Skating rinks to offer helmets

**GSW** · 14th January 2013, 14:09

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8175...leads-to-death

What do reckon, HiZis will be required soon as well?

But not a good thing to happen to anyone.... accidents do happen though...

**sil3nt** · 14th January 2013, 14:22

Don't see the problem. Ice isn't soft and helmets are hardly inconvenient when ice skating. Although when was the last time anyone actually listened to a coroners suggestions?

**tigertim20** · 14th January 2013, 14:39

I dont see a problem with them being offered to patrons, but I dont see a need for them to be mandatory either - which be the next suggestion.
Yes, very sad to hear of one's passing, but how many thousands of ice skaters have gone ice skating, and fallen, and there been no problem? I havent heard of any before now.

Trouble is, the bureaucrats demand that any time anything bad happens, it MUST have been avoidable, and there MUST be somewhere to lay the blame - ignoring that if 1 in 1 million people die doing something, its just a 'shit happens' scenario, not an excuse to go wild with ridiculous suggestions around how to police the activity in question

**Milts** · 14th January 2013, 15:09

I was surprised the coroner's suggestion was as mild as "should be made freely available". Usually you would indeed expect them to yell "compulsory! compulsory!".

I think the findings were entirely appropriate. It would maintain the entire 'personal choice' aspect while minimizing the risk, because if helmets are freely available then they are more likely to be used. Good call IMO.

**Zedder** · 14th January 2013, 15:15

Originally Posted by Milts

I was surprised the coroner's suggestion was as mild as "should be made freely available". Usually you would indeed expect them to yell "compulsory! compulsory!".

I think the findings were entirely appropriate. It would maintain the entire 'personal choice' aspect while minimizing the risk, because if helmets are freely available then they are more likely to be used. Good call IMO.

Well said.

**FJRider** · 14th January 2013, 15:21

Originally Posted by tigertim20

I dont see a problem with them being offered to patrons, but I dont see a need for them to be mandatory either - which be the next suggestion.

You and the others are totally missing the point.

The skating rinks are a business. They (as a business) pay ACC premiums which are based on ACC claims made that occurred AT the rink. ANY ACC payout to a rink client ... directly affect the rinks premiums.

"Offered to patrons" is the first step. THE RINK may make it mandatory later ... no doubt depending a lot on (positive) patron feedback.

**Zedder** · 14th January 2013, 15:43

Originally Posted by FJRider

You and the others are totally missing the point.

The skating rinks are a business. They (as a business) pay ACC premiums which are based on ACC claims made that occurred AT the rink. ANY ACC payout to a rink client ... directly affect the rinks premiums.

"Offered to patrons" is the first step. THE RINK may make it mandatory later ... no doubt depending a lot on (positive) patron feedback.

No company panders to workers/patrons when it comes to making the workplace etc safe so you're barking up the wrong tree there.

**mashman** · 14th January 2013, 16:33

I don't think human beings should be allowed to leave their houses without wearing a helmet. Perfect for when falling down drunk, being hit by cars, falling off bicycles, falling on the ice, slipping in dog poo and many many more. You're all just so fuckin stupid... which, ironically, kinda negates the need for a helmet.

**The Lone Rider** · 14th January 2013, 17:18

Wore them when I played hockey.

And other pads.

Worst team sport injuries I've had were on skates, much to the hardness of if you fall.

**Swoop** · 14th January 2013, 19:42

Originally Posted by GSW

What do reckon, HiZis will be required soon as well?

I would like to know what exactly "HiZis" is.

It sounds quite painful.

**bosslady** · 14th January 2013, 20:57

Originally Posted by Zedder

No company panders to workers/patrons when it comes to making the workplace etc safe so you're barking up the wrong tree there.

Care to explain? I don't believe that's true.

**Zedder** · 14th January 2013, 21:05

Originally Posted by bosslady

Care to explain? I don't believe that's true.

Companies don't ask workers or patrons if it's ok by them or an inconvenience to them if things were made safer. They just do it, it's the law.

**bosslady** · 14th January 2013, 21:17

Originally Posted by Zedder

Companies don't ask workers or patrons if it's ok by them or an inconvenience to them if things were made safer. They just do it, it's the law.

oh I see, thought you meant the opposite

**tigertim20** · 14th January 2013, 21:17

Originally Posted by FJRider

You and the others are totally missing the point.

The skating rinks are a business. They (as a business) pay ACC premiums which are based on ACC claims made that occurred AT the rink. ANY ACC payout to a rink client ... directly affect the rinks premiums.

"Offered to patrons" is the first step. THE RINK may make it mandatory later ... no doubt depending a lot on (positive) patron feedback.

I haven't missed 'the point' at all - I was talking about such things being forcibly regulated by govt, be it at a local or national level. The rink in question MAY decide to institute such a policy in order to be seen to be doing anything they can to prevent further incidents - But I don't think THAT particular rink instigating such a policy is likely to cause a flow on effect of all other rinks automatically adopting a policy of forced helmet use of their own volition.