https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DPBTMV3

Again with all research they are locking the respondents in without starting a broader scape and narrowing it down.

A banana and an orange for breakfast and a cuppa.
Bushfires making the morning a bit hazy.

don’t tell anyone
M(V^2), gravity also’n dangerous elsewhere
same traversing
birth canal, cranial deformation, world enter
rb’n here we are
‘em dents’n bumps a phrenological wonder

:-)

roughbarked said:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DPBTMV3

Again with all research they are locking the respondents in without starting a broader scape and narrowing it down.

What broader scope would you like?

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DPBTMV3

Again with all research they are locking the respondents in without starting a broader scape and narrowing it down.

What broader scope would you like?

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

transition said:

don’t tell anyone
M(V^2), gravity also’n dangerous elsewhere
same traversing
birth canal, cranial deformation, world enter
rb’n here we are
‘em dents’n bumps a phrenological wonder

:-)

:)

I believe I have ever posted to a bike helmet thread ;

Ian said:

I believe I have ever posted to a bike helmet thread ;

bike helmets wont save you… neither will that lycra…

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DPBTMV3

Again with all research they are locking the respondents in without starting a broader scape and narrowing it down.

What broader scope would you like?

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

Eh?

The questions asked if you are pro or anti (or something in between) and how often you ride a bike.

As surveys go, I thought it was pretty good.

Ian said:

I believe I have ever posted to a bike helmet thread ;

I’d say you have at least once.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Ian said:

I believe I have ever posted to a bike helmet thread ;

I’d say you have at least once.

= don’t believe more than once

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

What broader scope would you like?

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

Eh?

The questions asked if you are pro or anti (or something in between) and how often you ride a bike.

As surveys go, I thought it was pretty good.

I did too, but I didn’t like the providing the email address for further details.. I didn’t do that bit.

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DPBTMV3

Again with all research they are locking the respondents in without starting a broader scape and narrowing it down.

What broader scope would you like?

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

clearly they only want the views of people who ride currently and will be most likely affected by any change in the laws

Arts said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

Eh?

The questions asked if you are pro or anti (or something in between) and how often you ride a bike.

As surveys go, I thought it was pretty good.

I did too, but I didn’t like the providing the email address for further details.. I didn’t do that bit.

me neither.

I’m pro-helmet by the way.

Having an ex-friend who didn’t survive the impact between head and kerb probably has something to do with that.

Arts said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

What broader scope would you like?

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

clearly they only want the views of people who ride currently and will be most likely affected by any change in the laws

Seems to me that anyone with friends or relatives who ride a bike has a legitimate interest, even if they don’t ride themselves.

>I’m pro-helmet by the way.

i’m pro anything that does as or similar to craniums do.

lot of disincentives to slowing out there I notice

one of the safest places to be is in bed, short of ones house burning down.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Arts said:

roughbarked said:

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

clearly they only want the views of people who ride currently and will be most likely affected by any change in the laws

Seems to me that anyone with friends or relatives who ride a bike has a legitimate interest, even if they don’t ride themselves.

I don’t think they are disputing that, but their views on it are unclear, what is clear is that for this survey they are looking for a particular respondent.

Arts said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Arts said:

clearly they only want the views of people who ride currently and will be most likely affected by any change in the laws

Seems to me that anyone with friends or relatives who ride a bike has a legitimate interest, even if they don’t ride themselves.

I don’t think they are disputing that, but their views on it are unclear, what is clear is that for this survey they are looking for a particular respondent.

bicycle network is not pro mandatory

ChrispenEvan said:

Arts said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Seems to me that anyone with friends or relatives who ride a bike has a legitimate interest, even if they don’t ride themselves.

I don’t think they are disputing that, but their views on it are unclear, what is clear is that for this survey they are looking for a particular respondent.

bicycle network is not pro mandatory

beside the point, they are asking for respondents who ride bicycles and not people who know people who ride bicycles, rb’s original gripe

Arts said:

ChrispenEvan said:

Arts said:

I don’t think they are disputing that, but their views on it are unclear, what is clear is that for this survey they are looking for a particular respondent.

bicycle network is not pro mandatory

beside the point, they are asking for respondents who ride bicycles and not people who know people who ride bicycles, rb’s original gripe

I missed that. I just quickly scanned the opening page, then did the survey (and having done the survey, I can’t get back to the 1st page). I didn’t know what rb’s gripe was.

>I didn’t know what rb’s gripe was.

i’d guess he’s like me likes to jump on the bike and ride to the corner store, without putting on a helmet, minus the proxy license.

it’s an immature fondness from times past, a reminiscence, I have them all the time.

transition said:

>I didn’t know what rb’s gripe was.

i’d guess he’s like me likes to jump on the bike and ride to the corner store, without putting on a helmet, minus the proxy license.

it’s an immature fondness from times past, a reminiscence, I have them all the time.

