Setting Of Speed Limits - Consultation

[pritch]

Wearing a helmet on a motorbike has been compulsory for as long as I can remember a

Ahh but I can remember when helmets weren't compulsory unless you planned to exceed 30mph. You didn't need a helmet ii you were just riding around town. You put the helmet on to head out on the open road. The road toll was way higher then.

The US is umm different. It was reported that during the war in Iraq the US Marines were losing more marines to motorcycle accidents than to enemy action. The guys would come home with a heathy bank account having had virtually no opportunity to spend their pay while in Iraq. They could buy a new Hyabusa and head out on the road with no experience and no safety equipment with sadly predictable results.

[onearmedbandit]

The US is umm different. It was reported that during the war in Iraq the US Marines were losing more marines to motorcycle accidents than to enemy action. The guys would come home with a heathy bank account having had virtually no opportunity to spend their pay while in Iraq. They could buy a new Hyabusa and head out on the road with no experience and no safety equipment with sadly predictable results.

Yup, I have a couple facebook friends who talked about bans put on owning motorcycles on base because of this issue.

[SaferRides]

Yes, that's not what I was saying. The Texas figures are just reflective of the personal choice argument gone wild.

I could have put it better. For some reason, helmet wearing in countries like NZ is a safety measure that has been universally adopted. Texas represents the other extreme.

The reasons for this reflect the very different attitudes to personal freedoms. Perhaps one reason for some of the policies of the present government, including the proposed rule, may represent a feeling that the previous government had gone too far?



Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

[rastuscat]

I could have put it better. For some reason, helmet wearing in countries like NZ is a safety measure that has been universally adopted. Texas represents the other extreme.

The reasons for this reflect the very different attitudes to personal freedoms. Perhaps one reason for some of the policies of the present government, including the proposed rule, may represent a feeling that the previous government had gone too far?



Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

The Murcan obsession with the right to arm bears is another example

[Grumph]

I could have put it better. For some reason, helmet wearing in countries like NZ is a safety measure that has been universally adopted. Texas represents the other extreme.

The reasons for this reflect the very different attitudes to personal freedoms. Perhaps one reason for some of the policies of the present government, including the proposed rule, may represent a feeling that the previous government had gone too far?



Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

I note that the requirement to wear a helmet on a pushbike seems to have been forgotten.
It's been weeks since I last saw a cyclist wearing a helmet.

I'm going to assume that enforcement of this has fallen through the rather large gaps in the Police budget.
Do they still go to schools teaching the road code and safe cycling ?

[onearmedbandit]

Yeah I've noticed that too. Mind you in the past 3-4yrs I've noticed far less patrolling police cars than I can ever recall.

https://www.cyclehelmets.org/1008.html

[rastuscat]

I note that the requirement to wear a helmet on a pushbike seems to have been forgotten.
It's been weeks since I last saw a cyclist wearing a helmet.

I'm going to assume that enforcement of this has fallen through the rather large gaps in the Police budget.
Do they still go to schools teaching the road code and safe cycling ?

Yes, the NZTA Bike Ready programme is delivered through most schools in the country, and teaches about helmets.

https://bikeready.govt.nz/

You are right though, enforcement of this is fairly non existent. I have views on this which don't align with the belief that helmets make cycling safer.

Helmets discourage cycling, leading to deaths and medical problems from obesity. Which has only become obvious from decades of helmet laws. More people would cycle if they didn't have to wear helmets.

The only places cycling helmets are compulsory at NZ and Australia. What is it we know that the rest of the world doesn't?

Head injuries went down when helmets were introduced, but so did the number of people cycling, which also led to a reduction in head injuries. Cause or effect?

[nerrrd]

Helmets discourage cycling, leading to deaths and medical problems from obesity. Which has only become obvious from decades of helmet laws. More people would cycle if they didn't have to wear helmets.

