Fines wiped if biker buys 'dorky' helmet

[Grub]

By MARTY SHARPE - The Dominion Post | Saturday, 01 December 2007

Nomination for the Darwin Awards?

A Napier man with 11 unpaid fines for refusing to wear a bike helmet has been told some will be swapped for community work if he buys a helmet and brings it to court.

The problem is Shane Boyce, 21, has sold his bike - but reckons he will buy a cheap helmet anyway, to save a bit of money. He has refused to wear one because he says "they look dorky". Getting fined $185 for not wearing a bike helmet would persuade most people to start wearing one. But 11 fines later - the first in 2002 and the most recent in July - he still does not have a helmet. Nor has he paid a cent of the fines.

He was arrested on Thursday for having outstanding fines of $4320 - of which $2035 were for not wearing his helmet. The others were for various driving offences and disorderly behaviour. Boyce appeared before a bewildered Judge Bridget Mackintosh in Napier District Court yesterday.

"Mr Boyce, why would you not wear a cycle helmet?

"Do you have a problem with that?" she asked, failing to elicit a response.

"I tell you what, you'd have a big problem if you were involved in an accident without a helmet. You know that?"

"Um, yeah," Boyce responded.

"This is ridiculous," said the judge, ordering him to buy a helmet and bring it back to the court in two weeks. She said if he showed her the helmet on that day she would remit some of the fines in return for a sentence of community work.

Talking to The Dominion Post later, Boyce said he had sold his bike not long after his last offence and now walked. He said he was happy to do community work rather than pay the fine money and he planned to buy a cheap helmet before going to court next time.

"I'll never use it, but it'll save me heaps."

[Forest]

Oh well. That's cyclists for you.

[Bob]

A New Zealand biker – fined 11 times for refusing to wear a bike helmet – has been told that some of his fines will be converted into community service if he buys a helmet and brings it to court.

Shane Boyce, 21, has sold his bike, but will buy a cheap helmet “to save a bit of money”. Boyce has refused to wear one because "they look dorky".

Boyce was arrested for having outstanding fines of NZD 4320 - of which 2035 were for not wearing his helmet.

Judge Bridget Mackintosh said "This is ridiculous", ordering Boyce to buy a helmet and bring it back to the court, at which time she would remit some of the fines in return for a sentence of community work.

[AllanB]

See this is the problem with youth and courts -

1. that 21 year old dork should f-off and buy a helmet like the rest of us

2. that judge should tell him to f-off and throw his young arse in jail for a month in a cell with the biggest hairiest homo they can find.

3. and make the dork pay his fines.

BRING BACK JUDGE JUDY, she would sort him out.

Now that young wanker has pissed me off on my nice Sunday morning :oi-grr:

[Boob Johnson]

The kids got balls ill give him that much. But if it were me in the judges seat id have not budged an inch, all she did was gave him a minor victory, how did that teach him a lesson?

[Big Dave]

Wearing a helmet pootling around on a push bike completely shits me too.

[Swoop]

A friend still has his original "dorky"... in pieces but retained in the thin fabric cover.
Saved his pedal-powered ass.(and his skull)


Could this be another way for the police to generate revenue for Unkle Heilen?
Red light runners and psyclist non-hat wearers. Could be done at the same time.

Oops. Both have something to do with safety, so that'll never happen.

[homer]

cant say id blame him ....id never wear one on a pushy either, not that id be riding one but i used to .
yes they look stupid and no i dont believe they save you much either.dont care what any one says .

Like seatbelts in a cage
Guy wouldnt have drowned in the car upside down in the ditch if he didnt wear one ....would he

[Boob Johnson]

Like seatbelts in a cage
Guy wouldn't have drowned in the car upside down in the ditch if he didn't wear one ....would he
Plus 1 vote for moronic statement of 2007

[xwhatsit]

Wearing a helmet pootling around on a push bike completely shits me too.

Wasn't there some study or something that somebody posted on KB that push-bike helmets do diddly shit -- or even worse? Can't remember. Too early in the day to think yet.

I hate them as well. They certainly don't feel very useful. Watching myriad lycragoons can it on Le Tour sans helmutts at 50-odd-kph -- then pick themselves up and carry on going, well... Perhaps it's just the drugs.

[homer]

Wasn't there some study or something that somebody posted on KB that push-bike helmets do diddly shit -- or even worse? Can't remember. Too early in the day to think yet.

I hate them as well. They certainly don't feel very useful.

Yes ...there actually dangerous as well ...how you may be thinking?
Well in a fall if your head goes back the back edge of some helmets can touch your neck which then leads to a broken neck ...And i do know this for a fact.

[homer]

By the way does anyone remember the tv ad that the white station wagon wobbles then goes off the road ,cause the driver is eating a mince pie and the hot mince is burning his thumb ......

Well its a so true fact , It does actually happen

[crashe]

Pushbike helmets do save lives if worn correctly.

My daughter was riding her BMX to school (a newish bike and not trashed) and she was on the downward slope of a hill when the brakes failed.... well the end result was she hit a curb and flew over the handlebars when she crashed.

The helmet did its job and saved her head. The helmet was cracked and badly damaged. Both her knees were badly injured. ACC paid out for a new helmet back then........

[Big Dave]

Pushbike helmets do save lives if worn correctly.

My daughter was riding her BMX to school (a newish bike and not trashed) and she was on the downward slope of a hill when the brakes failed.... well the end result was she hit a curb and flew over the handlebars when she crashed.

The helmet did its job and saved her head. The helmet was cracked and badly damaged. Both her knees were badly injured. ACC paid out for a new helmet back then........

Yeah - that was your daughter.

I'm quite skillful, expert and pretty ferkin' smart.
Quite capable of making my decisions about risk without being nanna'd into wearing a stupid hat to save me from something I've been successfully doing for 46 years.