I understand.
Our family has been in & around boats for generations & were really peeved when licenses became compulsory.

Tamb said:

transition said:

>I didn’t know what rb’s gripe was.

i’d guess he’s like me likes to jump on the bike and ride to the corner store, without putting on a helmet, minus the proxy license.

it’s an immature fondness from times past, a reminiscence, I have them all the time.

I understand.
Our family has been in & around boats for generations & were really peeved when licenses became compulsory.

personally i’m going with immature fondness, being grownup’s repressive.

secretiveness too, I like that.

Pro Helmets,
having two good friends’
whose life has been ruined the
moment their heads hit the pavement.

Arts said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

What broader scope would you like?

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

clearly they only want the views of people who ride currently and will be most likely affected by any change in the laws

But that’s the whole point of the discussion. That having to wear a helmet will stop many who love to ride and have never needed one before the nannies got at it. There is no place for one to progress to this point in the survey.

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

What broader scope would you like?

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

Eh?

The questions asked if you are pro or anti (or something in between) and how often you ride a bike.

As surveys go, I thought it was pretty good.

they don’t allow you to say that you stopped riding bikes because of helmets.

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

Eh?

The questions asked if you are pro or anti (or something in between) and how often you ride a bike.

As surveys go, I thought it was pretty good.

they don’t allow you to say that you stopped riding bikes because of helmets.

But then if they had a similar survey about your use of roundabouts, most people would fail.

Does wearing a helmet detract from riding a bike ?
Surely when death or brain damage can result its better to be safe than sorry

• Does wearing a helmet detract from riding a bike ?

As far as I can tell the only reason for not wearing one is because people don’t want to look “uncool”…

Anyway as far as it goes, like gay marriage, I don’t give a shit if you want to. The fact is I have lived all my life without it and I don’t need to change now.

However if it was legal to ride a bike without a helmet, I’d ride one again.

Cymek said:

Does wearing a helmet detract from riding a bike ?
Surely when death or brain damage can result its better to be safe than sorry

I have hearing difficulties and helmets cause more problems.
Never worried me in the past tpo go without a helmet.

furious said:

• Does wearing a helmet detract from riding a bike ?

As far as I can tell the only reason for not wearing one is because people don’t want to look “uncool”…

The excuse mentioned by La Trioli was that people didn’t want to mess up their hair.

Which is as rubbish as most of her opinions.

furious said:

• Does wearing a helmet detract from riding a bike ?

As far as I can tell the only reason for not wearing one is because people don’t want to look “uncool”…

yeah, got to find it, get the cobwebs out, dust it off, carry it with you, tie it on nice.

doubt uncool’s it, though if a hippy sort like rb you’d probably like ya hair all out, natural.

transition said:

furious said:

• Does wearing a helmet detract from riding a bike ?

As far as I can tell the only reason for not wearing one is because people don’t want to look “uncool”…

yeah, got to find it, get the cobwebs out, dust it off, carry it with you, tie it on nice.

doubt uncool’s it, though if a hippy sort like rb you’d probably like ya hair all out, natural.

best put a wink with that

;-)

roughbarked said:

furious said:

• Does wearing a helmet detract from riding a bike ?

As far as I can tell the only reason for not wearing one is because people don’t want to look “uncool”…

The excuse mentioned by La Trioli was that people didn’t want to mess up their hair.

Which is as rubbish as most of her opinions.

Hmm a whole area to be exploited bling flavoured bike helmets

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

Eh?

The questions asked if you are pro or anti (or something in between) and how often you ride a bike.

As surveys go, I thought it was pretty good.

they don’t allow you to say that you stopped riding bikes because of helmets.

Yes they do, there’s boxes for you to put in reasons.

• Hmm a whole area to be exploited bling flavoured bike helmets

The problem is they are still associated with the perjorative “stack hats” and people, especially older types, see them as some clunky contraption that envelops the head whereas these days they are much more lighter with a lot more thought in their design…

furious said:

• Hmm a whole area to be exploited bling flavoured bike helmets

The problem is they are still associated with the perjorative “stack hats” and people, especially older types, see them as some clunky contraption that envelops the head whereas these days they are much more lighter with a lot more thought in their design…

The stack hats do give the best protection but the others would be adequate

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

furious said:

• Does wearing a helmet detract from riding a bike ?

As far as I can tell the only reason for not wearing one is because people don’t want to look “uncool”…

The excuse mentioned by La Trioli was that people didn’t want to mess up their hair.

Which is as rubbish as most of her opinions.

Hmm a whole area to be exploited bling flavoured bike helmets

This be true.

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Eh?

The questions asked if you are pro or anti (or something in between) and how often you ride a bike.

As surveys go, I thought it was pretty good.

they don’t allow you to say that you stopped riding bikes because of helmets.

Yes they do, there’s boxes for you to put in reasons.

