle with telling if patches of ground are dry or wet in areas that havent finished drying after rain. Normally these areas are in the shade also so lower in light levels.Totally give one a go if you can... bit like wearing Amber Visions. You might hate it, or you might think it's the most glorious thing ever :) Great on cloudy days :yes: