Friday, January 16, 2015


Almost home to this ... WTF! (sent to me just now by BN4)

What is it with Australia that we're so committed to our bicycle helmets and our bicycle helmet laws? $$$

Why have we thrown sanity out the window? $$$

When will we wake up to the fact that helmets and Australian correlating mandatory dumbness are just marketing strategies? $$$

What makes us Australians such gutless wonders with regards to using bicycles on the roads for tranpsort? $$$

When did we become so timid and scaredy cat-like? $$$

And when will we wrest using bicycles back from Aussie men, Aussie politicians and Aussie media? $$$



  1. If it is a two-way street, why don't they show motorists wearing helmets?

    And the drawing is very crappy. Is it a little girl wearing a middle-aged or senior lady's pearl necklace, or an infantilized adult woman?

    It will be fun to creatively vandalize that hideous blight.

  2. It's very patronising - and like lagatta says, where's the 'two-way street' balance?

    However, perhaps it's time to focus on what might happen in Freemantle where relaxing the helmet law is being considered.

    1. Fingers crossed MHLs are banished in Freemantle - it would have to get the ball rolling everywhere else too, wouldn't it?

  3. Doesn't this show how daft the law is?

    quote: Mr Benz said when cyclists were injured on WA roads, one of the most common scenarios was that the rider was hit by a car travelling in the same direction.

    "Just recently, a man who was wearing a helmet, wearing a safety vest and had lights on his bike got hit by a car and was killed," he said.

    "When a car collides with a cyclist, no matter if they are wearing a helmet or not, they are probably going to die.

    We had some cases last year of cyclists - and pedestrians - being mowed down by heavy trucks, and killed, even if they were wearing foam hats. They were squashed. And of course the pedestrians weren't wearing helmets (darned pedestrians).

    There is no reason on earth for Mr Benz not to support a change in a law that is useless for safety and discourages cycling - unless he sells helmets, that is.

  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. Good on you Sue. Love the blog! Mandatory helmet laws are just another attempt to make cycling less accessible to the average Australian. I've heard the most ridiculous arguments for helmet laws from people who should know better. One 'educated' woman asserted that cyclists who ride without a helmet are a public nuisance and put other road users in danger! I couldn't believe my ears. A few years ago a friend of mine was killed by a car while she crossed a road on her bike. Of course the first question on most people asked was. "Was she wearing a helmet?". Nobody bothered to ask any questions about the culpability of the driver... I also wonder proper investigations are made when a cyclist without a helmet is killed. That's pretty sick!
    Thanks for creating this blog. Definitely worth keeping the debate alive.