Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (MHL discussion)

[fat and old]

It is wrong. The law is much like the NT.

Seeing how baabaa linked the Singapore LTA site, I believe you, and as far as your question goes, I stand corrected. If I want to ride around on the public paths in Singapore I do not need a helmet. A helmet is only mandatory if I want to ride on the road. Excellent

1000s if not 10,000s of people ride bicycles every weekend and public holiday on the park connectors and basically no one wears helmets - apart from a handful of "serious" cyclists. Also the police are not particularly interested in enforcing it.

I'm sorry, anecdotal evidence is not accepted in this thread. This has been explained to me numerous times, and I accept the majority POV. Besides which, whether the laws are enforced or not is not the question. The existence of the law is the issue here, is it not?

That Singapore LTA site paints an excellent cycling culture of vertical responsibility, btw. I like it.

So now lets spend the next 87 pages nit picking the word - "mandatory"

indeed!

[trailgumby]

It's fascinating hearing about other countries' bike cultures. However, it's almost a completely separate question to the issue of the legislation and enforcement of laws criminalising the decision to ride without a helmet.

Are you saying that using the experiences of other countries is a separate issue to that of MHL's in Australia? If so, why do people including yourself continually relate anecdotes of their time spent overseas watching people ride around without helmets? Why are the facts and stats of countries other than Australia used to argue against MHL's? Am I missing something?

Yes. Context. Nuance.

[recumbenteer]

interesting and informative discussion .... https://youtu.be/rhzH6mEpIps

for me personally, I've been "lid-less" for 10 yrs in the Rotovelo .... my head, my choice

[uart]

interesting and informative discussion .... https://youtu.be/rhzH6mEpIps

Yes, that's a really good video. It addresses all the important issues, and some that I'm sure many people don't even think about, but especially the "helmet fundamentalists".

He's also spot on in pointing out how amazingly passionate/angry people can get about other people (often people they don't even know) not wearing a helmet. And this seems to be one of those things where the degree of passion/anger is inversely proportional to the degree of knowledge on the subject.

How many times would you hear a story (like on a forum or social media) where a kid was paddling a canoe near shore and say a speed boat driver recklessly ran them down and killed them, and the only detail reported was that the kid had no life jacket. And how many times would 99% of the comments completely ignore the speed boat driver but comment on what a moron the kid was for not wearing a life jacket. You know how often that happens, absolutely never, that's how often. But replace canoe/lifejacket/speedboat with cyclist/helmet/car and it's literally the most common type of comment you would read.

[tpcycle]

interesting and informative discussion .... https://youtu.be/rhzH6mEpIps

for me personally, I've been "lid-less" for 10 yrs in the Rotovelo .... my head, my choice

19:10 is a bit of a furphy. The lady says the rate of fatalities is low in Denmark/Netherlands (which it is) and the guy follows it up with "no one ever seems to get injured there" which is patently untrue. The absolute number of cyclist fatalities there is higher than a lot of other countries but the rate of cycling is astronomically higher than most other countries so the rate of deaths is much much lower.

Reminds me of this:-

http://drawingrings.blogspot.com/2012/0 ... -than.html

I too have ridden lid-less for half a century apart from when I am in Australia and require protection from helmet fines.

[DavidS]

when I am in Australia and require protection from helmet fines.

This.

I refer to it as a fine avoidance hat.

Cycling is quite safe, certainly no more dangerous than 99% of other activities which require no helmet.

Stupid law.

DS

[Thoglette]

….maybe many don't realise just how common these laws are world wide?

Most claiming the same vacuous arguments the College of Surgeons raised to start this whole debacle.

But Won’t Someone Think of the Children?

And if you’re lucky holding Australia up as a shining example.

Compare this to how we approach the risk of skin cancer. (Yes, I’m well aware of “no hat no play” where they are part of the school uniform. A bit like road races, really)

[warthog1]

This.

I refer to it as a fine avoidance hat.

Cycling is quite safe, certainly no more dangerous than 99% of other activities which require no helmet.

Stupid law.

DS

If you ride on the road with motorvehicles driven by distracted, incompetent, aggressive and arrogant people I disagree strongly.
No a helmet doesn't necessarily address or remove all of that risk but it isn't safe.

I have had multiple dangerous episodes and close misses, know multiple people who have been hit and injured and several who have been killed, riding their bikes on the road.

[Thoglette]

So do we really have a real MHL or just something that is occasionally policed and already fading away as infrastructure gets better and more people are biking anyway

In the NT and WA it's fading away. A bit like that slippery start to a criminal career: J-walking

But in NSW, Operation Pedro, in one day, raised $33,175 on 104 helmet fines

Meanwhile, in a month in NSW (Jan 2020), speed cameras raised $382,000. Of course, no-one in NSW speeds, so that's hardly surprising that they're giving out less than 100 tickets a day. Across the whole state.