[dmouse]

that idiot should have it welded to his head as he does not have the inteligence, he could be put under the mental health act im serious. also his fines should not be cut for communty service they should be doubled and he should still get com service and be made to wear the helmet while he does such service

[crashe]

Yeah - that was your daughter.

I'm quite skillful, expert and pretty ferkin' smart.
Quite capable of making my decisions about risk without being nanna'd into wearing a stupid hat to save me from something I've been successfully doing for 46 years.

yeah - but what I was getting at, was that my daughter was wearing it correctly and securely...... hence it saved her brains and life.


Look at how many don't have any idea on how they should be worn...
I see them hanging off the back of the head, or tilted to the side...... and some hanging over their eyes.
Some have even worn them back to front as they are unsure which way it fits on their head....lol.
If you come off a pushbike wearing them like that, it won't do jackshit for their head or brains.

I must admit that some of the new type of helmets do look rather strange and spaceage... and the straps holding it in place, don't look as thou they have been placed in the correct place on the helmet.

[Big Dave]

yeah - but what I was getting at, was that my daughter was wearing it correctly and securely...... hence it saved her brains and life.


OK sure - If I'm on cycling on greenlane I'll have all the help I can get too.
Getting a lecture as I was dawdling to the park at walking pace....I don't need to be protected from myself.

[oldrider]

Wearing a helmet pootling around on a push bike completely shits me too.

This a "me too" comment!

Should be individual choice, same for motorbikes too!

Yes, yes, I would still choose to wear a helmet on my motorbike most of the time!

There are times when the risk is low and it's not warranted to be compulsory.

As far as the stupid law goes, that judge just made a mockery out of it. :lol: John.

[bell]

Like seatbelts in a cage
Guy wouldnt have drowned in the car upside down in the ditch if he didnt wear one ....would he

Do I detect a hint of Darwinian thinking in this statement?

May I suggest you visit an organisation that works with people with Brain Injuries sometime before you leave the earth - offer to do some volunteer work with them.

You might just change your opinions about not needing to wear helmets. And you'll be doing something useful for a few people who need it.

[homer]

Do I detect a hint of Darwinian thinking in this statement?

May I suggest you visit an organisation that works with people with Brain Injuries sometime before you leave the earth - offer to do some volunteer work with them.

You might just change your opinions about not needing to wear helmets. And you'll be doing something useful for a few people who need it.

yes i guess you are quite correct ....
im just making the point of its up to you ...
its makes sence on a motorcycle to me as you have a lot more weight and speed but a pushy no .
I crashed my 250 trail years ago at 80 90 km in to a car i didnt have my helmet done up ,so it came off i got 9 stiches in the back of my head .
Hey im fine, the roads hard but i still dont see any sence of one on a pushy ......horse either for that matter......mobility scooter?


Oh and quads yes maybe if you racing them ,on the farm use them all the time ,yes theres a course you can do for safe quad riding .......Still not a million years .

[The Tazman]

cant say id blame him ....id never wear one on a pushy either, not that id be riding one but i used to .
yes they look stupid and no i dont believe they save you much either.dont care what any one says .

I thought the same but put one on anyway because of being a motorcyclist!!! If I hadn't the day I came off and my head went into a fence and slid along it I'm not so sure I'd be all there now. These laws sound silly sometimes but not as silly as te people that don't have the common sense in the first place, causing these laws to be put in place. We could always go to natural selection and let these muppets just get deselected from life!!!!


Like seatbelts in a cage
Guy wouldnt have drowned in the car upside down in the ditch if he didnt wear one ....would he

That's like saying 'I know someone that smoked all their life and were fine' forgetting about the millions it kills!!!!!!!!!!

Yes there is always exceptions to the rule but what they try to do is minimize the risk they'll never stop it all together

[Max Preload]

Wasn't there some study or something that somebody posted on KB that push-bike helmets do diddly shit -- or even worse? Can't remember. Too early in the day to think yet.

It's more dangerous to wear a safety helmet on a bicycle than to not wear one - not for the injuries but the fact you're more likely to get clipped in the first place. The only reason they were made compulsory is because some neurotic bitch lost a kid to a kerb - it was an accident - they happen - get over it. But instead she goes on a fucking crusade to further endanger all other bicyclists.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/somerset/5334208.stm

[oldrider]

It's more dangerous to wear a safety helmet on a bicycle than to not wear one - not for the injuries but the fact you're more likely to get clipped in the first place. The only reason they were made compulsory is because some neurotic bitch lost a kid to a kerb - it was an accident - they happen - get over it. But instead she goes on a fucking crusade to further endanger all other bicyclists.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/somerset/5334208.stm

He is quite right! (IMHO) Sounds a bit rough, put like that but it is true! :niceone: John.

[Usarka]

good on the judge, the dude wasnt hurting anyone else. the law is supposedly in place to stop him getting injured so the best course of action in the eyes of the lawmakers is one that ends up with him owning and using a helmet.

now if theyd stop letting burglars, assaulters and other fucktards off so lightly the country might be in a better state.

arse.

[bell]

its makes sence on a motorcycle to me as you have a lot more weight and speed but a pushy no .
I crashed my 250 trail years ago at 80 90 km in to a car i didnt have my helmet done up ,so it came off i got 9 stiches in the back of my head .
Hey im fine, the roads hard but i still dont see any sence of one on a pushy ......horse either for that matter......mobility scooter?

You'll effectively gain weight and speed when the car that hits you throws you 25 metres down the road into a post/kerb/tree/building[add preferred solid object in here].

