Should full gear be made compulsory? (Full-face helmet, jacket, pants, boots, gloves) [Archive]

Steam

20th February 2008, 20:42

I know there are some people on here who reckon full gear should be made compulsory.
("stop increasing my ACC levies! Think of your skin!")
And there are some who'd rather go to jail than be forced to wear all the gear all the time.
("goddam nanny state! Get out of my life!")

So I'm putting up a highly scientific, completely anonymous and secret poll to see how many of each there are here on KB.
Nobody can see how you vote, so be true.

Remember, this isn't so far-fetched, as some nation somewhere recently passed a similar law. However the legislation was full of loopholes and poorly worded, didn't specify exactly what protection and standards the gear should have, so it got overturned or something.
But it may only be a matter of time here in Kiwiland...

I reckon if you did this poll with politicians or the general public, you'd get a lot of people voting Yes, make them wear all the gear all the time. But I guess the percentage of bikers will be under 5% who vote yes. Let's see...

NighthawkNZ

20th February 2008, 20:48

I know there are some people on here who reckon full gear should be made compulsory.
("stop increasing my ACC levies! Think of your skin!")

I reckon if you did this poll with politicians or the general public, you'd get a lot of people voting Yes, make them wear all the gear all the time.

You could be wearing a full armour plated suite made of titanium and they would still increase your ACC fees.

I personally don't like the idea of ACC. I have never made a claim in 40 years and I am paying for other peoples accidents... should be user pay... have medical insurance... I hate paying for other pratts who do studip things and then expect ACC to pay for it... which at the end of the day is me and you paying for it...

JimO

20th February 2008, 20:51

i voted no but perhaps people who dont have the proper gear have to pay to fix their injuries, my son had a "off" a couple of weeks ago and had grazes on his elbows through the leather jacket even though the jacked had no damage apart from scuffing - the doctor at the AnE said they get lots of people in with the skin ground off down to the bone from not wearing proctive gear

Steam

20th February 2008, 20:53

I have never made a claim in 40 years

Wow! That's quite impressive.
Jeez, I was in so many accidents as a kid and young adult, in and out of hospital all the time for various foolish things. I am impressed you managed to avoid ACC.

Hitcher

20th February 2008, 20:56

And now ATGATT. That must surely complete the set of perennial issues raised in a single month.

You've won your toaster. Now please, make it stop.

Steam

20th February 2008, 21:01

And now ATGATT. That must surely complete the set of perennial issues raised in a single month.

You've won your toaster. Now please, make it stop.

heeehee! Yes indeed. I feel like starting a waving thread just for fun.
I'll hold you to that toaster, hope it's a good solid steel one that ticks, not some plastic one that smells funny and burns one side.

NighthawkNZ

20th February 2008, 21:02

in and out of hospital all the time for various foolish things.

I rest my case... :lol:

Hitcher

20th February 2008, 21:05

I grow old... I grow old...
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.

Steam

20th February 2008, 21:11

gunnyrob

20th February 2008, 21:23

I remember when I took my bike down the road in the '80s. I then took my buggered helmet to ACC & they paid for a new one.

At the end of the day, people need to accept personal responsibility for thier actions. If they choose to go through a lot of pain & road rash, so be it.

Having bounced down the road, I wear atgatt

mstriumph

20th February 2008, 21:26

having just ended up in a ditch i'd wear protective gear every time ......

but there are just TOO MANY 'you musts' in this world already methinks :confused:

boomer

20th February 2008, 21:29

Oh, incedentally, I'm not looking for arguments and reasons why or why not to wear gear. We all know all the arguments for and against. Blah blah blah.

Alll I want is an anonymous poll number, a percentage I can point to.

you need to get out more bro.....

Oh wait, my bad. I didn't see you lived in Dunedin. AS YOU WERE !

MVnut

20th February 2008, 21:32

I voted 'no' although I think it's a good idea to wear the right gear, it should not be law. I believe in ATGMOTT and MOTGATT if you can figure that out.

NighthawkNZ

20th February 2008, 21:32

but there are just TOO MANY 'you musts' in this world already methinks :confused:

I would agree there...