OK I’ll go back and have a look at it again. but I was pissed off that they didn’t ask me the right questions. For example I rode a bike every day for forty odd years until they brought in the helmet law. I hung the bike up afterwards.

I can’t even wear a hat to keep the sun off, let alone a helmet.

Princess Di didn’t wear one..
She dead

furious said:

• Hmm a whole area to be exploited bling flavoured bike helmets

The problem is they are still associated with the perjorative “stack hats” and people, especially older types, see them as some clunky contraption that envelops the head whereas these days they are much more lighter with a lot more thought in their design…

and the light helmets.. do they save lives?

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

they don’t allow you to say that you stopped riding bikes because of helmets.

Yes they do, there’s boxes for you to put in reasons.

OK I’ll go back and have a look at it again. but I was pissed off that they didn’t ask me the right questions. For example I rode a bike every day for forty odd years until they brought in the helmet law. I hung the bike up afterwards.

I can’t even wear a hat to keep the sun off, let alone a helmet.

Is your head very large and you can’t find hats that fit

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Yes they do, there’s boxes for you to put in reasons.

OK I’ll go back and have a look at it again. but I was pissed off that they didn’t ask me the right questions. For example I rode a bike every day for forty odd years until they brought in the helmet law. I hung the bike up afterwards.

I can’t even wear a hat to keep the sun off, let alone a helmet.

Is your head very large and you can’t find hats that fit

Mainly, they won’t stay on my head. My hair is quite long and springy. I have to be more afraid of choking myself to wear one.

anything smaller than a car sorta gets squeezed off the roads anyway, of the psychology, in fact to some extent anything smaller, pedestrians and children too, are somewhat squeezed out of public spaces.

all that fuel/energy propelling fast moving large objects makes for a substantial uncompromising indifference.

aggressive, even hostile, seen that way.

transition said:

>I didn’t know what rb’s gripe was.

i’d guess he’s like me likes to jump on the bike and ride to the corner store, without putting on a helmet, minus the proxy license.

it’s an immature fondness from times past, a reminiscence, I have them all the time.

yeah… i remember driving around in cars without seatbeats… those were the days my friends…

I remember doing EVAs without all these fancy “spacesuits” you have to wear these days. A deep breath and a handful of HTFU was fine for us.

dv said:

I remember doing EVAs without all these fancy “spacesuits” you have to wear these days. A deep breath and a handful of HTFU was fine for us.

In Fireball XL5 they just take an oxygen pill and they’re on their way.

dv said:

I remember doing EVAs without all these fancy “spacesuits” you have to wear these days. A deep breath and a handful of HTFU was fine for us.

What’s an EVA?

Michael V said:

dv said:

I remember doing EVAs without all these fancy “spacesuits” you have to wear these days. A deep breath and a handful of HTFU was fine for us.

What’s an EVA?

EVA

I wear a bike helmet on my scooter. Draws crabs if you don’t and it’s not a biggie. I used to ride a motorbike and wore a helmet then as well.

dv said:

Michael V said:

dv said:

I remember doing EVAs without all these fancy “spacesuits” you have to wear these days. A deep breath and a handful of HTFU was fine for us.

What’s an EVA?

EVA

Thanks.

Cymek said:

Does wearing a helmet detract from riding a bike ?
Surely when death or brain damage can result its better to be safe than sorry

I agree… I mean, I ride quite regularly, sometimes on roads and sometimes on cycle paths, sometimes for recreation or sport and sometimes to get down the shop to buy milk… I always wear a helmet… it hangs on the handlebars of my bike ready to put on, I wear it if I have my hair up or down, and I take it off to go into the shop. I really don’t give a shit about what people think of my hair while I am buying milk, but I do care if I damage my skull/brain as a long term consequence. I don’t get the problems people come up with… it’s easy, convenient, lightweight, simple to use and could prevent some serious injury…. much like a seat belt.

roughbarked said:

Arts said:

roughbarked said:

Well let’s start with are you pro or anti and why. Before we make sure that only people who currently ride bicycles can answer.

clearly they only want the views of people who ride currently and will be most likely affected by any change in the laws

But that’s the whole point of the discussion. That having to wear a helmet will stop many who love to ride and have never needed one before the nannies got at it. There is no place for one to progress to this point in the survey.

sure there is.. I think it was one of the questions actually

Ive survived two crashes with cars without a helmet, i tend to roll whilst protecting my head. Ive been flung from a motorcycle without breaking anything the most spectacular with me sommersaulting about 10 feet in the air and landing and rolling ( just winded myself) but without the helmet there would have been a problem.

Bike helmets in australia are a problem – your head cooks in them in the sun.

Generally bike riding in australia is a death sentence, theres zero respect from anyone on the road – cold steel is your guarantee for limited respect.

One option is for air to be pumped into the helmet

wookiemeister said:

Ive survived two crashes with cars without a helmet, i tend to roll whilst protecting my head. Ive been flung from a motorcycle without breaking anything the most spectacular with me sommersaulting about 10 feet in the air and landing and rolling ( just winded myself) but without the helmet there would have been a problem.