If you're unfortunate enough to hit said post/kerb/tree/building with your head, you'll probably be glad you had your helmet on (and fitted properly). Otherwise you may end up drinking your beer through a straw.
http://www.head-injury.org.nz/headInjury.html


It's more dangerous to wear a safety helmet on a bicycle than to not wear one - not for the injuries but the fact you're more likely to get clipped in the first place. The only reason they were made compulsory is because some neurotic bitch lost a kid to a kerb - it was an accident - they happen - get over it. But instead she goes on a fucking crusade to further endanger all other bicyclists.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/somerset/5334208.stm

Perhaps the most useful information that the article could impart would be the last two paragraphs:

However, a spokesman for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents insisted: "We wouldn't recommend that people stop wearing helmets because of this research. Helmets have been shown to reduce the likelihood of head and brain injuries in a crash.

"[The research] highlights a gain in vulnerability of cyclists on our roads and drivers of all types need to take more care when around them."

[Max Preload]

Perhaps the most useful information that the article could impart would be the last two paragraphs:

However, a spokesman for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents insisted: "We wouldn't recommend that people stop wearing helmets because of this research. Helmets have been shown to reduce the likelihood of head and brain injuries in a crash.

"[The research] highlights a gain in vulnerability of cyclists on our roads and drivers of all types need to take more care when around them."

I say they need to be more aware of vehicles - there's little that can be done to preserve the kamikaze spandex fucks I see on a regular basis riding two abreast in the middle of the narrow road between Clevedon and Kawakawa Bay. Much like with muslims, if they have so little respect for their own lives, why should we be expected to have anything but a passing casual interest in their lives?

[Hitcher]

Helmet laws for treadly riders are a joke. While the law requires that push bike riders must "wear" a helmet, there is nothing in that law that says it:

1. Has to fit
2. Has to be fastened
3. Has to be worn properly (i.e. not worn over other headgear or perched jauntily in proximity to one's cranium)
4. Etc

Most pushbike riders who may happen to fall from their velocipedes will benefit not a jot from having a plastic colander atop their noggin. This is a law either dreamed up by Tupperware Corporation or the "worried well" -- the same people who don't know how to reverse a SUV and who think they can taste the difference between organic and inorganic food. Puh-lease.

This law is an ass.

[oldrider]

If the reasoning for helmet laws were absolutely correct, why haven't they done the same for gloves, boots, riding suits etc?

Hands without gloves are just as (or more) at risk as any other part of your body!

Shhh don't mention it out loud or there will be a new laws for that too.

Personal safety, personal responsibility, personal choice, personal accountability!

Just stop telling me when and how to wipe my own arse! :argh: John.

[bell]

I say they need to be more aware of vehicles - there's little that can be done to preserve the kamikaze spandex fucks I see on a regular basis riding two abreast in the middle of the narrow road between Clevedon and Kawakawa Bay. Much like with muslims, if they have so little respect for their own lives, why should we be expected to have anything but a passing casual interest in their lives?

Not wanting to generalise or anything....perhaps there's a distinction to be made between the cyclists that do the right thing and ride as safely as the road allows and those that don't?

I'm in the former group and would really like to stay out of intensive care units and wheelchairs in the years ahead. It does seem that there are a considerable number of car/truck/bus drivers that simply do not appreciate that a bicycle rider is extremely vulnerable. One way they demonstrate this is by passing too closely.

It's simple. The motorist should try and give the cyclist as much space as the road allows when they pass the bike. The road code IIRC makes reference to a 1.5 metre passing clearance when overtaking cyclists.

Now, that's all well and good. There is, however, the slight problem of policing this rule. A bit like tailgating. It's only likely that the Police will charge you with following too closely if that factor has contributed to an accident. In the same way, if a vehicle passes a cyclist too closely they are only likely to be done for it if they cause an accident - and that would mean a high chance of a serious injury for the cyclist.

Attitudes to cyclists appear to be a major issue in this regard. If you don't think that cyclists matter then you'll drive accordingly.

If you are a cyclist or perhaps have a son, daughter, mother, aunt, cousin, wife, or favourite politican who rides a bicycle, then maybe you'll take the extra caution that's needed and give cyclists the space they need to be safe next time you pass them on the road.

[Bullitt]

It's more dangerous to wear a safety helmet on a bicycle than to not wear one - not for the injuries but the fact you're more likely to get clipped in the first place. The only reason they were made compulsory is because some neurotic bitch lost a kid to a kerb - it was an accident - they happen - get over it. But instead she goes on a fucking crusade to further endanger all other bicyclists.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/somerset/5334208.stm

Unless its covered in the study and omitted from the article I have a problem with his methodology ... What stops him riding further from the kerb when hes wearing a helmet, suddenly he will be riding closer to traffic and can achieve any result he wants.

Ive always worn a helmet on a bike well before I was legally forced to, back then helmets were alot more expensive and ugly than they are now too. So I dont think anything of putting on a helmet on the odd occassion I still go on one.

I remember some discussion a few years ago about kids wearing baseball caps under helmets complete with the button on the top (not sure if they still have these) which focused the entire impact onto one small point at the top of the head...about the only time I can think a helmet might make a crash worse.

[Shazz]

A New Zealand biker – fined 11 times for refusing to wear a bike helmet – has been told that some of his fines will be converted into community service if he buys a helmet and brings it to court.
...
Judge Bridget Mackintosh said "This is ridiculous", ordering Boyce to buy a helmet and bring it back to the court, at which time she would remit some of the fines in return for a sentence of community work.