TerminalAddict

20th February 2008, 21:43

I voted 'no' although I think it's a good idea to wear the right gear, it should not be law. I believe in ATGMOTT and MOTGATT if you can figure that out.
nice :)  

roy.nz

20th February 2008, 22:10

I voted yes..Yeah we have all done it,ridden without our full gear and thought now this is better.But would it be if some idiot came out and knocked you over and you pealed more than half of your skin off on the tarmac, NO.Yeah gear is pricey but its better paying for the gear the looking like some freak show from a travelling circus.So i think it would be good.Bite the bullet for some kind of chance :Pokey:

Jantar

20th February 2008, 22:13

I also voted NO!. I generally ride with suitable gear, and I refuse to take any pillon that has any bare skin showing. However there are times that I will hop on a bike while wearing a minimum of protective gear, and still look back at those wonderful days when it was legal to ride without a helmet (at less than 30 mph) and feel the air blowing through your hair.

I might add that every time I have been injured has been while wearing full protective gear, so maybe the lack of gear makes us just a bit more careful. :yes:

Steam

20th February 2008, 22:14

I voted yes.

Golly, I didn't expect anyone to admit it in public!

I also voted No, leave it to us to decide.
My reason was because I have a bike that looks like it's from Mad Max, and you can't be a self-respecting unhinged bone-wearing post-nuclear-apocalypse punk waster in the middle of the Australian desert, if you are forced to wear full gear. It just wouldn't look right.

Motu

20th February 2008, 22:22

He,he - very interesting poll Steam.This must be like an election - say one thing,and vote the opposite.

onearmedbandit

20th February 2008, 22:30

I voted 'no' although I think it's a good idea to wear the right gear, it should not be law. I believe in ATGMOTT and MOTGATT if you can figure that out.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

roy.nz

20th February 2008, 22:31

Is the desert not a whole different kettle of fish? Even id ride like that but if we are talking everyday work and back plus weekend blasts up and down the coast with most non bike riding car drivers not seeing any biker, then like i said give me my gear cos i aint taking my chances.And yeay its your own choice, but some people just need to take a spill like i did ( under a fucking truck) and they'd realise gear is the the way. :Playnice:

Big Dave

20th February 2008, 22:42

Put me somewhere on the 'Get fucked' side of no.

Mikkel

20th February 2008, 22:46

ATGATT - yes...
Compulsory - fuck off, it's my life!

I voted 'no' although I think it's a good idea to wear the right gear, it should not be law. I believe in ATGMOTT and MOTGATT if you can figure that out.

ATGATT is worth aspiring to. But indeed I have to agree with you MVnut - ATGMOTT and MOTGATT is a bit more realistic. :yes:
Then again, we're talking ideology here and realism isn't a factor ;)

Magua

20th February 2008, 23:11

I voted 'no' although I think it's a good idea to wear the right gear, it should not be law. I believe in ATGMOTT and MOTGATT if you can figure that out.

I concur. Freedom of choice. _b

Danboy

21st February 2008, 00:09

Big Dave

21st February 2008, 00:21

So I'm guessin that none of you people who voted no have been hit by a bee at 100 clicks?

Several times. And had them go inside my shirt.
I scraped out the stings, HTFU'd and kept riding.

DingoZ

21st February 2008, 03:31

ATGATT...for me.... Would do it regardless..

Compulsory....hmmmmm....Shouldn't have to come to that...

BiK3RChiK

21st February 2008, 04:55

You could be wearing a full armour plated suite made of titanium and they would still increase your ACC fees.

I personally don't like the idea of ACC. I have never made a claim in 40 years and I am paying for other peoples accidents... should be user pay... have medical insurance... I hate paying for other pratts who do studip things and then expect ACC to pay for it... which at the end of the day is me and you paying for it...

Yes, and no Nighthawk... I have been involved in 2 car accidents waaaay back and neither were my fault, nor could I do anything about either of them, except, not be there at that time... But then again, I do dumb things sometimes that upset my old injuries and end up back at the chiropractor for my stupidity!

