ACC - Should wearing safety gear be a legal requirement?

[ManDownUnder]

I ask again - are you planning on forcing education on people? What if they don't want to be educated to the risks you perceive?

So it seems we are now arguing what to force on people, rather than if we should make them do something.

Nope - I'm proposing the option to understand the risks because they/we'll be paying the price of the damage...

[Ducky848]

They are currently looking at an increased ACC levy for bikes of 600cc and over, because the injuries occurring from these bikes are more serious and costing ACC more than those on smaller bikes. It's detailed in the Safer Journeys discussion paper.

I can't tell you why. I was surprised by the statistic. Perhaps there are a lot of mature riders who return to riding, by a big bike, and have nastier accidents.

I find riding a litre bike attracts even more lunatics to drive into me...maybe its that whole relativity theory fucking with us...

[Grahameeboy]

re: not taking up free education

So then if we have a group of people not taking up free education, not wearing safety gear, and having accidents, what should we do?

Nothing, and accept the higher ACC premium from a failure to achieve reduced costs to ACC, or some form of regulation?

e,g. If your convicted of some driving charge (say careless driving or worse) 3 times you have compulsory "re-education" before you get your licence back? Doesn't help after the accident has happened of course.
e,g. Regulate that they wear safety gear, so they can be removed from the road (very un-popular according to the poll)?
e,g. Just accept it as the cost of freedom, and be dammed pleased we have the choice?

They have to accept a reduced level of ACC compensation...

Should we have the choice when it does not just affect us...say you don't wear a back protector and suffer spinal injuries which affects your wife and kids future...

Why should the Govt bail us out for making our own stupid choice...

[p.dath]

I suppose you're one of those people who thinks licensing gun owners reduces the likelihood of firearms offences?

Umm, don't know much about guns or gun licensing, or the results or issues of licensing, and not likely to take an interest in it. Not something I have any passion about.

But I'm guessing you feel Government regulation of gun owners (or any other personal pursuit for that matter) should not occur for the same reason that you think that the Government should not regulate motorcycle riders?

[Grahameeboy]

Nope - I'm proposing the option to understand the risks because they/we'll be paying the price of the damage...

Yep..it's that simple folks....why are we any different to car drivers having to wear a seat belt

[Mekk]

Why would you want to get in the way of natural selection?

[The Stranger:Me]

I suppose you're one of those people who thinks licensing gun owners reduces the likelihood of firearms offences?

Bloody stupid idea isn't it.
Ban them completely instead.

[James Deuce]

Umm, don't know much about guns or gun licensing, or the results or issues of licensing, and not likely to take an interest in it. Not something I have any passion about.

But I'm guessing you feel Government regulation of gun owners (or any other personal pursuit for that matter) should not occur for the same reason that you think that the Government should not regulate motorcycle riders?

Point----------------------Chasm--------------------Conclusion.

[StoneY]

Negative. The average cost of someone dying is far greater than someone being seriously injured.
A lot of those who die don't just die. They use some incredibly expensive resources and then die.

I don't quite recall which report it was in. Something like a name like "Social Cost of Injuries".

Do you have a fuckin life dude
Who the fuck reads every .govt website report out there- I dont and I was in govt service for 4 years

Your posts are just whinging-nothing else- get a fuckin life or go out for a fuckin ride for gods sake

[StoneY]

Umm, don't know much about guns or gun licensing, or the results or issues of licensing, and not likely to take an interest in it.

MY god finally a subject the mighty p.dath has no opinion on
WOW!

[NighthawkNZ:Me]

for the same reason that you think that the Government should not regulate motorcycle riders?

Tell us do you truly want to be regulated, and be honest with yourself... You need to stand back and see what you yourself are saying and wanting. Are you truly wanting the gooberment to regulate you as a motorcyclist. A personal hobby for most, something that is for enjoyment...

Its about personal and freedom of choice, what I and any other biker wears when out riding. We all know the risks, well all know that it hurts if you do fall off, we all know it costs money to fix you... so simple put, don't fall off... Get taught how to handle the bike better, and defensively...to avoid the situation in the first place... oh wait a loop of more education

I'm am ATGATT always have been, but being told I must wear XYZ approved gear is over the top. The more you regulate people the more you will find people will rebel.

All our importers will have to have all the gear tested to meet these new standards, who passes and fail. you would have to go get the gear you wear now tested, that you have been wearing for the last 4 or 5 years hope it passes else you have another bill to pay, the test and new gear. How often do we have to get our gear checked, once a year, every time we go for a ride like the do at a race meet, then as asked before how is it regulated and priced to you.

It may save money for ACC but that money saved won't go on better roads, or driver education it will most likely go on regulating you.