Bike helmets in australia are a problem – your head cooks in them in the sun.

Generally bike riding in australia is a death sentence, theres zero respect from anyone on the road – cold steel is your guarantee for limited respect.

One option is for air to be pumped into the helmet

or to wear one of those helmets designed for air flow…

wookiemeister said:

Ive survived two crashes with cars without a helmet, i tend to roll whilst protecting my head. Ive been flung from a motorcycle without breaking anything the most spectacular with me sommersaulting about 10 feet in the air and landing and rolling ( just winded myself) but without the helmet there would have been a problem.

Bike helmets in australia are a problem – your head cooks in them in the sun.

Generally bike riding in australia is a death sentence, theres zero respect from anyone on the road – cold steel is your guarantee for limited respect.

One option is for air to be pumped into the helmet

Hot heads.

wookiemeister said:

Ive survived two crashes with cars without a helmet, i tend to roll whilst protecting my head. Ive been flung from a motorcycle without breaking anything the most spectacular with me sommersaulting about 10 feet in the air and landing and rolling ( just winded myself) but without the helmet there would have been a problem.

Bike helmets in australia are a problem – your head cooks in them in the sun.

Generally bike riding in australia is a death sentence, theres zero respect from anyone on the road – cold steel is your guarantee for limited respect.

One option is for air to be pumped into the helmet

I spent far too long in the brain injury unit at Shenton park to not wear a helmet…

My helmet has big slashes across it to allow air flow. Or at least heat to get out.

Arts said:

roughbarked said:

Arts said:

clearly they only want the views of people who ride currently and will be most likely affected by any change in the laws

But that’s the whole point of the discussion. That having to wear a helmet will stop many who love to ride and have never needed one before the nannies got at it. There is no place for one to progress to this point in the survey.

sure there is.. I think it was one of the questions actually

I can’t be arsed doing the survey.

I didn’t like wearing a bike helmet when the law was first introduced, Didn’t like the feel of it on my head. But I got one anyway. It has not stopped me from riding. I ride quite a bit.

wookiemeister said:

Ive survived two crashes with cars without a helmet

And it hasn’t affected you…

and to say I’m never riding again because of helmets seems weird. You either like riding or you don’t, but riders don’t care either way if someone chooses to not ride and I don’t think the bike care that much either.

If you are concerned just wear a bandana and flip the bird whenever you see the cops ( they will respect this statement of individuality)

wookiemeister said:

If you are concerned just wear a bandana and flip the bird whenever you see the cops ( they will respect this statement of individuality)

I don’t carry a bird when I’m riding.

But I do wear a helmet. It’s not uncomfortable and it’s well ventilated.

Michael V said:

wookiemeister said:

If you are concerned just wear a bandana and flip the bird whenever you see the cops ( they will respect this statement of individuality)

I don’t carry a bird when I’m riding.

But I do wear a helmet. It’s not uncomfortable and it’s well ventilated.

I wear a helmet, which is why I am able to type this now.

dv said:

Michael V said:

wookiemeister said:

If you are concerned just wear a bandana and flip the bird whenever you see the cops ( they will respect this statement of individuality)

I don’t carry a bird when I’m riding.

But I do wear a helmet. It’s not uncomfortable and it’s well ventilated.

I wear a helmet, which is why I am able to type this now.

Yes but you go in for fancy stunt riding.

Personally I’ve argued against compulsory helmets in the past, and would certainly retain that view in regard to the bike-friendly countries of Europe.

But maybe it’s true that cycling will never be as safe, or as popular, here in car-crazy Australia.

You need need a pack of 18650 lithium cells that powers a turbine that pumps air through a tube about an inch diameter. This would keep the head cool without extra weight on the helmet.

It was the crash that gave me the bulging cock eyed look

I personally think that people who don’t want to wear a bike helmet shouldn’t have to. If there’s nothing in there to protect, why bother?

btm said:

I personally think that people who don’t want to wear a bike helmet shouldn’t have to. If there’s nothing in there to protect, why bother?

Because you end up paying for them until they croak

In this case its a necessary evil

diddly-squat said:

transition said:

>I didn’t know what rb’s gripe was.

i’d guess he’s like me likes to jump on the bike and ride to the corner store, without putting on a helmet, minus the proxy license.

it’s an immature fondness from times past, a reminiscence, I have them all the time.

yeah… i remember driving around in cars without seatbeats… those were the days my friends…

Sigh.

dv said:

Michael V said:

wookiemeister said:

If you are concerned just wear a bandana and flip the bird whenever you see the cops ( they will respect this statement of individuality)

I don’t carry a bird when I’m riding.

But I do wear a helmet. It’s not uncomfortable and it’s well ventilated.

