Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Cycling - all the way to GBK

I've 'touched-down' in Sydney; and not a moment too soon...I'm just in time for a 'touch of art'!!

FUNTIMES!! - always a pleasure following Saskia around, and lovely to meet Gilbert of ARTcycle fame - so make sure you check for a gallery near you - they're 'popping-up' all over the place!!!

However notwithstanding the beauty & serenity that is evident across Sydney as a result, arriving back in 'Helmet-law land' has reminded me yet again that mandatory standards for bicycle helmets make no sense - in part due to two elements:

1st element - a cyclist must exhibit compliance by wearing a helmet

2nd element - a helmet must exhibit compliance by complying with the standard

...therefore anyone riding a bicycle ought to be stopped in order for their helmet to be inspected - after all just because you're wearing a helmet doesn't automatically make you compliant & law abiding...

...imagine - there could be dozens of law-breakers out there!!!

'Checkpoint Helmet' would be just the ticket; literally!!!


  1. I had Study Tour visitors from Australia here a couple of weeks back who told me that they've known the police actually to stop cyclists in order to check that the helmets that they're wearing are compliant. I find that quite incredible. Do they really have nothing better to do ?

  2. David - Of course they do, but those people fight back. Bullies never pick on other bullies if they can avoid it. Even if you win it's painful.

    So what can make a cop's life painful without resorting to violence?

    Sue is showing one of the paths; use their own force against them and bury them in resistance that creates paperwork.

  3. David,

    First of all, I love your blog and read it all the time. Secondly, during recent blitzes here in Melbourne the police have been checking that helmets are fitted correctly and are compliant with current standards. They have even changed the wording in their media releases by stating that cyclists must be wearing a "properly-fitted" helmet at all times, which means you can be fined over $100 even if you are wearing one. I come across many poorly-fitted or ill-sized helmets on a daily basis, so Sue is absolutely correct in saying that there are many law-breakers out there.

  4. On Tuesday, my daughter & I plus another cyclist were in the left hand lane at traffic lights (Redfern Police Station ones) when the car waiting next to us in the right hand lane was 'rear-ended'. The damage was excessive but luckily all car-occupants were ok and able to swap the usual 'accident-type' details etc etc - meanwhile us cyclists couldn't help but remark we were glad he hadn't approached the lights in our lane!

    What gets me is that the law of our land provides for such a 'near-catastrophic' incident to be left to insurance companies to sort out without police assistance at police discretion, which is in stark contrast to the expectations of the strict liability provisions of helmet nakedness and society's bloodthirsty quest to punish such aberrant behaviour - sigh