There are already regulations in place for on the learning side, and you have in through out your life... you must go to school from the age of 5. To start teaching you the tools of what you need to know in life. Maybe they need to start teach in the later years when the kids are just below the driving age more about driving, the dangers the safety, the stupid, the dangers, of drink driver, modding your car (or bike) without proper guidelines teaching them what not to do... start teaching them younger, prepair them better for when the do start to get behind the wheel. Start teaching road safety as soon as they start play with matchbox cars in the sand pit...

Make the learning side of getting the license better than what is and a bit tougher on the younger ones getting a license, be tougher on the law and penalties if the break the restrictions of the license. Make them be responsible for their actions. (and not just money)

Be more realistic with the restrictions....

• No alcohol levels while driving... zero, nada, zip
• HP rating and restriction (both cage and bike)
• No pillion or passengers.
• No open road driving or riding for period of time (might only be a month or 3). Then a reduced speed on open road (but more than 70) period of time probably up to 90kph (this way you technically are not being pushed of the road by Kenworth trucks.)
• Must have L or a R plate showing.
• Sit a defensive driving and or riding course and test in between learner and restricted. None of this to reduce time on your learners. and an advanced defensive driving course and test between restricted & full.

The last one has added to courses before they can get their full without over regulating.

As for bikers and gear and clothing, educate and recommend. Be heaver on the law when caught tailgating, drink driving if caught more than once loss of license, caught again... day in court, and dangerous driving.

ACC doesn't pay if you have broken these restrictions (taking responsibility for your actions)

[James Deuce]

I'm am ATGATT always have been, but being told I must wear XYZ approved gear is over the top. The more you regulate people the more you will find people will rebel.

Not only that, Mr Dath seems to think that a law will mean that people will obey.

He still hasn't responded to the comment about a fair proportion of big bike injury accidents being attributed to riders either without a license or lacking the appropriate class 6 license to be riding a big bike in the first place.

[vifferman]

Oh God yes it should be. Everything should be of the highest rating, full cover from head to toe, one piece, body armour, sliders and steel capped/reinforced boots. We need to extend the reach of the legislation to include bicycles, skateboards, in fact anyone that faces the prospect of abrading themselves against the ground at any speed able to draw blood.

Everyone should have to wear full safety gear at all times, even when in bed (in case they roll out and hurt themselves, or get up to have a whizz in the night and fall over the cat).
FFS - life has a 100% mortality rate! Get over it.
My cousin died when he tripped on the wharf and hit his head. My mother broke a couple of ribs when she tripped over an ant or summat and fell. Lucky for her, when she was examined, they found out she had breast cancer, so she had to have radical surgery and 6 weeks of chemo.
My grandma fell over in her kitchen and broke her hip.
My mother-in-law fell backwards in the garden (just standing there!), and fuckt her back and fractured her scaphoid.
I fell over in the gargre, and had more damage than I've EVER had in a bike accident: cracked my eyebrow, got 6 stitches in my eye, two black eyes, wrecked my rotator cuff, and had to have months of physio, which gave me arthritis.

OTOH, I wrote off my first bike at 65-70km/h, when I t-boned a car, wearing jandals, no gloves, jeans, and an open-faced helmet. Got some fairly minor abrasions and contusions, and 9 stitches in my right knee. Fuck all really.

We already suffer from over-regulation, and too many rules and laws. We definitely don't need any more.

[The Stranger:Me]

Everyone should have to wear full safety gear at all times, even when in bed (in case they roll out and hurt themselves, or get up to have a whizz in the night and fall over the cat).
FFS - life has a 100% mortality rate! Get over it.
My cousin died when he tripped on the wharf and hit his head. My mother broke a couple of ribs when she tripped over an ant or summat and fell. Lucky for her, when she was examined, they found out she had breast cancer, so she had to have radical surgery and 6 weeks of chemo.
My grandma fell over in her kitchen and broke her hip.
My mother-in-law fell backwards in the garden (just standing there!), and fuckt her back and fractured her scaphoid.
I fell over in the gargre, and had more damage than I've EVER had in a bike accident: cracked my eyebrow, got 6 stitches in my eye, two black eyes, wrecked my rotator cuff, and had to have months of physio, which gave me arthritis.

Do you hate your parents for passing on the fall over gene?

[Swoop]

Umm, don't know much about guns or gun licensing, or the results or issues of licensing, and not likely to take an interest in it. Not something I have any passion about.

But I'm guessing you feel Government regulation of gun owners (or any other personal pursuit for that matter) should not occur for the same reason that you think that the Government should not regulate motorcycle riders?

The point is that even though our government has "policies" in place that say you MUST do xyz... some people do not follow that process. Hence we have unlicenced road-users, etc, etc.

Even though we are required to comply with something, dosen't mean that we all do that.

Some of us use our own initiative and common sense, while others may choose to be part of the sheeple. Individual choice is a wonderful thing.