The hilly, windy and wet nature of Auckland was a far bigger factor in discouraging me from cycling than wearing a helmet ever was (and I have cycled as an adult, although I've never ridden an electric bicycle which might help with a couple of those).

[neels]

More people would cycle if they didn't have to wear helmets.

Personally I have no issue with wearing a helmet on a bike, simply because falling on your head from a couple of metres up or crashing into a tree is going to hurt.

I have talked to a number of people (mainly female) who would be quite happy to cycle the short distance to work, particularly where there are cycle lanes which mean they don't have to interact with other traffic, but won't because they like to have their hair looking nice and sticking on a helmet undoes an hour of effort to this end.

[rastuscat]

Personally I have no issue with wearing a helmet on a bike, simply because falling on your head from a couple of metres up or crashing into a tree is going to hurt.

The same mindset is shared by those who ride motorcycles in sleeveless leather vests. They aren't going to crash, you see, so have no need for protective gear.

In terms of cycle helmets, I can see the need when I am riding a road bike at 30 kmh on the Sunday bunch. But when doing 15 kmh to the shops to buy milk, I'm not convinced.

[R650R]

As a child of the 80’s I remember exactly why we got helmet laws. Some lady from down south ended up having to care for her son in a vegetative state after he got knocked off his bike.Nowadays he’d prob just die due to the response time of our overworked emergency services compounded by traffic delays.
Anyhow she made it a crusade to speak at just about every school in country. People deal with idea of death ok but the idea of lifelong care for permanently mental disability of your offspring swayed public opinion. About the same time Patricia Bartlett was trying to get pornography banned. Helmet lady took over the news cycle, Penthouse magazine survived and maybe a few cyclists as a result.

Everyone was in on its and we still had a domestic Mc helmet manufacturer back then too, Pacific. Can’t remember if they got into pushbike scene. If you saved 5 bread bags I think natures fresh subsidised your helmet purchase. So for awhile there were a lot of yellow and orange kids in their company colours.

I agree with rastus that we’ve probably gained greater health problems over all and a bit more freedom is better. But then I have seen long term health effects of a friend who slipped over backwards and had head injury on concrete floor. So I kinda don’t mind wearing it even on off highway cycle paths as just like motorbiking you don’t get to choose when you will crash.

[onearmedbandit]

The classic Stack Hat!

http://www.suzyj.net/2014/02/stackha...lped-kill.html

[Berries]

Personally I have no issue with wearing a helmet on a bike, simply because falling on your head from a couple of metres up or crashing into a tree is going to hurt.

My head is higher above ground when walking than it is while cycling but I am not wearing a helmet when walking to the pub, or back, when statistically I am more likely to have a head / concrete interaction than I would sober on a pushbike.

I have talked to a number of people (mainly female) who would be quite happy to cycle the short distance to work, particularly where there are cycle lanes which mean they don't have to interact with other traffic, but won't because they like to have their hair looking nice and sticking on a helmet undoes an hour of effort to this end.

It's not even that. I used to commute by pushbike in the UK and for my health I should ride a bike here but I have done so 3 or 4 times in over 20 years, purely because of the helmet laws. I get helmet hair from my Shoei, it's not that, it is being told what is good for me when I fundamentally disagree with that view. It would be better long term for me to cycle without a helmet than take the car and come home via the drive through. Basic shit, I'm not 9 years old anymore

[nerrrd]

And then I saw someone riding one of these these along the main road I live on this morning.



I think the rider was wearing a helmet, probably a good idea.

[neels]

In terms of cycle helmets, I can see the need when I am riding a road bike at 30 kmh on the Sunday bunch. But when doing 15 kmh to the shops to buy milk, I'm not convinced.

I completely agree.

Down the cycle lane on the commuter bike to Pak n Save to get some milk and waffles for breakfast a helmet seems somewhat redundant, and therefore don't bother to avoid the possible annoyance of getting ticketed for no helmet if there happens to be a cop passing who's bored enough or down on his quota for the week.