If you really want to talk about a lack of enforcement, let's talk about minimum passing distance laws

[BobtheBuilder]

If you ride on the road with motorvehicles driven by distracted, incompetent, aggressive and arrogant people I disagree strongly.
No a helmet doesn't necessarily address or remove all of that risk but it isn't safe.

I have had multiple dangerous episodes and close misses, know multiple people who have been hit and injured and several who have been killed, riding their bikes on the road.

The same would be true of walking, jogging, gardening or even chess-playing done on a road.
And like cycling, wearing a helmet when undertaking those activities is going to have a marginal effect on your safety.

[warthog1]

If you ride on the road with motorvehicles driven by distracted, incompetent, aggressive and arrogant people I disagree strongly.
No a helmet doesn't necessarily address or remove all of that risk but it isn't safe.

I have had multiple dangerous episodes and close misses, know multiple people who have been hit and injured and several who have been killed, riding their bikes on the road.

The same would be true of walking, jogging, gardening or even chess-playing done on a road.
And like cycling, wearing a helmet when undertaking those activities is going to have a marginal effect on your safety.

Yep. Not safe on the road.
Most of those activities you list do not commonly take place on the road.

The likelihood of a headstike is high in the event of a collision.
Given I have had an ICH post headstrike with the road whilst wearing a helmet I'll take that "marginal" improvement in my safety.
I am not advocating mandatory use I am just saying road cycling with motorvehicles is not safe.

[DavidS]

This.

I refer to it as a fine avoidance hat.

Cycling is quite safe, certainly no more dangerous than 99% of other activities which require no helmet.

Stupid law.

DS

If you ride on the road with motorvehicles driven by distracted, incompetent, aggressive and arrogant people I disagree strongly.
No a helmet doesn't necessarily address or remove all of that risk but it isn't safe.

I have had multiple dangerous episodes and close misses, know multiple people who have been hit and injured and several who have been killed, riding their bikes on the road.

I ride on the road every day on the way to work, did you actually listen to that video and hear the probability of having a serious accident on a bicycle? Hint - it was very very low.

I'll tell you what makes roads safer for bicycles - more bicycles on the roads.

I'll tell you what leads to less bicycles on the roads - mandatory helmet laws.

If the government was serious about safety for cyclists they wouldn't mandate "protection" for when an accident happens, they would do something about how some road users won't share the road with other road users. Bicycles are road vehicles and we need more education on how bicycles have the same right to space on the roads as cars. Instead the governments in Australia decide to mandate largely useless protection in the form of a helmet which isn't really effective against a tonne of car and only protects the head and nothing else.

Helmet laws are also responsible for spreading the idea that somehow cycling is particularly dangerous - it isn't and I'll tell you something else: cycling is healthy, it is actually good for you.

DS

[DavidS]

Time for this video again I reckon:



DS

[Cyclophiliac]

This.

I refer to it as a fine avoidance hat.

Cycling is quite safe, certainly no more dangerous than 99% of other activities which require no helmet.

Stupid law.

DS

If you ride on the road with motorvehicles driven by distracted, incompetent, aggressive and arrogant people I disagree strongly.
No a helmet doesn't necessarily address or remove all of that risk but it isn't safe.

I have had multiple dangerous episodes and close misses, know multiple people who have been hit and injured and several who have been killed, riding their bikes on the road.

Agreed. Furthermore, what's painfully ironic about the situation in Australia is that helmet laws contributed to making cycling less safe, because it decimated cyclist numbers, and so the safety in numbers effect seen overseas isn't present here. In many European countries, cycling is far more popular, and so motorists are more aware of (and more considerate of) cyclists. Australia's obsession with oversized cars that are safe for their occupants and extra dangerous for everyone else makes this situation even worse.

[warthog1]

I ride on the road every day on the way to work, did you actually listen to that video and hear the probability of having a serious accident on a bicycle? Hint - it was very very low.

I'll tell you what makes roads safer for bicycles - more bicycles on the roads.

I'll tell you what leads to less bicycles on the roads - mandatory helmet laws.

If the government was serious about safety for cyclists they wouldn't mandate "protection" for when an accident happens, they would do something about how some road users won't share the road with other road users. Bicycles are road vehicles and we need more education on how bicycles have the same right to space on the roads as cars. Instead the governments in Australia decide to mandate largely useless protection in the form of a helmet which isn't really effective against a tonne of car and only protects the head and nothing else.

Helmet laws are also responsible for spreading the idea that somehow cycling is particularly dangerous - it isn't and I'll tell you something else: cycling is healthy, it is actually good for you.

DS

Our neighbour in Alice was run over and killed whilst cycling.
A boy who shared the same year group at my son's school was run over and killed by a substance affected garbage truck driver.
Here is what the car looked like after the texting driver hit a cycling mate and killed him.