I wear a helmet, which is why I am able to type this now.

Yes but you are silly enough to dive over your handlebars.

Arts said:

and to say I’m never riding again because of helmets seems weird. You either like riding or you don’t, but riders don’t care either way if someone chooses to not ride and I don’t think the bike care that much either.

The point is that the bike riders association believes that people are afraid to ride their bike if they forgot their helmet.

Bubblecar said:

Personally I’ve argued against compulsory helmets in the past, and would certainly retain that view in regard to the bike-friendly countries of Europe.

But maybe it’s true that cycling will never be as safe, or as popular, here in car-crazy Australia.

I feel safer on a bike than I do in a car. I can jump off the bike and take it off the road to get away from idiots. It is nigh on impossible to do it with a car.

Here you go rb…

Nanny State Australia Is Out of Control, And It Is Getting Worse

Gone are the attractive and laidback days of old – introducing a country that’s become over-governed to the point of hilarity.

Picture your father in the 1980s. His shirt’s actually a singlet and his shorts ball-baringingly short – much like the shrift he gives to the idea of rules, regulations and moderation.

He doesn’t wear a bicycle helmet, he can drink where and what he likes, and he’d probably blow the smoke from a Winfield Red right in your face were you to suggest otherwise.

Fleeing this ruined remnant of a once- great Australian day out, he’d find a country that’s put its reputation for being laidback permanently to rest – a country where inflatable pools deeper than 30cm must have a fence built around them. With a self-latching gate. By law.

Your dad would struggle with the simple fact that over 35 short years, we’ve surrendered our sense of personal accountability – that is, the right to choose the best course of action (and accept the consequences) based on experience, fact and individual preference. Instead, seemingly willingly, we’ve traded it for intrusive levels of government regulation.

We’re now one of only a handful of nations that mandates helmet-wearing by cyclists of all ages. Depending where you live, drinking on public land is either illegal or requires a permit. Despite incredible technological and mechanical advancements that have made cars safer than ever before, speed limits continue to be cut, while dogs can no longer rest their heads out a car window when travelling. Playing games of schoolyard tip, meanwhile, alongside performing cartwheels and handstands, is increasingly being prohibited.

In Victoria vacuuming is banned after 10pm, and, in May of this year, a group of Queensland residents were told they’d be fined if they continued to cut the overgrown grass of a local park –

Ian said:

Here you go rb…

Nanny State Australia Is Out of Control, And It Is Getting Worse

Gone are the attractive and laidback days of old – introducing a country that’s become over-governed to the point of hilarity.

Picture your father in the 1980s. His shirt’s actually a singlet and his shorts ball-baringingly short – much like the shrift he gives to the idea of rules, regulations and moderation.

He doesn’t wear a bicycle helmet, he can drink where and what he likes, and he’d probably blow the smoke from a Winfield Red right in your face were you to suggest otherwise.

Fleeing this ruined remnant of a once- great Australian day out, he’d find a country that’s put its reputation for being laidback permanently to rest – a country where inflatable pools deeper than 30cm must have a fence built around them. With a self-latching gate. By law.

Your dad would struggle with the simple fact that over 35 short years, we’ve surrendered our sense of personal accountability – that is, the right to choose the best course of action (and accept the consequences) based on experience, fact and individual preference. Instead, seemingly willingly, we’ve traded it for intrusive levels of government regulation.

We’re now one of only a handful of nations that mandates helmet-wearing by cyclists of all ages. Depending where you live, drinking on public land is either illegal or requires a permit. Despite incredible technological and mechanical advancements that have made cars safer than ever before, speed limits continue to be cut, while dogs can no longer rest their heads out a car window when travelling. Playing games of schoolyard tip, meanwhile, alongside performing cartwheels and handstands, is increasingly being prohibited.

In Victoria vacuuming is banned after 10pm, and, in May of this year, a group of Queensland residents were told they’d be fined if they continued to cut the overgrown grass of a local park –

I do mean that there should always be a within reason clause.

Ian said:

Here you go rb…

Nanny State Australia Is Out of Control, And It Is Getting Worse

Gone are the attractive and laidback days of old – introducing a country that’s become over-governed to the point of hilarity.

Picture your father in the 1980s. His shirt’s actually a singlet and his shorts ball-baringingly short – much like the shrift he gives to the idea of rules, regulations and moderation.

He doesn’t wear a bicycle helmet, he can drink where and what he likes, and he’d probably blow the smoke from a Winfield Red right in your face were you to suggest otherwise.

Fleeing this ruined remnant of a once- great Australian day out, he’d find a country that’s put its reputation for being laidback permanently to rest – a country where inflatable pools deeper than 30cm must have a fence built around them. With a self-latching gate. By law.

Your dad would struggle with the simple fact that over 35 short years, we’ve surrendered our sense of personal accountability – that is, the right to choose the best course of action (and accept the consequences) based on experience, fact and individual preference. Instead, seemingly willingly, we’ve traded it for intrusive levels of government regulation.

