NO HELMETS

[tl1000gussie]

There was an article in my local newspaper, eastleigh and southampton area echo, with a guy on a cruiser, who got himself dilibaratly booked for not wearing a helmet.

He is now going to court to prove its an infringment of his civil liberties!!!!!!!

Dont know what I think, but I believe silks do not have to wear a hewlmet as they cant get the helmet over there turbans, (or is that an urban myth)
If they dont wear one why should he, but I believe a trip to motorbike crash at rotten.com may change his mind.

His argument was that he would only be driving slowly and a helmet made his visability worse, and without a helmet he felt more vulnarable so wouldnt go so fast, and new safety gear, helmets, gloves, leathers and back protectors give people a false sense of safety so they ride faster.

comments please!

[a j]

Yep i think thats right in law, that if you wear a turban you dont have to wear a lid. I remember that from when i did my test quite a while ago, dont know if it applies now though?

I guess you can take the same view as if people wear leathers or not. Bodies not much good without the head and vice versa? Soory thats a bit grim! I think if i didnt wear a lid i'd proberly not go over 20mph!

[Davel]

Can you get full face turbans then with visors?

[FourWheelDrift]

tl1000gussie said:

His argument was that he would only be driving slowly and a helmet made his visability worse, and without a helmet he felt more vulnarable so wouldnt go so fast, and new safety gear, helmets, gloves, leathers and back protectors give people a false sense of safety so they ride faster. comments please!

I think someone should tell him most bikers get hit rather than hit others. It takes 2 to tango.

He was probably dropped on his head as a child anyway.

[marki]

In Denmark you can ride without a helmet , the thing is you need to sign or accept that "if" you chuck it down the road while not wearing a helmet you are responsible for hospital costs

[danhay]

If he's arguing on safety grounds I think he's onto a non starter. I would have thought he'd have a better chance with the human rights/discrimination angle?

[954 girlie]

There are two angles on this debate
-Freedom of Choice
-Social Responsibility

It's a tough one really innit? on one hand we should be free to say/do/wear/ what we like when we are going about our own business.
On the other, I don't particularly want to witness someones brains smashed in / or assist in the payment of medical expenses thru taxes for someone who has been so negligent.
I dunno where I stand on that one really

How about the fence for the moment??

Yukky thought innit?

[Leadfoot]

I think you should have the freedom to decide. I wouldn't ride without a lid (been there,crashed,got scar) but I can't see why an adult should be denied the right to make a reasoned decision of their own, no matter how stupid it is, so long as nobody else can be hurt by it.

BTW - sitting on fence = splinters in a5se!

[danhay]

I can see your point Leadfoot i.e. that responsible adults should be able to decide.

However, when someone is killed or brain damaged in an accident, even if they're the only ones involved, then their loved ones will suffer. For this reason, I'm all for the compulsory wearing of helmets.

(Except on BMW C1s!)

[A J]

Good point danhay. Where do you stop though? Ned Kelly body armour?

[bor]

marki said:

In Denmark you can ride without a helmet , the thing is you need to sign or accept that "if" you chuck it down the road while not wearing a helmet you are responsible for hospital costs

This seems like the best compromise to me - freedom of choice but paying for the consequences. But does it then apply to other dangerous sports like mountaineering, hang gliding, parachuting and that really fast walking?

Tricky......

Regards

BOR (not totally convinced helmetless C1 rider)

[smeagol]

I believe it should be personal choice as the hypocrasy of you MUST wear a helmet but no need for anything else is beyond me.

Its just like the seat belt laws I used my seatbelt before it became law. I would wear a helemt even if it wasn't the law.

I simply do not believe we should have laws to protect people from themselves cos where does it end?

[tl1000gussie]

bor said:

marki said: In Denmark you can ride without a helmet , the thing is you need to sign or accept that "if" you chuck it down the road while not wearing a helmet you are responsible for hospital costs This seems like the best compromise to me - freedom of choice but paying for the consequences. But does it then apply to other dangerous sports like mountaineering, hang gliding, parachuting and that really fast walking? Tricky...... Regards BOR (not totally convinced helmetless C1 rider)

I agree now that seems fair.

However if someones smokes, drinks a lot (george best) do they then pay as well?, risk assesssment and all that. Remove the national health and get everyone to have their own insuyrance and pay the premiums for riding without a helmet or smoking 60 capston full strenghts a day.

[Steve_T]

That is a good attitude. Do want you like, but don't come moaning afterwards if what you did was stupid, you knew it and you suffered the consequences. At least the signature gets around the problem of people trying to duck responsiblity afterwards. Chances of that happening here ... well considering we've not been able to sort the dark visor issue

Steve.

[bor]

tl1000gussie said:

I agree now that seems fair. However if someones smokes, drinks a lot (george best) do they then pay as well?, risk assesssment and all that. Remove the national health and get everyone to have their own insuyrance and pay the premiums for riding without a helmet or smoking 60 capston full strenghts a day.

You need an individual quote for your own level of risk. Sample questions would be;

1.Do you ride a motorcycle ?
2.Do you wear a helmet ?
3.Do you smoke ?
4.Do you drink too much ?
5.Do you drink too little ?
6.Do you eat burgers ?
7.Do you have unprotected sex ?
a)with humans
b)with animals

Your quote € xxxxx

Young blokes would be standing around in bars bragging about how much their insurance costs. Old guys would be saying "that's nothing. When I was your age...... etc
The NHS would be awash with money as people wildly exagerate how dangerous their lifestyle is in a vain bid to make themselves more interesting.
A series of cheap game shows would be developed where contestants guess the insurance costs for random memebers of the public, another idea..(cont p94)

Its a good idea. I like it.

Regards,

BOR (really high quote, OH yes)

[Davel]

Excuse my ignorance but what is the issue about dark visors then?

Are they legal or not - or is that the issue?

[Steve_T]

From memory visor may only be tinted to allow 50% of light through, where goggles maybe tinted to allow as little as 18% of light through. Yet it seems fine to wear whatever sunglasses you like. I'd far rather wear a visor which is designed for the job than sunglasses that may shatter in my eyes should I have an off.

The BiB have kit to test how much light a visor will let through, not sure what the implications are if you're caught wearing one. It would be rather more sensible for them to enforce say the same standard as your driving test, i.e. read a number plate at 20m with your visor down.

Steve.

[kareng]

For the record...Regarding TURBANS, Sardar Devinder Singh Parmar was the man who rode a bike without wearing a Turban outside 10 Downing Street! He won his argument by pointing out that Sikhs, under Queens Regulations, were allowed to wear them when fighting for the British, so it follows they are considered a safety lid.

[zorro]

Saw a guy in my town riding with a turban with no helmet, guess they're exempt then.

WRT above.

>> Edited by zorro on Sunday 21st March 16:56

[DennisTheMenace]

Ive got a piece of paper here and ive just come up with a full face turban with beard hole

I wouldnt even ride my bike down the road without a skid lid , come summer time when you have the joys of suicidal bees slamming into yer lid !!