New helmet law?

**NiggleC** · 1st March 2010, 20:57

What have I missed? While out in North Canterbury yesterday I saw, on 2 seperate ocassions riders on SH1 riding helmetless. While I would loath to stereotype the riders lets just say both were on bikes, parts of which I am told are actually made in the USA. Do these new laws only apply to riders on these bikes? Maybe they were on their way home from the beach having not seen a tsunami and were looking for another way to remove themselves from the gene pool.

**Mudfart** · 2nd March 2010, 07:58

from wat ive been told, if they were on trikes that have seatbelts, they dont have to wear helmets.

**Headbanger** · 2nd March 2010, 08:31

Should have taken a stand and performed a citizens arrest.....

**KelvinAng** · 2nd March 2010, 10:07

On that day I saw a bloke and a lady pillion rider on a cruiser along the same stretch of road, first tailgating my van and then "zipping" past me along the centre line when I'm doing err, shall we say a positively mis-calibrated 100km/hr (flowing with the traffic and all, I swear!). I slowed down for cruiser to overtake and then he proceed on to do the same thing with the car in front... pillion rider has got no helmet.

**Headbanger** · 2nd March 2010, 11:41

This reminds me of a BBQ I attended on Sunday, Over a glass of ale I informed the ladies present that fat girls had to be informed of their state so they could do something about it.

**Taz** · 2nd March 2010, 12:30

Originally Posted by Headbanger

This reminds me of a BBQ I attended on Sunday, Over a glass of ale I informed the ladies present that fat girls had to be informed of their state so they could do something about it.

I agree we all have a civic duty to tell fat girls they are fat and not to wear that skimpy clothing

As for those helmetless bikers - who cares?

**Muppet** · 2nd March 2010, 13:12

Originally Posted by Anthrax

I agree we all have a civic duty to tell fat girls they are fat and not to wear that skimpy clothing

As for those helmetless bikers - who cares?

Yes who bloody cares, they know the risks, I say let 'em crash! They were probably the same twats who went to the beach to watch the Tsunami come in.

**avgas** · 2nd March 2010, 13:35

Helmets are only compulsory for brains. If you lack the latter helmet is not required. Its the law

**mazz1972** · 2nd March 2010, 15:09

This sort of airhead behaviour by does nothing good for the reputation of us sharing caring careful motorcyclists

*hands on hips*

ACC levy increase anyone? *cough cough*

**Pedrostt500** · 2nd March 2010, 15:11

You can apply for a waiver to wearing a Helmet on medical grounds, though you do need a certificate sighned off by a doctor or surgeon.

**p.dath** · 2nd March 2010, 15:30

Originally Posted by Headbanger

Should have taken a stand and performed a citizens arrest.....

I think it has to be a criminal offence to be able to arrest someone, citizen's or otherwise. I'm guessing not wearing a helmet is probably just a breach of regulations and as such would attract only a fine and some demerits.

**pc220** · 2nd March 2010, 16:12

They are actually doing a good thing for the ACC campaign. If they bin their chances of death are so much higher and therefore will be less chance of them draining ACC funds. Either that or they are just fucken retards.

**davereid** · 2nd March 2010, 16:53

Originally Posted by pc220

If they bin their chances of death are so much higher and therefore will be less chance of them draining ACC funds. Either that or they are just fucken retards.

Much higher ?

Nope. Helmets improve your chances by about 30%.

Or a multiplier of 1.3 if you like to think of it that way.

Given that riding a motorcycle is 18-35 times more likely to cause you death that going in the car, I'd suggest that riding a motorcycle makes you a Darwin award candidate much more effectively than choosing not to wear a helmet.

**pc220** · 2nd March 2010, 17:17

Originally Posted by davereid

Much higher ?

Nope. Helmets improve your chances by about 30%.

Or a multiplier of 1.3 if you like to think of it that way.

Given that riding a motorcycle is 18-35 times more likely to cause you death that going in the car, I'd suggest that riding a motorcycle makes you a Darwin award candidate much more effectively than choosing not to wear a helmet.

Fair point. But a dead motorcyclist is going to be cheaper than one that is seriously injured.The fact they are not wearing a helmet is very possably going to be the differance between death and serious head injuries.(in worst case scenario)