We’re now one of only a handful of nations that mandates helmet-wearing by cyclists of all ages. Depending where you live, drinking on public land is either illegal or requires a permit. Despite incredible technological and mechanical advancements that have made cars safer than ever before, speed limits continue to be cut, while dogs can no longer rest their heads out a car window when travelling. Playing games of schoolyard tip, meanwhile, alongside performing cartwheels and handstands, is increasingly being prohibited.

In Victoria vacuuming is banned after 10pm, and, in May of this year, a group of Queensland residents were told they’d be fined if they continued to cut the overgrown grass of a local park –

Toxic nostalgia.

LITERALLY toxic nostalgia.

An old motorsport saying – “If you’ve got a $10 head then you need a $10 helmet.”
Wear a helmet, FFS it’s not difficult to understand.

Spiny Norman said:

An old motorsport saying – “If you’ve got a $10 head then you need a $10 helmet.”
Wear a helmet, FFS it’s not difficult to understand.

When they make a helmet that fits my head, will stay on and doesn’t interfere with my perception of traffic and traffic noises or provide me with custom fit, then maybe.

dv said:

Ian said:

Here you go rb…

Nanny State Australia Is Out of Control, And It Is Getting Worse

Gone are the attractive and laidback days of old – introducing a country that’s become over-governed to the point of hilarity.

Picture your father in the 1980s. His shirt’s actually a singlet and his shorts ball-baringingly short – much like the shrift he gives to the idea of rules, regulations and moderation.

He doesn’t wear a bicycle helmet, he can drink where and what he likes, and he’d probably blow the smoke from a Winfield Red right in your face were you to suggest otherwise.

Fleeing this ruined remnant of a once- great Australian day out, he’d find a country that’s put its reputation for being laidback permanently to rest – a country where inflatable pools deeper than 30cm must have a fence built around them. With a self-latching gate. By law.

Your dad would struggle with the simple fact that over 35 short years, we’ve surrendered our sense of personal accountability – that is, the right to choose the best course of action (and accept the consequences) based on experience, fact and individual preference. Instead, seemingly willingly, we’ve traded it for intrusive levels of government regulation.

We’re now one of only a handful of nations that mandates helmet-wearing by cyclists of all ages. Depending where you live, drinking on public land is either illegal or requires a permit. Despite incredible technological and mechanical advancements that have made cars safer than ever before, speed limits continue to be cut, while dogs can no longer rest their heads out a car window when travelling. Playing games of schoolyard tip, meanwhile, alongside performing cartwheels and handstands, is increasingly being prohibited.

In Victoria vacuuming is banned after 10pm, and, in May of this year, a group of Queensland residents were told they’d be fined if they continued to cut the overgrown grass of a local park –

Toxic nostalgia.

LITERALLY toxic nostalgia.

Winfield red would be toxic if you could still buy them.

FWIW I have never used a helmet when ride a bicycle or a horse although I probably would do (mostly) if I was starting out again.

The article that I posted is partly in jest but I agree with it in general. I don’t swim between the flags, or pay to get into those back-beaches in national parks. I take the signed the speed limit as a loose suggestion only unless it’s a well policed area etc. If I start being busted and fined I may consider changing my behaviour. The cops can’t be everywhere.

I’m surprised that rb doesn’t do likewise.

Ian said:

FWIW I have never used a helmet when ride a bicycle or a horse although I probably would do (mostly) if I was starting out again.

The article that I posted is partly in jest but I agree with it in general. I don’t swim between the flags, or pay to get into those back-beaches in national parks. I take the signed the speed limit as a loose suggestion only unless it’s a well policed area etc. If I start being busted and fined I may consider changing my behaviour. The cops can’t be everywhere.

I’m surprised that rb doesn’t do likewise.

Hey, I can ride my bike anywhere around home with no worries of virtually ever seeing a cop but I cannot ride my bike to work and thus save all that energy and pollution plus give myself life sustaining exercise.

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

Ian said:

Here you go rb…

Nanny State Australia Is Out of Control, And It Is Getting Worse

Gone are the attractive and laidback days of old – introducing a country that’s become over-governed to the point of hilarity.

Picture your father in the 1980s. His shirt’s actually a singlet and his shorts ball-baringingly short – much like the shrift he gives to the idea of rules, regulations and moderation.

He doesn’t wear a bicycle helmet, he can drink where and what he likes, and he’d probably blow the smoke from a Winfield Red right in your face were you to suggest otherwise.

Fleeing this ruined remnant of a once- great Australian day out, he’d find a country that’s put its reputation for being laidback permanently to rest – a country where inflatable pools deeper than 30cm must have a fence built around them. With a self-latching gate. By law.