M

BiK3RChiK

21st February 2008, 04:59

heeehee! Yes indeed. I feel like starting a waving thread just for fun.
I'll hold you to that toaster, hope it's a good solid steel one that ticks, not some plastic one that smells funny and burns one side.

If it ticks, call the bomb squad! It might be a disguise!!!:shit:

CookMySock

21st February 2008, 06:01

having just ended up in a ditch i'd wear protective gear every time ......

but there are just TOO MANY 'you musts' in this world already methinks :confused:

ditto

ditto.

I vote no.

DB

slimjim

21st February 2008, 06:49

fuck off , ride what you wish and wear what you need for yourself , otherwise were's your freedom of choice , freedom of thought , freedom to ride

FROSTY

21st February 2008, 06:57

I don't agree but mainly because the nanny state has control of most everything else we do in liffe

The Stranger

21st February 2008, 07:18

I personally don't like the idea of ACC. I have never made a claim in 40 years and I am paying for other peoples accidents... should be user pay... have medical insurance... I hate paying for other pratts who do studip things and then expect ACC to pay for it... which at the end of the day is me and you paying for it...

Be careful what you wish for.

Mr Triple

21st February 2008, 07:36

You could be wearing a full armour plated suite made of titanium and they would still increase your ACC fees.

I personally don't like the idea of ACC. I have never made a claim in 40 years and I am paying for other peoples accidents... should be user pay... have medical insurance... I hate paying for other pratts who do studip things and then expect ACC to pay for it... which at the end of the day is me and you paying for it...

Perhaps no full gear no acc seems fair to me. Every body wants to do what they wont. But still hold there hand out when it turns to shit.

Swoop

21st February 2008, 07:54

And now ATGATT. That must surely complete the set of perennial issues raised in a single month.

You've won your toaster. Now please, make it stop.
Is there a bonus ball?

Ralph

21st February 2008, 08:02

I think there needs to be some form of compulsory gear,
Full face helmet? how bout just one that complies with NZ law whether it be full face or open face (up to the individual).
Personally I'd never wear an open face unless I didn't have a choice, any lid is better than no lid.
However no open footwear - Definitely.
Gloves - Definitely.
Full arm and leg covering - Definitely.
I see to many people riding around on scooters and bikes in nothing more than shorts, T's and jandels!

Full safety gear I don't think should not be made compulsory as it's not that affordable to some and might put a lot of people off riding and I wouldn't want that, it's too much fun.

Quasievil

21st February 2008, 08:27

Yes abosolutely, cause its good for business:clap:

Steam

21st February 2008, 09:32

madandy

21st February 2008, 09:42

Should full gear be made compulsory? (Full-face helmet, jacket, pants, boots, gloves) ?

Depends on the type of gear...Force people to wear full-on leathers to duck out to the dairy for a pint of milk on the scooter? that's a bit tough.
you'd need to establish a minimum acceptable standard of PPE as OSH idoes for workers in the workplace...
People should be free to choose the level of protection so for some Draggin jeans are great while others, for reasons like how they ride may dictate a full on squid suit.

FROSTY

21st February 2008, 09:55

Yes abosolutely, cause its good for business:clap:
PROVIDED--your gear was govmint approved of course

Quasievil

21st February 2008, 09:58

PROVIDED--your gear was govmint approved of course

Well Technically it has been as we supply the Government riding gear via the NZ Army.:devil2:

Usarka

21st February 2008, 10:27

So I'm guessin that none of you people who voted no have been hit by a bee at 100 clicks? Let alone a car or truck or Boeing 747? Huh huh???! Yeah, I thought not! :laugh:

Oooh a scary bee....

Is your neck exposed in your gear? Better get compulsory neck armour too.

Visor up? No no son, not now because it's illegal. You might get a bee on your nose.

Tinted visors? Nope, illegal. You never know when you'll be out at night and opening your visor is a dangerous hazard (plus we've just made it illegal).