Hate to say it, but this is an article about a pushbike rider refusing to wear his helmet...the motorbike fraternity....are we that thick! NO... The judge would have taken our licence or worse, than offering us a 'cheaper' versions out of the fine!:msn-wink:

[NighthawkNZ]

Make all Bicyclists wear full protective body armour... helmet, gloves, boots, back armour, and kidnet belts. Make this new gear pure dayglow orange. On the back of the armour, have LCD flashing lights. The Bicycle, must also have a flag, and them spoke rattlers so you can hear them coming, as well as the rider going Brrroooom Broom at the lights (de-baffled sound)

This should also go for roller bladders, oh and while we are at it, pedestrians, just in case they get hit by a roller blader or a cyclist


"Most adult cyclists know what it is like to drive a car, but relatively few motorists ride bicycles in traffic, and so don't know the issues cyclists face.

Same goes for most cage drivers and motorcyclists

[Shazz]

Yeah you still got the magic....I didn't question your opinion...just the mentality of the push bike rider.... me sorry....hug.

[90s]

Wasn't there some study or something that somebody posted on KB that push-bike helmets do diddly shit -- or even worse? Can't remember. Too early in the day to think yet.

I hate them as well. They certainly don't feel very useful. Watching myriad lycragoons can it on Le Tour sans helmutts at 50-odd-kph -- then pick themselves up and carry on going, well... Perhaps it's just the drugs.

All kinds of wrong Xerces.
Studies of the biased unreliable "seatbelts don't make a difference" and "no links between smoking and cancer" kind in the 1980s were publisheed true. However, the evidence overall is very clear.

If you are 'pootling' up the highstreet maybe a lid won't make much difference unless you are very unlucky (and maybe a car hits you). At woodhill a few weeks ago a friend of mine - and I was there - was unlucky in being knocked out by a blow that was transmitted through the helmet - but imagine if he had no helmet on at all? And I hit 60k on scenic drive - do you think a lid would not help if I binned it?

If you had cracked a few giros as I have you would not question the power of the helmet. Lance Armstrong trained in helmets and the one time he did not he ended up so concussed he put it down as one of the worst oversights of his life - he was lucky not to have been killed.

If you feel your cheap crappy lid is no good maybe it isn't. You need a decent helmet with a decent retention system. Buy a good giro, met or bell and see how that feels.

[davereid]

The "Scuffham" report was commissioned by the NZ government, to demonstrate how effective our helmet law is.

I bet Mr. Scuffham had a battle to get paid, and actually had to fudge his results to get an answer that the government liked. (The helmet law caused a lot of bare-headed cyclists to stop riding. This of course caused the number of head injuries to reduce.)

He found :

Scuffham analysed data on the increase of voluntary wearing in New Zealand to 1995; he concluded that, after taking into account long-term trends, helmets had no measurable effect. His subsequent re-analysis without accounting for the long-term trends showed a small benefit. Scuffham's later cost-benefit analysis of the New Zealand helmet law showed that the cost of helmets outweighed the savings in injuries, even taking the most optimistic estimate of injuries prevented.


If you are really concerned about head injury, wear a helmet in your car. Thats the most likely place you will suffer your brain injury.

[gijoe1313]

Gordon Bennet, struth and luv'a'duck! I remember being a nipper on my little chopper (with high and low gear, dyno on the back wheel and the ubiquitious flag - no spokey-dokeys though)

And no helmet! Gads! The whole school back then was riding in blissful ignorance of the fact we had to enclad our scones! Even today, though I have a cycling helmet - I use the ol'MTB to ride to the dairy sans helmet! :gob: :oi-grr:

I am a scoff law of the highest order, riding on the pavement on the wrong side, without a helmet to go... 200m :o I felt in mortal peril for my blighted soul and could see that I was opening myself up to all sorts of physical danger.

:scratch: What next, handrails in toilets, showers and baths to stop us cracking our heads as we get up/out? Warning labels on vaccum cleaners saying "This is not a sex toy"? Direction arrows on jam lids to tell us which way to twist? Toilet paper with printing on it saying "Use this side"? A general sign on the pavement saying "This is a general walkway, No running allowed" since people get impact injuries from traiing... Rant rave arf bark rhubarb custard apple! :rolleyes: :done:

[90s]

The "Scuffham" report was commissioned by the NZ government, to demonstrate how effective our helmet law is.

I bet Mr. Scuffham had a battle to get paid, and actually had to fudge his results to get an answer that the government liked. (The helmet law caused a lot of bare-headed cyclists to stop riding. This of course caused the number of head injuries to reduce.)

He found :

Scuffham analysed data on the increase of voluntary wearing in New Zealand to 1995; he concluded that, after taking into account long-term trends, helmets had no measurable effect. His subsequent re-analysis without accounting for the long-term trends showed a small benefit. Scuffham's later cost-benefit analysis of the New Zealand helmet law showed that the cost of helmets outweighed the savings in injuries, even taking the most optimistic estimate of injuries prevented.


If you are really concerned about head injury, wear a helmet in your car. Thats the most likely place you will suffer your brain injury.


This is very emotive, and I don't want to want to follow this up again, but here are some thoughts - because it does relate to motorbikers and helmet law.
1) dealing with a single population as does Scuffham is not very useful for this analysis
2) the arguments against helmets fall into the camp of i) civil liberties people; ii) fitness arguments; iii) technical arguments
OK so http://www.cyclinghealth.org.nz/ takes the civil liberties approach. If you are against seatbelts and any kind of safety legislation stop wearing your motorbike helmet on principle too. We can ignore this type of argument as it does not deal with whether wearing helmets is a good idea of not.
The there are the fitness arguments. The theory is here if you let everyone ride without helmets, more people will ride and therefore the aggregate health benefits outweigh the cost to the nation of extra head injuries - if there are any. Even if there are, more people live because of being fitter than die due to injury. Some comfort for the pawns lowering health taxes who do die. But are they significantly likely increase as a percentage of riders because of helmet wearing?
The tecnical camp is deeply flawed in terms of studies and execution. Aggregate figures confuse the issues and there are wildly contradictory results. A major argument here is that most cyclists (usually London based studies are used, ie. 66% of London cyclists are crushed by trucks and 97% involve traffic collisions: Gilbert K, McCarthy M. Deaths of cyclists in London 1985-92: the hazards of road traffic. BMJ 1994;308:1534-1537) are crushed by vans and cars and helmets do not save them. This confuses all our stats.
Same with motobike helmet safety studies - when you take a certain amount of overall injury to the body the helmet will not save you either.