Your dad would struggle with the simple fact that over 35 short years, we’ve surrendered our sense of personal accountability – that is, the right to choose the best course of action (and accept the consequences) based on experience, fact and individual preference. Instead, seemingly willingly, we’ve traded it for intrusive levels of government regulation.

We’re now one of only a handful of nations that mandates helmet-wearing by cyclists of all ages. Depending where you live, drinking on public land is either illegal or requires a permit. Despite incredible technological and mechanical advancements that have made cars safer than ever before, speed limits continue to be cut, while dogs can no longer rest their heads out a car window when travelling. Playing games of schoolyard tip, meanwhile, alongside performing cartwheels and handstands, is increasingly being prohibited.

In Victoria vacuuming is banned after 10pm, and, in May of this year, a group of Queensland residents were told they’d be fined if they continued to cut the overgrown grass of a local park –

That looks like it was written by wookie.

On an off night.

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

My point exactly. For sure there is a need to have the greater numbers of children cyclists on the roads be better protected from the greater number of cars on the roads. particularly since we don’t have the increased police presence to stop people being complete megalomaniacs behind the wheel.

However, it should not necessarily be that if you have survived riding a bike on the roads for forty years that a helmet will make you more conscious of your safety.

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

Most of the things attributed to the nanny-state make good economic sense.

• I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

Tell us more about this anecdote…

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

I don’t think embrace is the right word, Tolerate is probably more like it.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

Most of the things attributed to the nanny-state make good economic sense.

Yes. The biggest driver.

roughbarked said:

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

My point exactly. For sure there is a need to have the greater numbers of children cyclists on the roads be better protected from the greater number of cars on the roads. particularly since we don’t have the increased police presence to stop people being complete megalomaniacs behind the wheel.

However, it should not necessarily be that if you have survived riding a bike on the roads for forty years that a helmet will make you more conscious of your safety.

Are we allowed to shoot you like a horse if you come off and hit your head?

Witty Rejoinder said:

roughbarked said:

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

My point exactly. For sure there is a need to have the greater numbers of children cyclists on the roads be better protected from the greater number of cars on the roads. particularly since we don’t have the increased police presence to stop people being complete megalomaniacs behind the wheel.

However, it should not necessarily be that if you have survived riding a bike on the roads for forty years that a helmet will make you more conscious of your safety.

Are we allowed to shoot you like a horse if you come off and hit your head?

Absolutely.

roughbarked said:

However, it should not necessarily be that if you have survived riding a bike on the roads for forty years that a helmet will make you more conscious of your safety.

How did that seatbelt work out for ya?

party_pants said:

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

I don’t think embrace is the right word, Tolerate is probably more like it.

We are a tolerant bunch.

I bet this thread is full of anecdotes.

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

However, it should not necessarily be that if you have survived riding a bike on the roads for forty years that a helmet will make you more conscious of your safety.

How did that seatbelt work out for ya?

that’s different.

;-)

Witty Rejoinder said:

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

Most of the things attributed to the nanny-state make good economic sense.

More to the point, they make good sense to maximise overall well-being.

• I bet this thread is full of anecdotes.

Aye, I’ve been riding without a helmet since just after WWI and I’ve been fine, all them head knocks add character…

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

However, it should not necessarily be that if you have survived riding a bike on the roads for forty years that a helmet will make you more conscious of your safety.

How did that seatbelt work out for ya?

Seatbelts are excellent. I’ve always given them approx 97% in an accident. Doesn’t mean that you should be forced to wear it for five minutes of driving though. I could point out thta usually a flat tyre will never happen until you actually go on a longer drive somewhere.

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

Don’t know about that.

Amongst countries with a similar heritage, i.e. N European, I’d say we would be about mid-range.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

Most of the things attributed to the nanny-state make good economic sense.

More to the point, they make good sense to maximise overall well-being.

Overall is fine but if we are encouraged to wear helmets not by fining you for the crime but by not paying the insurance. A bit like the are you a smoker question in the life insurance policy.

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

However, it should not necessarily be that if you have survived riding a bike on the roads for forty years that a helmet will make you more conscious of your safety.

How did that seatbelt work out for ya?

Seatbelts are excellent. I’ve always given them approx 97% in an accident. Doesn’t mean that you should be forced to wear it for five minutes of driving though. I could point out thta usually a flat tyre will never happen until you actually go on a longer drive somewhere.

The clunk click every trip is to reinforce a behaviour so it is automatic, so people don’t do thinking like it’s only 5 minutes and before they know it they are 100 km down the road.

First it’s catches then it’s hatches.

furious said:

• I bet this thread is full of anecdotes.

Aye, I’ve been riding without a helmet since just after WWI and I’ve been fine, all them head knocks add character…

In fact, I’ve never hit my head when falling off a pushbike. I do owe my life to a man who gave me his helmet when I was to ride pillion to carry the case of beer back. I do mean it should be about making sense.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

Don’t know about that.

Amongst countries with a similar heritage, i.e. N European, I’d say we would be about mid-range.