Multiple other people I know have been struck by motor vehicles whilst cycling.
Our experiences and opinions clearly differ.
My experience is that road cycling is not safe.

[DavidS]

Your anecdotes do not constitute evidence.

DS

[DavidS]

I ride to work every day, have done so for over 10 years, I ride maybe 70% on the road. I have never been hit by a car.

Is that evidence that the roads are totally safe? Of course not.

I hope you wear a life jacket within 100m of a large body of water.

DS

[warthog1]

Agreed. Furthermore, what's painfully ironic about the situation in Australia is that helmet laws contributed to making cycling less safe, because it decimated cyclist numbers, and so the safety in numbers effect seen overseas isn't present here. In many European countries, cycling is far more popular, and so motorists are more aware of (and more considerate of) cyclists. Australia's obsession with oversized cars that are safe for their occupants and extra dangerous for everyone else makes this situation even worse.

Sure and radio shock jocks and right wing media running down cyclists as "cockroches" or whatever other negative label they choose to give us.

More cyclists may mean we are treated more considerately eventually but it ain't happening quickly and tbh I am slowly bailing by riding more gravel.
When I do cycle on the road I choose my routes and times with care.
With respect to traffic I feel safer in a bunch.
Yes more certainly is safer there.

[warthog1]

Your anecdotes do not constitute evidence.

DS

They are not anecdotes.
They were people.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-23/ ... /100237896

https://cyclingtips.com/2019/11/driver- ... 2000-fine/

[warthog1]

I ride to work every day, have done so for over 10 years, I ride maybe 70% on the road. I have never been hit by a car.

Is that evidence that the roads are totally safe? Of course not.

I hope you wear a life jacket within 100m of a large body of water.

DS

I have north of 150k road kms. Rode to work for years too.
Multiple nears misses, including a bus driver who passed me with cms clearance at 80kmh on an otherwise deserted road.
Caught up with that bustard and lost my temper whilst re-educating him.
He was unrepentant.

[trailgumby]

I ride to work every day, have done so for over 10 years, I ride maybe 70% on the road. I have never been hit by a car.

Is that evidence that the roads are totally safe? Of course not.

I hope you wear a life jacket within 100m of a large body of water.

DS

I'd say that means you should be very grateful. While I disagree that helmets should be compulsory, and acknowledge their limitations - they are simply not built to protect against being hit by a car - calling the stories of the people we know personally and grieve "anecdotes" is demeaning and insensitve. I hope you didn't mean that.

[BobtheBuilder]

Most of those activities you list do not commonly take place on the road.

Quite true, but they are as risky as cycling, some more risky. And, like cycling, most of the risk is not from head injury.

And, like cycling, they are not inherently based on busy, dangerous roads. In most countries, cyclists are people like me - utility cyclists who don't have an obsession with speed and risk, who just enjoy being on the pedals or simply want to get from A to B. And most of that happens in safer environments, at lower speeds and with a lower risk appetite.

But, sure, if you want to expose yourself to risk, and you think a helmet will significantly change the risk equation (a debatable proposition), I won't stop you. But, for the rest of us, it shouldn't be law. It clearly diminishes cycling rates and leads to far poorer public health outcomes compared to the debatable reduction in head injury.

Personally, I don't buy the "personal freedom" argument - I think, for instance, seat belts should be compulsory, as they lead to a clear, dramatic improvement in personal and public health, and masks lead to a dramatic improvement in public health outcomes (and a small, but significant, personal improvement). Helmets don't.

[BobtheBuilder]

They are not anecdotes.
They were people.

In terms of rational, scientific argument that is anecdotal evidence. That does not diminish the personal loss and pain from these horrible events, but it also does not increase their evidential value.
I've ridden without a helmet for decades and never got hurt. That also doesn't prove that what I'm doing is safe.

[g-boaf]

Lower speed limits and heavy enforcement against drivers doing close passes so that the road environment feels safer will help.

I've said this numerous times but nobody cares. Might as well leave things as they are, better still, ban bicycles from the road completely and be done with it.

I don't know, the whole thing goes around in circles and nothing ever gets done, and some of the anti-MHL people shoot down anything else that isn't related to getting rid of MHL. The lack of unity in cycling community does us no favours.

[tpcycle]

If it is too dangerous to cycle on the road without wearing a bicycle helmet and a bicycle helmet only offers minimal protection in the event of a crash with a motor vehicle. Does that mean that wearing a bicycle helmet induces people to indulge in riskier behaviour than if they were not wearing one? Thus making them less safe?

I know I've fallen into this trap - on dark rainy slippery nights I've thought I should be wearing one - then I pull myself up and think "no, that's not right". I should just be extremely cautious and not take risks that I might otherwise have done, helmet or no helmet.