So the critical factor when deciding to wear a helmet of interest is this - when it comes to head injury accidents, ie. non-fatal crashes, do helmets protect against head injuries that would have been worse if you had not been wearing a helmet?
One leading "anit-helmet propnent Dr Richard Keatinge (http://www.magma.ca/%7eocbc/keating.htm) says in his view "The design intention is that the foam should compress, thus slowing deceleration of the head ... In fact, it requires very little energy to break a helmet, even to smash it. Most broken helmets have simply failed."
Mechanical engeneers will be weeping reading such misinformed rubbish. Your shoei's deformation is in fact not evidemnce it saved your life - your helmet failed?

It comes back to motorbikes because no helmet will save you if an artic hits you head on. So you are protecting yourself against a class of survivable accident. If you ride where you push it at all, will having a helmet on increase your chances of not getting certain types of injury, or making them less severe?
You bet.
If not stop wearing it - motorbike or cycle.
If you believe wearing a motorbike helmet is the right choice, then wearing a cycle helmet is also the right choice - esp. if you are a cyclist , not just someone who toodles down to the dairy sometimes.

[MisterD]

I think it's interesting how this kind of stuff links into the whole "perceived risk" thing...forced to wear a helmet, therefore feel safer and so ride like a twat to return your preceived risk level to the point it was at before.

I hate my (cycle) helmet, but I wouldn't be without it on a fast moving bunch ride.

[ajturbo]

Yeah - that was your daughter.

I'm quite skillful, expert and pretty ferkin' smart.
Quite capable of making my decisions about risk without being nanna'd into wearing a stupid hat to save me from something I've been successfully doing for 46 years.

i'm with you here....

the frigging greeny, nana state, tree hugging, bra-less..(mmmmm) anti smaking, touchy feely, cotten wool wraping, do gooders telling me that i am safer to ride a push bike with a helmet.. fuck them... but IF i decide to go for a race, off road hoon, i will wear one... but if i am just slowly riding around the, in no hurry to get anywhere, i will not be wearing one...

[Sanx]

...about the only time I can think a helmet might make a crash worse.

Based upon my highly scientific research (i.e. I occasionally look and notice) most cycle helmets aren't fitted. Provided they're actually fastened in the first place, they're often too loose. In the event of an accident the helmet can be pushed forward on the head, which concentrates the impact force on the bridge of the nose. And I'm sure a medic will tell you what happens whenn the bride of the nose gets focibly broken by a blunt object and the shards of bone pushed back into the brain.

[madandy]

Pro-choice is great.
Now go get some full private medical insurance so my tax dollar doesn't have to pay for your brain surgery in the unfortunate event that you require your head fixing.

[skidMark]

hang on...hes on a pushbike.....pushbikes don't have numberplates....

why the fuck did he stop...

i never wear a helemet on a pushy they look gay...i did once wear one piece leathers and a helmet on my pushbike once for a laugh.

[madandy]

Why do you wear that orange reflectve vest thingee?

[skidMark]

By MARTY SHARPE - The Dominion Post | Saturday, 01 December 2007

Nomination for the Darwin Awards?

A hamilton n00bwith 11 unpaid fines for refusing to wear a bike helmet has been told some will be swapped for community work if he buys a helmet and brings it to court.

The problem is Zeroindex, 21, has sold his bike - but reckons he will buy a cheap helmet anyway, to save a bit of money. He has refused to wear one because he says "they look dorky". Getting fined $185 for not wearing a bike helmet would persuade most people to start wearing one. But 11 fines later - the first in 2002 and the most recent in July - he still does not have a helmet. Nor has he paid a cent of the fines.

He was arrested on Thursday for having outstanding fines of $4320 - of which $2035 were for not wearing his helmet. The others were for various driving offences and disorderly behaviour. Zeroindexappeared before a bewildered Judge Bridget Mackintosh in hamilton District Court yesterday.

"Mr Zeroindex, why would you not wear a cycle helmet?

"Do you have a problem with that?" she asked, failing to elicit a response.

"I tell you what, you'd have a big problem if you were involved in an accident without a helmet. You know that?"

"Um, yeah," Zeroindex responded.

"This is ridiculous," said the judge, ordering him to buy a helmet and bring it back to the court in two weeks. She said if he showed her the helmet on that day she would remit some of the fines in return for a sentence of community work.

Talking to The Dominion Post later, Zeroindex said he had sold his bike not long after his last offence and now walked. He said he was happy to do community work rather than pay the fine money and he planned to buy a cheap helmet before going to court next time.

"I'll never use it, but it'll save me heaps."


they got the napier bit wrong...Zero index is from hamilton...

[skidMark]

Why do you wear that orange reflectve vest thingee?


cowpoos thought he would take the piss at the memorial trackday and make me look like a dick, so i went along with it hahahaha

all in good fun for a laugh LOL:wari:

[madandy]

:wari: Haha, got a laugh outta me all right :wari: at this hour one needs humour

[skidMark]

:wari: Haha, got a laugh outta me all right :wari: at this hour one needs humour


i was thinking sleep but errr.....

[madandy]

Grab it while you can.
My Mrs has been up since 1:30 with beginnings of labour. I have the massage, make cups of tea, time the contractions job till dawn...tis gonna be a loooong Tuesday.

