New campaign to repeal bicycle helmet laws.

Around 20 years ago the federal government effectively blackmailed the states into introducing mandatory bicycle helmet laws, by threatening to withhold road funding to states that failed to comply. Since that time the use of bicycles has declined dramatically. Geoff Mcleod of Helmetfreedom.org has produced the following video on the issue along with the statement below it:

 

This is an issue that's gaining momentum as people see our bike share failing. I ask you, and your party to help repeal our nanny-state helmet laws and bring us in line with the rest of the world. Australia is only among 2% of nations (Australia, NZ, United Arab Emirates) who have who have unfair mandatory helmet laws for adult riders.

I appeal to your common sense and hope you will support a repeal of this law. This may even save our taxpayer-funded shared bike scheme and help ease traffic on our roads and the help the environment.

Bicycle helmet laws have done nothing to change injury statistics. The head to writs injury trend was never effected by these laws. The laws were only successful in stopping a generation from using bikes. For More information, visit this site.

via jimunro.blogspot.com

Comments

[Brett]

1.

People should be free to choose; but you would be a fool not to wear a helmet. I ride, and race, and have seen people spared head injury because they were wearing a helmet.

[Oldman]

2.

Helmets should be compulsory for people like Andy:

http://imgur.com/fwCwG

[TerjeP]

3.

We don't force pedestrians to wear helmets even though they would be safer if they did. Maybe we should start by making it mandatory for pedestrians under 18.

;-)

[Barry]

4.

Ahhh we live in a FREEEEEEE society ,,,,,,, yeah right.. governed by the retards who seem to have a fetish for telling people what to do ,,,,,,ha ha ha ha ,,, how boring can life become???

[R..M. Griffin]

5.

I would support anything which would make it easier for cyclists to kill themselves. There are far too many of them. Before helmets were made compulsory it was easier to spot the potentially most selfish cyclists. They were the ones wearing helmets.

[John Angelico]

6.

As with most advertising, this 60-second snippet leaves us with some dangerous half-truths, and fails to address some uniquely Australian issues - like distance.

Has cycling "failed" in Australia? I agree that publicly funded cycling stuff (free city bikes) has bombed, but ask yourself about the power of the cycling lobby, linked with environmental smugness.

However, I am not one for cycling from Melbourne to Sydney, or for carrying loads by cycle.

Instead of comparing ourselves with the more compact European lifestyle, how about comparing cycling in North America?

[kraka]

7.

he point is John, I am an adult and should be free to choose whether I wear a helmut or not. I would choose to as a point of interest but I should have that choice. If i don't and get hit and injured in such a way that a helmut would have saved me-well that is my fault-pure and simple.My whole generation rode around with helmuts and you just made sure you didn't put yourself in dangerous situations. Unfortunately in the left utopian dream, nanny always knows better and it's always someone else's fault.

[Tom]

8.

Helmet* ^

[annette]

9.

Yes I have been stopped twice in the last month for not wearing a helmet,naughty me...couldve died of horrific injuries, which I had previously avoided for years before the helmet rules were introduced!!But then again I was once pulled over for eating a PIE....whilst driving! Makes me feel sorry for the Police....dealing with such petty matters all to raise money for our inept leaders!!

[John Angelico]

10.

Kraka, I agree, especially about the problem of the nanny state.

It sounds like we both grew up in the same era - when we were taught about duties and responsibilities instead of "rights".

I was more picking up the problem that the adverts actually misuse international comparisons and take liberties with what are essentially half-truths.

PS: I think you meant to type "without helmets" :-)

[RossCO]

11.

Push bike riders need better and safer bike roads, separate from cars and pedestrians. They also need to pay a licence and rego to be entitled to use said bike roads.
The situation we have at the moment is not sustainable - only last week a friend injured himself avoiding female pedestrians.

[Give Me Freedom!]

12.

As long as they ban lycra, I don't care what they do with helmets.

As for me, I think helmets prevent some low speed impact injuries BUT they diminish the ability to hear approaching cars to the rear due to the wind noise they produce near the ears. This, IHMO, makes them dangerous.

The best thing for road safety would be to licence adult riders who commute (ie peak hours) and require a licence plate (fabric hi-vis vest maybe). Allow any copper who pulls them over to slash their tyres and make them walk.

[steve]

13.

If you want to help repeal bicycle helmet laws please consider showing your support on facebook.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-Mandatory-Bicycle-Helmet-Laws/299708740046667

[steve]

14.

Australia is closely related to the UK, Europe and Asia - most countries in these regions have no helmet laws the comparison is quite reasonable, and most of the USA does not have helmet laws for adults either. Australian /NZ are almost the only country's in the world with helmet laws on and off road for everyone with no exceptions (except for residents of the NT).

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-Mandatory-Bicycle-Helmet-Laws/299708740046667

[Grantley]

15.

I say this as one who rode two wheels...but with a motor in the frame.

Helmets are a necessary safety feature, I think that has been proven to death (pardon the pun). However when visiting Holland some years ago it was very apparent that the Dutch do not think them necessary, hell, some states in the US dont even make motor bike helmets mandatory!!.

The issue around cyclists wearing helmets is one of enforcement....if you are going to have the law...then enforce it. Police could start outside any school at knock off time.

However, if Police do not want to enforce the wearing of helmets (& I have seen police drive past cyclists not wearing helmets) claiming that they are too busy with real crime...then repeal the wearing of helmets as a law and make it a focus of education in taking responsibility for one's own actions and the consequences thereof.

But DO NOT leave it as law and then ignore it...that sends all sorts of wrong messages to the very young.

[Arthur Dent]

16.

Where does the "nanny state" start ?
Seat belts?
Helmets on motor cycles?
Recreational drugs?
Speed in built up areas?
Speed on open roads?
Just wondering......

[Give Me Freedom!]

17.

Arthur Dent, you can't drive after imbibing a pan-galactic gargle blaster.

I think that it just nannyish :-)

[John Mc]

18.

The nanny state starts when laws are being passed to 'protect' a typical adult from their own decisions, rather than protect that adult from others.

Speed in built up areas clearly poses a risk to others and no one is claiming that is the nanny state but you. Speed on open roads is a matter of agreed risk that should be decided by democratic consent. When it's decreed by bureaucrats without consulting the people who pay for and use the roads, then you might say you've started into a nanny state.