Northern European nannyism tends to be tempered by more progressive politics than Australia.

Two cases in point: sale of nicotine e-cigarette liquid banned in Oz, same sex marriage banned in Oz.

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

How did that seatbelt work out for ya?

Seatbelts are excellent. I’ve always given them approx 97% in an accident. Doesn’t mean that you should be forced to wear it for five minutes of driving though. I could point out thta usually a flat tyre will never happen until you actually go on a longer drive somewhere.

The clunk click every trip is to reinforce a behaviour so it is automatic, so people don’t do thinking like it’s only 5 minutes and before they know it they are 100 km down the road.

First it’s catches then it’s hatches.

I remember laughing at people who put blinkers on out in a dusty paddock. I disagree with people who say to me OK it is a school zone but we are not in the time period. I tell them there is always a risk so it is a good habit to travel at safe speeds where there is possible people movement.

Bubblecar said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Bubblecar said:

I have to agree that Australians tend to embrace nannyism rather more eagerly than most peoples.

Don’t know about that.

Amongst countries with a similar heritage, i.e. N European, I’d say we would be about mid-range.

Northern European nannyism tends to be tempered by more progressive politics than Australia.

Two cases in point: sale of nicotine e-cigarette liquid banned in Oz, same sex marriage banned in Oz.

BT corn banned in many places but in Aus, who either cares or gives a fuck?

roughbarked said:

Bubblecar said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Don’t know about that.

Amongst countries with a similar heritage, i.e. N European, I’d say we would be about mid-range.

Northern European nannyism tends to be tempered by more progressive politics than Australia.

Two cases in point: sale of nicotine e-cigarette liquid banned in Oz, same sex marriage banned in Oz.

BT corn banned in many places but in Aus, who either cares or gives a fuck?

Oh well, have fun picking your sour cherries :)

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

Bubblecar said:

Northern European nannyism tends to be tempered by more progressive politics than Australia.

Two cases in point: sale of nicotine e-cigarette liquid banned in Oz, same sex marriage banned in Oz.

BT corn banned in many places but in Aus, who either cares or gives a fuck?

Oh well, have fun picking your sour cherries :)

It is a bit weird in Australia. We are a very diverse lot and when we get away from prying eyes we do what we like and if it looks hard we’ll bribe some officials.

roughbarked said:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DPBTMV3

Again with all research they are locking the respondents in without starting a broader scape and narrowing it down.

How about insisting that all bicycle riders wear motorcycle gear – full leathers and motorcycle helmet. ;-)

mollwollfumble said:

roughbarked said:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DPBTMV3

Again with all research they are locking the respondents in without starting a broader scape and narrowing it down.

How about insisting that all bicycle riders wear motorcycle gear – full leathers and motorcycle helmet. ;-)

Everyone would quit. They already prefer lycra.

What about insurance for all push bike riders ?

It stands to reason that for our safety and security having push bike rider insurance will make things safer – not to mention it will be much safer for children as well.

mollwollfumble said:

How about insisting that all bicycle riders wear motorcycle gear – full leathers and motorcycle helmet. ;-)

I did read that there’s good data to suggest that deaths and injuries would be significantly reduced if car drivers wore crash helmets.

wookiemeister said:

What about insurance for all push bike riders ?

It stands to reason that for our safety and security having push bike rider insurance will make things safer – not to mention it will be much safer for children as well.

How about a universal insurance scheme, like extending the NDIS or something?

pommiejohn said:

mollwollfumble said:

How about insisting that all bicycle riders wear motorcycle gear – full leathers and motorcycle helmet. ;-)

I did read that there’s good data to suggest that deaths and injuries would be significantly reduced if car drivers wore crash helmets.

Pedestrians too.

party_pants said:

wookiemeister said:

What about insurance for all push bike riders ?

It stands to reason that for our safety and security having push bike rider insurance will make things safer – not to mention it will be much safer for children as well.

How about a universal insurance scheme, like extending the NDIS or something?

And we could all have chips inserted into us

When we get to a certain age they send the police to kill us for being unproductive

Bubblecar said:

pommiejohn said:

mollwollfumble said:

How about insisting that all bicycle riders wear motorcycle gear – full leathers and motorcycle helmet. ;-)

I did read that there’s good data to suggest that deaths and injuries would be significantly reduced if car drivers wore crash helmets.

Pedestrians too.

In the future everyone will need to wear hi vis ( for our sagety of course), the only exception will be managers.

Those not wearing hi vis and ppe will need to be whipped for their own safety and security.

wookiemeister said:

Bubblecar said:

pommiejohn said:

I did read that there’s good data to suggest that deaths and injuries would be significantly reduced if car drivers wore crash helmets.

Pedestrians too.

In the future everyone will need to wear hi vis ( for our sagety of course), the only exception will be managers.

Managers will have to wear bullet-proof underwear.