[skidMark]

Grab it while you can.
My Mrs has been up since 1:30 with beginnings of labour. I have the massage, make cups of tea, time the contractions job till dawn...tis gonna be a loooong Tuesday.


congrats...! anyways we better stop hijacking the thread LOL

add me on msn messnger if you have it...i cant sleep anyways LOL

brngiton@hotmail.com

[Pancakes]

I have exploded two helmets (cycling) and cracked two more (rock climbing one and and a snowboarding one).

Don't tell me that the force they used up by being damaged wouldn't have hurt my head! All have since been replaced, $370 Road Riding helmet, $70 BMX helmet (low speed stuff and more for lots little dings) climbing helmet $200, a 3 Kg rock fell, glanced off my head then smashed my shoulder. That one alone turned what would have been my buddy de-rigging and carrying me out into just a retreat and pain. The snowboarding one ($399) I dropped a cliff and found a rock. That one would have killed me no doubt, split the helmet in two.

If you want to buy a shitty helmet and wear it wrong it makes you a fool, not the helmet. I don't wear one going to the dairy etc, no alot of risk and not that fast but think they are a good idea.

The Tour Riders get really hot and perform better when they are cooler, they aren't sure to get hurt if they crash either but if they hit their head I have no doubt a helmet would help to reduce and spread the blow.

If you want to wrap your setbelt around your neck and eat a hot pie & coffee while texting you will probably get hurt when you crash. If the guy in the ditch story is going to be used and the guy couldn't undo his seatbelt and drowned he was pretty hurt or unbconsious. What would he have been like is he wasn't wearing it and what shape would the windscreen have been?

It's no gaurantee but worth doing. As for not wearing a helmet on a motorbike, yeah all the old buggers never died, they're in the RSA complaining about stuff now and looking up Mables dress while it's her turn at lawn bowls! Think of any motorbike accident you have seen and what would happen if the rider wasn't wearing a helmet. Get on a ute with leathers and no lid and jump out at 50, thats slow, go on.

[oldrider]

Pro-choice is great.
Now go get some full private medical insurance so my tax dollar doesn't have to pay for your brain surgery in the unfortunate event that you require your head fixing.

Just as a little conversation piece and a wee rant.

What year was it that compulsory helmet laws came in for motorbikes?

Prior to that, I could not even buy a decent helmet let alone wear one!

My priority was always "gloves" up to that point, they were hard to get too!

I do have private health insurance but I also have "compulsory" ACC, so I think I pay my own way now.

I have been riding motorbikes for 54 years and I think I fully understand the value of safety equipment.

For a major portion of that time, I had no safety equipment and couldn't afford what was available! (we used to try to make our own)

I also value highly the right to freedom of choice and personal responsibility.

I don't need some bureaucratic bloody socialist government dickhead to tell me when I should wipe my own arse.

I use and wear safety equipment when I need to protect myself (or others) not when I don't need it!

Doing so just to comply with some stupid bloody irrelevant collective law is a brain damaging practice in it's self! (IMHO) John.

[madandy]

Of all the people who are stating their dislike at being told to wear helmets how many, if given the choice would leave theirs at home and take to the roads without that helmet?
You do have a choice not to comply with a law, any law. Out in the sticks where one seldom sees another vehicle and there's nothing to be scared of how often do you remove your helmet just to feel the wind in your hair etc?
I fell off a BMX at age 11 and woke up in Hospital and have worn a helmet ever since. I have a Sth Is. seconday school title and regional title on a road bike in 1994 and have been upside down on several bikes both road and MTN and a car and would never choose not to use the saftey gear provided. On a motorcycle, choosing not to wear the gear would be silly in most situations I have ridden over the past 20 years. Maybe I push harder thah some but mistakes can happen and that's what wearing the gear is for.
I have the choice to wear a helmet or not (just like everyone else) and by choosing to do so just to avoid a fine is doing my brain no damage, sir.
:rockon:

[Big Dave]

Of all the people who are stating their dislike at being told to wear helmets how many, if given the choice would leave theirs at home and take to the roads without that helmet?

Me.
If the circumstances warranted.
or not Me
If they didn't.

It should be MY decision. I pay Private insurance levys and wave my private parts at ACC levy wingers.

[hospitalfood]

whats a helmet?

[oldrider]

Of all the people who are stating their dislike at being told to wear helmets how many, if given the choice would leave theirs at home and take to the roads without that helmet?
You do have a choice not to comply with a law, any law. Out in the sticks where one seldom sees another vehicle and there's nothing to be scared of how often do you remove your helmet just to feel the wind in your hair etc?
I fell off a BMX at age 11 and woke up in Hospital and have worn a helmet ever since. I have a Sth Is. seconday school title and regional title on a road bike in 1994 and have been upside down on several bikes both road and MTN and a car and would never choose not to use the saftey gear provided. On a motorcycle, choosing not to wear the gear would be silly in most situations I have ridden over the past 20 years. Maybe I push harder thah some but mistakes can happen and that's what wearing the gear is for.
I have the choice to wear a helmet or not (just like everyone else) and by choosing to do so just to avoid a fine is doing my brain no damage, sir.
:rockon:

Like I said, your experience, your choice, you should not be "made" to behave in a safe manner, you should choose to of your own free will!

Sometimes arbitrary rules are to your detriment, you should be the judge!

For instance, drive to the conditions, when they change, reduce your speed!

What utter bullshit, situations occur when conditions dictate it is safer to increase your speed, you are there, "you" make the decision, based on the ethics of the situation as you read it.

I don't wear a helmet to avoid a fine, I wear it for protection against the elements and in case some other dickhead, like that "driver" in the Buller Gorge, does something stupid and causes me to experience something I did not plan and could not escape!