Mikkel

21st February 2008, 10:29

So I'm guessin that none of you people who voted no have been hit by a bee at 100 clicks? Let alone a car or truck or Boeing 747? Huh huh???! Yeah, I thought not! :laugh:
I don't know about atgatt compulsory, but at least motgatt would be a start.
Seriously, some of the riders I've seen on the open road with a t-shirt, open face helmet and no gloves are just begging to lose their jaw, all their skin and appendages.
Dumb!:weird:

D. :devil2:

That is natural selection and it's good to see that we haven't eradicated it entirely from the human society!

But yeah bees hit surprisingly hard. Got a big bruise from one through my leathers once. Birds are worse...

Well Technically it has been as we supply the Government riding gear via the NZ Army.:devil2:

Didn't know you guys did life jackets - that's the only safety gear I thought was appropriate when all the army does is getting unimogs stuck in the Waimak. ;)

Mikkel

21st February 2008, 10:30

Oooh a scary bee....

Is your neck exposed in your gear? Better get compulsory neck armour too.

Visor up? No no son, not now because it's illegal. You might get a bee on your nose.

Tinted visors? Nope, illegal. You never know when you'll be out at night and opening your visor is a dangerous hazard (plus we've just made it illegal).

I actually heard of a guy who got one eye wrecked by a bumblebee... Them visors are good!

Danboy

21st February 2008, 10:33

Perhaps no full gear no acc seems fair to me. Every body wants to do what they wont. But still hold there hand out when it turns to shit.

Exactly! It's all fun and games till the flying monkeys attack! :)

Usarka

21st February 2008, 10:34

I actually heard of a guy who got one eye wrecked by a bumblebee... Them visors are good!

I'm sure that's happened, just like people fall of ladders. But do we make it compulsory to use cherry pickers when cleaning the gutters on your house because someone fell off a ladder?

My choice would be to wear sunnies with an open face or no helmet.....

Danboy

21st February 2008, 10:48

Danboy

21st February 2008, 10:51

Oooh a scary bee....

Is your neck exposed in your gear? Better get compulsory neck armour too.

Visor up? No no son, not now because it's illegal. You might get a bee on your nose.

Tinted visors? Nope, illegal. You never know when you'll be out at night and opening your visor is a dangerous hazard (plus we've just made it illegal).

I was thinkin' more along the lines of wearing a full suit of 12th century armour and a sword to swat away pesky insects and cages. hahahaha!

Mikkel

21st February 2008, 10:52

I'm sure that's happened, just like people fall of ladders. But do we make it compulsory to use cherry pickers when cleaning the gutters on your house because someone fell off a ladder?

My choice would be to wear sunnies with an open face or no helmet.....

No no, I wasn't advocating making visors mandatory. Just saying that sometimes the fun and games actually results in someone loosing an eye.

Danboy

21st February 2008, 11:12

Oooh a scary bee....

Is your neck exposed in your gear? Better get compulsory neck armour too.
- NOPE - My jacket has a high neck.

Visor up? No no son, not now because it's illegal. You might get a bee on your nose.
- NOPE, coz if I ride with my visor up my contacts would come out!

Tinted visors? Nope, illegal. You never know when you'll be out at night and opening your visor is a dangerous hazard (plus we've just made it illegal).
- NOPE, I like my $500 Black Nolan helmet with the tinted outer half-visor that I can flip up at night.

So there....nyaaaaah! lol. :calm:

mstriumph

21st February 2008, 14:26

Perhaps no full gear no acc seems fair to me. Every body wants to do what they wont. But still hold there hand out when it turns to shit. mmmmmm and 'no tax payment history, no welfare eligibility??' i'd LIKE to see THAT!! :shifty::msn-wink:

HornetBoy

21st February 2008, 19:09

I ticked the yes but would IN MY OPINION only implement it in area's above 50kph ,silly it may be but its my view on it.

but to be honest i think gloves and helmet should be law, even if your going down to the shop,don't like it... WALK.

ynot slow

21st February 2008, 20:24

Let the user choose,personally I have,jeans,boots,gloves and jacket when in town,then leather or cordura pants on the highway.
Mind you if you do a lot of city riding at 50km or so there is a good chance of an accident.

