Compulsory ATGATT Yay or Nay

**SpankMe** · 10th February 2011, 11:01

No more bloody laws!, for anything! countries in the west already have too much legislation. Can't do this, can't that, I tired of it. Individually the laws might make sense, but overall they just take away the feeling of freedom.

I can't wait until I retire to Thailand.

**bogan** · 10th February 2011, 11:01

Originally Posted by superman

It's different when we have a socialist health system and we pay for eachothers choices. Someone feels like eating a lot/smoking and we pay for the impeding cancer treatment.

Or some bastard politicians feel like sticking their snout in the trough and charging almost double what they could/should.

**Whynot** · 10th February 2011, 11:02

Originally Posted by superman

It's different when we have a socialist health system and we pay for eachothers choices. Someone feels like eating a lot/smoking and we pay for the impeding cancer treatment.

Same if someone chooses to play rugby, or not wear ATGATT riding a bike at over 27 metres per second. Want to change to a pay for yourself health system though and then force only rich people to get treatment, NO! So nanny laws seem to be a must for the situation our country's in IMO.

Choice is of course something important, but in a safety situation surely making people more safe is not something bad. Such as seatbelt and helmet laws have shown.

Do what you want if it doesn't cost me money, if it costs me money then I give a damn. I have to bloody fork out 4 weeks of my wage to pay for just a 250cc bike and car rego.

I suggest you do a bit of research, we are not the only country in the world with a socialist health system.

**Whynot** · 10th February 2011, 11:04

Originally Posted by SpankMe

No more bloody laws!, for anything! countries in the west already have too much legislation. Can't do this, can't that, I tired of it. Individually the laws might make sense, but overall they just take away the feeling of freedom.

Completely agree.

**Usarka** · 10th February 2011, 11:05

Originally Posted by superman

New rating system for abrasion? Urg create more bureaucratic jobs... yaaaay.

Exactly the issue. And remember Cordura is just a trademark, there are other fabrics out there also. And different grades of leather.

Effectively every bit of kit sold would need to be tested. Who would do this? The likes of Alpline* would say hahahahahaa rofl. If it's the government or the importer then expect major price rises.

Might be a good idea in theory (i don't think so though) but not practicle or workable.....

**Katman** · 10th February 2011, 11:06

Originally Posted by superman

Should it be a legislatively controlled action, or should it be every bikers given right to wear shorts/t-shirt on hot days?

I could ride naked and still be safe.

It's not the riding gear that needs sorting - it's what's inside the riders head.

**superman** · 10th February 2011, 11:07

Originally Posted by Usarka

Then campaign/vote to have the system changed. ACC is supposed to be a no-fault system.

That line of reasoning bugs me. If it were the way things worked the government should ban mountain bikes and rugby.

Ban rugby

... no that would be crazy... can't be done. Some dreams will just never be fulfilled.

They made base jumping illegal didn't they?!

And no they make high risk injury sports less attractive to people, show ads on tv of people breaking their necks playing rugby... get the numbers down. Like with smoking.

**awa355** · 10th February 2011, 11:07

I wear what is comfortable, safe, senseable and to hell with the sanctimonious crowd.

I make my choices and wear the outcomes. Nobody else has ever had to cough up as a result of my actions on a bike in over 40 years riding.

Motorcycling is a pleasure, I indulge in for my own reasons, and to my own standards, be it full leathers in 30c heat or G string and the wifes' bra in winter.

My choice!!

**Usarka** · 10th February 2011, 11:08

Originally Posted by superman

Ban rugby

... no that would be crazy... can't be done. Some dreams will just never be fulfilled.

They made base jumping illegal didn't they?!

And no they make high risk injury sports less attractive to people, show ads on tv of people breaking their necks playing rugby... get the numbers down. Like with smoking.

Be careful where your argument is going dude.......

**Banditbandit** · 10th February 2011, 11:11

Originally Posted by Bald Eagle

Now that's a can of worms you've opened. Who decides what constitutes compliant gear ?
Not to mention the whole right to choose lobby...

+1 - who decides what gear is compliant is a major issue

**R-Soul** · 10th February 2011, 11:35

Originally Posted by superman

Ban rugby

... no that would be crazy... can't be done. Some dreams will just never be fulfilled.

They made base jumping illegal didn't they?!

Yeah ban the All Blacks
[froma Bok supporter]

**superman** · 10th February 2011, 11:39

Originally Posted by R-Soul

Yeah ban the All Blacks
[froma Bok supporter]

Run, run, run, throw, run, run, dodge, slide. TRY!!!!!!!

**Hellzie** · 10th February 2011, 13:38

My initial response to the question was "Na they're only hurting themselves if they crash and injure themselves by not wearing gear so screw them."

BUT, that's not entirely true as when they crash and injure themselves it's the rest of us that are paying for ACC to fix them up...

BUT since I'm not one for a nanny state and since I believe people should have a choice in how seriously they take their own safety I think a better solution would be to provide incentives for and subsidize those that do reduce the risk of injury by wearing ATGATT.

**superman** · 10th February 2011, 13:52

Originally Posted by Hellzie

My initial response to the question was "Na they're only hurting themselves if they crash and injure themselves by not wearing gear so screw them."

BUT, that's not entirely true as when they crash and injure themselves it's the rest of us that are paying for ACC to fix them up...

BUT since I'm not one for a nanny state and since I believe people should have a choice in how seriously they take their own safety I think a better solution would be to provide incentives for and subsidize those that do reduce the risk of injury by wearing ATGATT.

Ooo, now that sounds very promising!