If there were no rules at all, would there be much change in the way I ride my bike?

Not really!

If you ride your bike believing everyone else will be observing the rules then you probably are in for a short life!

I ride to enjoy the experience of the ride and look after my bike and my body so that I can do it again and again and again ad infinitem!

Rules and laws are for the benefit of the rule and law makers, they just love it and it makes feel they have made a contribution to society!

If they really believed that their rules and laws were effective, they would rule that we don't need a Police force any more. Yeah right!

Safety is a learned behaviour, not a rule or a law. :oi-grr: John.

[madandy]

So it's ok for YOU to behave in an unsafe manner is it John?!
People already have the choice to behave safely or not. Sometimes it comes with consequences. Public scrutiny, hummiliation, condemnation, Death or a fine and/or imprisonment spring to mind.

Dave, you can already choose to leave yer helmet off.
Find a medical reason not to wear it, or to wear it as the circumstances dictate.
You could choose not to stop for a cop to issue you a ticket for not wearing the helmet and if you did stop you can still choose not to pay the fine, or at least contest the issue in court.
I would argue that any place you could safely ride without a helmet would be far enough away from the presence of Police and things to smack your head on as to make your decision not to wear that helmet completely 'safe'.

I completely agree that skilled riders and drivers are able to assess situations and make their own judgement calls but not every one can do that. In fact most people cannot. Wanna edumacate them all? Good luck. Most don't give a rats ass about their driving skills, they just wanna get 'there'.

Sounds like you guys want rules for yourselves and other rules for other people. Or do you really trust the whole population to make wise choices as you guys do all the time?

[Big Dave]

\

Sounds like you guys want rules for yourselves and other rules for other people. Or do you really trust the whole population to make wise choices as you guys do all the time?

Yep. No problem with different sets of rules based on experience and skill. IQ rating would be handy too.
Stupid? - Yes - compulsory everything.
Half a brain - follow the guidelines - or else.
Alpha - well, you inderstand - off you shoot.

I don't really care about the rest of the population. I think the Spartans had the right idea and fully support Darwinism.

[davereid]

So it's ok for YOU to behave in an unsafe manner is it John?!

Is it OK for you to behave in an unsafe manner ?

Because thats what you do every time you hop on your motorcycle.
You are much more likely to be killed or injured on a motorcycle than in a car.

As a form of transport, motorcycles suck. They are unstable. They offer no crash protection. They offer no seatbelts, airbags or stability control. Environmentally they are no better, often getting worse fuel consumption than a car, and gobbling consumables like tyres and oil at 10x the speed of a small car.

Motorcycles are chosen, because we like 'em.
Most people don't like them and would not even notice if they were banned.

So, when you raise you hand to me, to enforce my safety with your "nanny knows best - wear your helmet" arguement, look over your shoulder.

Your nanny may be standing there, holding her left hand out for your keys, and with a big stick tucked behind her back just to make sure you listen.

[oldrider]

So it's ok for YOU to behave in an unsafe manner is it John?!
People already have the choice to behave safely or not. Sometimes it comes with consequences. Public scrutiny, hummiliation, condemnation, Death or a fine and/or imprisonment spring to mind.

Dave, you can already choose to leave yer helmet off.
Find a medical reason not to wear it, or to wear it as the circumstances dictate.
You could choose not to stop for a cop to issue you a ticket for not wearing the helmet and if you did stop you can still choose not to pay the fine, or at least contest the issue in court.
I would argue that any place you could safely ride without a helmet would be far enough away from the presence of Police and things to smack your head on as to make your decision not to wear that helmet completely 'safe'.

I completely agree that skilled riders and drivers are able to assess situations and make their own judgement calls but not every one can do that. In fact most people cannot. Wanna edumacate them all? Good luck. Most don't give a rats ass about their driving skills, they just wanna get 'there'.

Sounds like you guys want rules for yourselves and other rules for other people. Or do you really trust the whole population to make wise choices as you guys do all the time?

If you haven't worked it out by now, I don't think you ever will, you are a nanny dependent!

I blame the socialist public school system here in NZ, they teach kids that the State will do "all" their thinking for them!

These are the rules, we know best, now obey without thinking for yourself, nanny knows best!

The thought police will keep you on track and make sure that you are devoid of any dangerous (for nanny) original thoughts.

If you don't believe me, take a look at some of the legislation that nanny is passing in parliament at present, it's not for "your" benefit!

Take your helmet off and look around. I'm out of this discussion. :spanking: Good luck, John.

[Pancakes]

John and Dave, I have only read your posts, I don't know you in "real life" but normally agree and see experience and wisdon in your writing. I agree about the nanny state etc etc but there is so much you lose your brain for and so much to lose to gain what? Bugs in your eyes and the feeling that your "stickin' it to the man"?

If you want to have the occaisional blat with no helmet I'm sure you'll find a little spot for doing it but for general riding with Mr I'm texting my mrs and all the girls changing the stereo and applying their eye-liner don't you think the perceived or real hassles of wearing a helmet are a small price to pay for a way higher chance of saving your mental faculties?

[mstriumph]

................. But if it were me in the judges seat id have not budged an inch,..........

if it had been ANY of us in the judge's seat, methinks, we wouldn't have budged an inch .......

can anyone please explain to me why normal folk like thee and me are so much wiser,more intelligent, more JUST than those whose robe-clad bums warm the judicial benches?

do you have to have an IQ smaller than your shoe size to qualify?

[davereid]

John and Dave, I have only read your posts, I don't know you in "real life" but normally agree and see experience and wisdon in your writing. I agree about the nanny state etc etc but there is so much you lose your brain for and so much to lose to gain what? Bugs in your eyes and the feeling that your "stickin' it to the man"?