I did jump on the bike Tuesday evening after tea and rode to end of street and back(300 mts max),no helmet,teeshirt,barefeet and 3/4 pants,just to keep battery ticking over,got bike into garage and went to shut the gate and a cop turned at intersection and drove away from our place,lucky or what.No wasn't speeding or anything illegal,just fired the bike and thought stuff gotta turn the bike around lawn and may as well go up the road.

carver

21st February 2008, 20:28

such a move would be silly
impact can kill, which gear cant always protect against

its our body-we choose

Zuki Bandit

21st February 2008, 20:30

I think we should all have a choice as to what kind of protective clothing we want to wear damn it!!!

madandy

22nd February 2008, 08:20

That is natural selection and it's good to see that we haven't eradicated it entirely from the human society!

Natural selection FWT :)

But yeah bees hit surprisingly hard. Got a big bruise from one through my leathers once. Birds are worse...
Insects & birds...pffft. Wait till a stone finds you

Didn't know you guys did life jackets - that's the only safety gear I thought was appropriate when all the army does is getting unimogs stuck in the Waimak. ;)

I heard the Engineers told them they were designed for the terrain ;)

Mikkel

22nd February 2008, 12:26

I heard the Engineers told them they were designed for the terrain ;)

I'm pretty sure it would be quite possible to drive a unimog across the Waimak - if you choose an appropriate spot and have a snorkel for it.

...or you could just pick one of the bridges... ;)

madandy

22nd February 2008, 14:59

Ahahaha. Touche.

faredce

22nd February 2008, 17:22

each to their own i reckon.some people are happy to wear it all the time but for a nip down the road doesnt need a full kit. to much hassle

JimO

22nd February 2008, 17:41

each to their own i reckon.some people are happy to wear it all the time but for a nip down the road doesnt need a full kit. to much hassle

YES but lots of accidents happen during that "nip down the road"

HornetBoy

22nd February 2008, 18:36

YES but lots of accidents happen during that "nip down the road"

yep true but would you like to be forced to wear full kit(boots,gloves,jacket,pants,helmet) just to go a couple kilometers ? i reckon for most people its a calculated risk

HRT

22nd February 2008, 20:31

It would be a bitch having to chuck everything on just to go for a short trip, more so on a hot day. Would pretty much discourage me using the bike if that was the case.

And likewise would discourage people from buying bikes in the first place if you had to add an extra grand or more on the top of the price of your first bike. And then the issue of safety standards on boots etc etc which would simply bump up the price of decent gear because it costs extra to get a standard on

Helmet is a must, sure. But on a hot day for a quick little trip you sometimes don't even want a jacket on

Steam

22nd February 2008, 20:35

It would be a bitch having to chuck everything on just to go for a short trip, more so on a hot day. Would pretty much discourage me using the bike if that was the case.

And likewise would discourage people from buying bikes in the first place if you had to add an extra grand or more on the top of the price of your first bike.

Yeah that's all true true. But I reckon some penny-pinching politician is going to propose it soon, within 5 years or so. It'll be a battle to protect our biking freedom no matter who is in government.

Ixion

22nd February 2008, 20:44

The other objection is that for such a law to work, all gear would need to be certifed. So, only goverment approved jacket, government approved boots, etc.

Firstly, do you want to trust the government in such matters. Secondly, since no other country in the world makes such demands, such certification would have to be done specifically for NZ. At what cost? and who would bear the cost? (No prizes for guessing). And the hassle would deter all but a very few manufacturers from staying in the market. Oligopoly means even HIGHER prices.

I will forstall the objection that it is not so with helmets by pointing out that many other jurisdictions require helmets and have provided statutory standards for them . There are no such standards for other gear (not statutory ones, anyway)

JimO

22nd February 2008, 21:05

Yeah that's all true true. But I reckon some penny-pinching politician is going to propose it soon, within 5 years or so. It'll be a battle to protect our biking freedom no matter who is in government.

sue bradford would be the man for the job

craneman

22nd February 2008, 21:06

its obvious from our comments that most of YOU havent worked out the meaning of life yet. Its a random series of events .ie; crash your plane into a helecopter ,get taken out by some tourist in a campervan ,or sit at home wraped in cottonwool and die of a heart attack(AND I dont think full protective clothing will save you from that) or be like paddy who smoked all his life,went through ww2 from start to finish ,rode m-cycles from the age of 13 and died at 96 when he got a zip off his toaster

James Deuce

22nd February 2008, 21:18

I am amazed, I never thought the Make It Compulsory numbers would be so high. More than 20% of KBers!
They sure keep a low profile, I guess they are a bit afraid to speak out and get flamed down.

If that's the percentage amongst motorcyclists, imagine what percentage would be returned by the cage-driving public and even politicans!

Very very interesting!

It's not even vaguely interesting.

We don't represent NZ "bikers" on KB, mainly because we're the minority of Kiwi motorcyclists who aren't scared of electrical appliances or them damn computers and we're boring with far too much time on our hands.

Even thinking about protective gear beyond the legally mandated helmet means you're not a real biker, just an Interdweeb wastrel with wannabe syndrome.

Get outside, find some culs-de-sac, and go ride pocket bikes round in circles while wearing a pushie helmet, wife beater, boardies, and red and white jandals. Don't come in until you've crashed at least twice and there's road rash and blood everywhere and you're drunk and giggling like a 14 year old school girl with a copy of "Mandingo".

Steam

22nd February 2008, 21:21

or be like paddy who smoked all his life,went through ww2 from start to finish ,rode m-cycles from the age of 13 and died at 96 when he got a zip off his toaster

Okaaaay.

Despite common sense telling you... well, most of us...
...that taking care and wearing the gear (etc) increases the possibilities of living longer and better.

And that lucky old Paddy is one in a thousand, one in ten thousand, who managed to survive despite all that.

But you, Craneman, are more than welcome to do whatever the fuck you like. Don't wear a helmet for all I care. Steer your plane directly for that helicopter. Smoke a pack a day and hope you dodge the statistics. Go fight at Gallipoli and be one of the few who returned to speak of it. Ride a bike at the redline around town, close your eyes as you run the red lights at 100k in a 50 zone.
Sit at home wearing not cotton wool, but a thin smear of bacon fat instead.

I mean, I understand your point, but your example was a fucking stupid one.

Please try harder in future.

Motu

22nd February 2008, 21:39

Don't come in until you've crashed at least twice and there's road rash and blood everywhere and you're drunk and giggling like a 14 year old school girl with a copy of "Mandingo".

I think what is sadly lacking from these people is the skill to crash safely.Closing your eyes and saying ''oh shit'' is going to give you a story to tell other riders about ATGATT.Active crash management starts before ''oh shit'' happens,is on going during the crash process and isn't over until the final outcome meets your objectives.Do it often enough and it's second nature.

A few weeks ago I watched my daughter get out of control on my TLR200 - she took off at 90 deg to her intended course (Poor throttle control,I thought I had explained the sudden lurch) and launched the bike off a metre high bank into a rocky stream,the bike ending upside down on it's handle bars.She landed on her feet giggling like a school girl.She was wearing jeans,gumboots and a T shirt....no helmet even.I was a pretty proud Dad....

twotyred

23rd February 2008, 06:34

It would be a bitch having to chuck everything on just to go for a short trip, more so on a hot day. Would pretty much discourage me using the bike if that was the case.

And likewise would discourage people from buying bikes in the first place if you had to add an extra grand or more on the top of the price of your first bike. And then the issue of safety standards on boots etc etc which would simply bump up the price of decent gear because it costs extra to get a standard on

This is exactly why someone will eventually propose it in parliament,cause gubmints would love to see bikes cease to exist... I'm sure it's on someones list somewhere..

Grumpy

23rd February 2008, 07:20

I voted yes for the simple reason that I've seen the results after some mates binned while not wearing the right gear. At some stage all were heard to say the words "it's my life and I'll do what I'll fuckin' like". In part this may be true but the reality is the aftermath affects more than just themselves. Friends and family also feel the effects. Maybe not the same sort of pain but it's not nice having to watch a partner or mate or family member go through the agony of recovering from a skin graft while you are helping to care for them. It is our life and we should be able to do what the fuck we want. Motorcycling is a dangerous hobbie but I think we do owe to those others that an "off" is going to have an impact on to be a little sensible when kitting up for a ride.