If you want to have the occaisional blat with no helmet I'm sure you'll find a little spot for doing it but for general riding with Mr I'm texting my mrs and all the girls changing the stereo and applying their eye-liner don't you think the perceived or real hassles of wearing a helmet are a small price to pay for a way higher chance of saving your mental faculties?

Hi Pancakes... all very valid points, I absolutely accept that wearing a helmet improves your odds.

As they say, Lies damn lies and statistics. So, we don't really know what the facts are. But this may be relevant...

- The Scuffham report found cycle helmets to be a waste of money. But lets assume it was wrong, and motorcycle data could be used.

- Per vehicle miles traveled, motorcyclists are about 21 times as likely as passenger car occupants to die in a traffic crash and four times as likely to be injured. (NHTSA, 2001)

- Helmets reduce the risk of death by 29% and are 67% effective in preventing brain injuries to motorcycle riders. (NHTSA, 2001)

So lets revise the figures to use the same multipliers, rather than emotive ones.

Riding without a helmet increases your chance of death by 1.29.
Riding without a helmet increases your chance of head injury by 1.67.
Riding a motorcycle increases your chances of death by 21.

Having made the decision to ride a motorcycle, I have already made the dumbest decision I will ever make. The helmet decision... merely petty cash by comparison.

So yes, I agree helmets help. So do lights on laws, pink flouro jackets, and hp restrictions. But by miles, the solution is to ban motorcycles.

Data from...http://www.saferoads.org/issues/fs-helmets.htm

[madandy]

Yep. No problem with different sets of rules based on experience and skill. IQ rating would be handy too.
Stupid? - Yes - compulsory everything.
Half a brain - follow the guidelines - or else.
Alpha - well, you inderstand - off you shoot.

I don't really care about the rest of the population. I think the Spartans had the right idea and fully support Darwinism.


That is the exact same set of ideals I have submitted to parliament several times with regard to 'boy racer' legislation and its impact on legitmate users of moddified motorvehicles.

One difference I see is you're arguing with me on an internet forum and I've already had a crack at the rule makers. Perhaps, in your positionyou have too, I don't know.
Do some research and you'll learn there are some major obstacles in front of those of us who'd like to improve the transport environment.
History is full of interesting events resulting from the 'one set of rules for us - another set of rules for you' mentality.

I don't enjoy being labelled as a nanny state supporter.

I ignore plenty of nanny's rules.

If I'm still around these traps, moaning about nanny this & nanny that and still dreaming of having my own set of rules because I'm so fucking pefrect on my bike in another 34 years of riding I'll consider my time on earth a complete waste.

[davereid]

History is full of interesting events resulting from the 'one set of rules for us - another set of rules for you' mentality.

That Andy, is the essence of government, and the cause of all war and conflict.

You see, when 3 mongrels, and 1 chick discuss the sleeping arrangements, and its decided that the majority can use force to take what is needed from the minority for the benefit of the greater good, somehow we understand that to be gang rape, and we know it is wrong.

But when Government uses force to make non violent, non threatening people do things they don't want to do, for the greater good, we call it Tax or Safety. Then its OK. Apparently.

[madandy]

Hi Pancakes... all very valid points, I absolutely accept that wearing a helmet improves your odds.

As they say, Lies damn lies and statistics. So, we don't really know what the facts are. But this may be relevant...

- The Scuffham report found cycle helmets to be a waste of money. But lets assume it was wrong, and motorcycle data could be used.

- Per vehicle miles traveled, motorcyclists are about 21 times as likely as passenger car occupants to die in a traffic crash and four times as likely to be injured. (NHTSA, 2001)

- Helmets reduce the risk of death by 29% and are 67% effective in preventing brain injuries to motorcycle riders. (NHTSA, 2001)

So lets revise the figures to use the same multipliers, rather than emotive ones.

Riding without a helmet increases your chance of death by 1.29.
Riding without a helmet increases your chance of head injury by 1.67.
Riding a motorcycle increases your chances of death by 21.

Having made the decision to ride a motorcycle, I have already made the dumbest decision I will ever make. The helmet decision... merely petty cash by comparison.

So yes, I agree helmets help. So do lights on laws, pink flouro jackets, and hp restrictions. But by miles, the solution is to ban motorcycles.

Data from...http://www.saferoads.org/issues/fs-helmets.htm

I'd love to see the test criteria for the Scuffham test. Under the wheel of a truck? I've had pleny of bike crashes where a simple, properly fitted, quality helmet has prevented trauma - though I cannot claim to have cheated death as a result of wearing such a device.
I'd lay cash on table to say that those statistics are ignoring the many deaths caused by massive impact to the body, blood loss etc and not reflecting the head only related deaths, and non deaths directly attributable to helmet use.
Yes motorcycling can be dangerous and yes most injuries and deaths would not have been stopped by wearing a helmet, but I know there's a lot of lives saved that'd have not been had a helmet not been worn - due to the nature of the impact.

Perhaps the most realistic solution is to stop idiots riding bikes?

[madandy]

That Andy, is the essence of government, and the cause of all war and conflict.

You see, when 3 mongrels, and 1 chick discuss the sleeping arrangements, and its decided that the majority can use force to take what is needed from the minority for the benefit of the greater good, somehow we understand that to be gang rape, and we know it is wrong.

But when Government uses force to make non violent, non threatening people do things they don't want to do, for the greater good, we call it Tax or Safety. Then its OK. Apparently.

I just don't see all the things I'm not allowed to do...or all the things I'm forced to do for the greater good. Sure Taxes bite and I don't enjoy funding the ciggarette habit of the fat, low brow bitch next to my wife in the maternity ward tonight .
Maybe I need to get out more and witness all the oppression against the hard working people who'd enjoy greater liberties.

[Big Dave]

Yeah - my dues are paid.