Swampdonkey

23rd February 2008, 07:30

Just the word "compulsory" scars the shit out of me. The present government use it way much,the greens just love it!! Lets keep it out of the bikeing community.:headbang:

Ocean1

23rd February 2008, 08:02

I think what is sadly lacking from these people is the skill to crash safely.Closing your eyes and saying ''oh shit'' is going to give you a story to tell other riders about ATGATT.Active crash management starts before ''oh shit'' happens,is on going during the crash process and isn't over until the final outcome meets your objectives.Do it often enough and it's second nature.

A few weeks ago I watched my daughter get out of control on my TLR200 - she took off at 90 deg to her intended course (Poor throttle control,I thought I had explained the sudden lurch) and launched the bike off a metre high bank into a rocky stream,the bike ending upside down on it's handle bars.She landed on her feet giggling like a school girl.She was wearing jeans,gumboots and a T shirt....no helmet even.I was a pretty proud Dad....

Nice. I couldn't agree more, and that's the perfect environment to learn ACM.
When I started crashing a fairly high percentage of learners rode dirt bikes and crashed mostly in the dirt. Don't think that's true any more. How many times does your average learner need to actually crash to learn those skills? And can you learn them on the road and survive?

As for compulsory specified riding kit? Hell no, NZ is just possibly the worst society in the world for prescriptive legislation "controlling" minority behaviour. We've even advanced to allowing a rabid minority to dictate an overwhelming majority of parental behaviour. Be very carefull of anything that starts with "they orta", it always defines a statement intended to intefere with someone else's rightful choices.

If you want to "control" other people's behaviour start by removing systems that encourage bad behaviour. If the cost of bike related accidents is high then allow riders to pay those costs through free-market insurance. If you then want to ride without sensible protection you'll do so with the knowledge that you've either payed the appropriate premiums or you'll be paying for health care in cold hard cash.

Animal

24th February 2008, 01:58

ATGATT in Perth appears to mean closed sneakers with your shorts and singlet, whereas riding in jandals is considered 'reckless'. However, it is appropriate to still wear your >$800 helmet because the cops fine you if you don't.

Wearing the NZ interpretation of ATG is a daily challenge here because it's so fuckin' hot and leather everything makes for a mobile sauna, even on a short trip! I've had to adapt my thinking somewhat, so nowadays I don't roll the bike out of the garage unless it's for a reasonably long ride. There is a bonus to this... I now take the longest route possible to get to work to justify the loss of sweat.

In reply to your question, Mr Steam, I'd rather not give away another of my personal liberties for The Government to make money out of. They have enough things that they can fine us over already, methinks.

Jiminy

24th February 2008, 03:19

Voted no.

Defining the mandatory gear will not be an easy task. Plus, there is a (very subjective) line that you need to draw between plain stupidity and calculated risk.

The other day, I drove my bike to the dealer through the whole of 6 crossings wearing only my helmet and my fingerless gloves. I felt a bit naked and put on my jacket when picking up the bike two days later, but I find that a law telling me what to wear would be too intrusive.

Mind you, I also think that helmets on push bikes are really annoying and should be optional.

BAD DAD

24th February 2008, 06:59

Voted "No". NZ society already suffers from too much ECD: excessive compulsion disorder.

Xaria

24th February 2008, 07:13

The Pastor

24th February 2008, 14:07

if it were legal requirement to wear full gear, its just another thing they would fine us for.

The Pastor

24th February 2008, 14:09

Uni has just restarted here in Dunedin and yesterday I saw about a dozen more scooters around, no one wearing more safety gear than a helmet - which in two cases was a cycle helmet, generally wearing shorts or skirts and a tshirt. There was even two bikes where they were doubled up. I know they aren't going too fast but still an impact at 50km with no gear would still not be fun.
The way I think about it is, would you run as fast as you can wearing what you would wear on the scooter and then jump onto the road? How much faster does a scooter go.