My husband and I have just returned to Australia

[Biker]

My husband and I have just returned to Australia after almost a year of

travelling around the world. We had our bicycles with us and used them
to cycle in three continents, concluding our trip with over 3000 km of
cycling around Southern Africa (Zimbabawe, Mozambique & South Africa).
Nowhere did we experience any problems; to the contrary - travelling on

bikes seems to arouse people's curiosity and we had many friendly chats

with the locals.
We arrived back in Australia and thought we would stop over in WA for a

month or so, to catch up with friends in Perth and cycle down to Albany

& Esperance and back, before continuing on home to the East Coast.
It only took one little, slow ride on the beach bike path from Duncraig

to Cottesloe for us to be pulled over by two gun-carrying police on
mountainbikes. Reason? Australia's favourite: No helmets!
Upon learning we were not WA residents, the police decided not to issue

us with traffic infringement notices - probably too much hard work,
having to chase payment from Qeensland! Instead, we were ordered to
walk
back - that is, 25 kilometers! Naturally, we refused to do this, and
were subsequently formally placed under arrest for disobeying police.
One of the cops attempted to call a paddy wagon on his two-way radio,
so, he explained, we could be taken to the station, fingerprinted and
locked up in the watchhouse for the time being. He was, however,
usuccessful in getting through (comforting thought for victims of any
possible real emergency), so they let our tires down and let us go,
wishing us a "nice walk back to Duncraig" and warning us not to attempt

to pump the tyres up and continue riding, or we really would be taken
into custody.
What a homecoming! I must say it's great to be back in Australia and
only through travelling overseas one can fully appreciate the quality
of
life we Australians generally take for granted. However, this damned
helmet law is one major blot on that lifestyle. Nowhere else have we
been hassled for peacefully riding along a road, minding our own
business. No other country we visited penalizes its citizens for
exercising their bodies and using an environmentally friendly mode of
transport at the same time - not even some of the semi-dictotorial
regimes!
Having had a read through aus.bicycle, I notice the "great debate" is
still raging - and the authorities are still taking no notice of what
failure this law, this infringement of civil liberties, has been. The
helmet zealots are still bleating their naive message of "if it saves
one child's life, blah, blah, blah..."
In some ways, it is disappointing to see how easily some people are
brainwashed into believing whatever the authorities want them to
believe...
Alas, I don't think we'll be doing that Albany bike trip after all. Who

wants to be constantly hassled? Hiring a car, maybe? Now, there's an
idea I'm sure would fix the helmet problem - as it has already fixed
it,
once and for all, for many ex-cycling commuters. Shame it's nowhere
near
as much fun...

[Ray Peace]

Biker wrote:
> My husband and I have just returned to Australia after almost a year of
>
> travelling around the world. We had our bicycles with us and used them
> to cycle in three continents, concluding our trip with over 3000 km of
> cycling around Southern Africa (Zimbabawe, Mozambique & South Africa).
> Nowhere did we experience any problems; to the contrary - travelling on
>
> bikes seems to arouse people's curiosity and we had many friendly chats
>
> with the locals.
> We arrived back in Australia and thought we would stop over in WA for a
>
> month or so, to catch up with friends in Perth and cycle down to Albany
>
> & Esperance and back, before continuing on home to the East Coast.
> It only took one little, slow ride on the beach bike path from Duncraig
>
> to Cottesloe for us to be pulled over by two gun-carrying police on
> mountainbikes. Reason? Australia's favourite: No helmets!
> Upon learning we were not WA residents, the police decided not to issue
>
> us with traffic infringement notices - probably too much hard work,
> having to chase payment from Qeensland! Instead, we were ordered to
> walk
> back - that is, 25 kilometers! Naturally, we refused to do this, and
> were subsequently formally placed under arrest for disobeying police.
> One of the cops attempted to call a paddy wagon on his two-way radio,
> so, he explained, we could be taken to the station, fingerprinted and
> locked up in the watchhouse for the time being. He was, however,
> usuccessful in getting through (comforting thought for victims of any
> possible real emergency), so they let our tires down and let us go,
> wishing us a "nice walk back to Duncraig" and warning us not to attempt
>
> to pump the tyres up and continue riding, or we really would be taken
> into custody.
> What a homecoming! I must say it's great to be back in Australia and
> only through travelling overseas one can fully appreciate the quality
> of
> life we Australians generally take for granted. However, this damned
> helmet law is one major blot on that lifestyle. Nowhere else have we
> been hassled for peacefully riding along a road, minding our own
> business. No other country we visited penalizes its citizens for
> exercising their bodies and using an environmentally friendly mode of
> transport at the same time - not even some of the semi-dictotorial
> regimes!
> Having had a read through aus.bicycle, I notice the "great debate" is
> still raging - and the authorities are still taking no notice of what
> failure this law, this infringement of civil liberties, has been. The
> helmet zealots are still bleating their naive message of "if it saves
> one child's life, blah, blah, blah..."
> In some ways, it is disappointing to see how easily some people are
> brainwashed into believing whatever the authorities want them to
> believe...
> Alas, I don't think we'll be doing that Albany bike trip after all. Who
>
> wants to be constantly hassled? Hiring a car, maybe? Now, there's an
> idea I'm sure would fix the helmet problem - as it has already fixed
> it,
> once and for all, for many ex-cycling commuters. Shame it's nowhere
> near
> as much fun...
>
Greetings,
Lovely. When doing a major climb in summer my helmet comes off anyway.
If they want to cite me for dying of heat exhaustion, fine. They've got
the whole debate arse around as usual. It isn't the helmet that saves
you, it's the 1.5 tonnes of metal doing 100 k/mh that kills you.
Regards,
Ray.

[Absent Husband]

Hi,

Sounds like you had a wonderful time cycling through Africa!!
Fantastic!!

As for the helmet thing... I am pro-helmet, but I won't recycle
arguments that we've all heard a thousand times before.

Given that its the law - is it THAT much of a hassle to wear one?? So
much so that you'd actually ditch your bikes and drive, rather than
wear a helmet?! Seems kind of an extreme reaction to me...

Abby

[GPLama]

Sorry to hear.. however, helmets = law..

Bit harsh about letting your tyres down.. I'd be laying some smack down GTA
style if they did that to me (though, I always wear a helmet)... 25km walk
or a free ride back in the divy van? Give me the divy van any day! :)



cheers,
GPL
:no, not the hot coffee mod style smack.. well maybe if they were h0t female
cops:

[Walrus]

Is it that uncomfortable to wear? It's the law, I don't understand why
you don't just save yourself the hassle and wear one.


--
Walrus

[EuanB]

Biker Wrote:
>
> to Cottesloe for us to be pulled over by two gun-carrying police on
> mountainbikes. Reason? Australia's favourite: No helmets!
> ....
> No other country we visited penalizes its citizens for
> exercising their bodies and using an environmentally friendly mode of
> transport at the same time - not even some of the semi-dictotorial
> regimes!
>

Ask yourself this question about some of the semi-dictatorial regimes
you've been under; could you have lost your life legally for infracting
on what you may consider an innocuous law?

I don't agree with the actions of the police, what they did was rather
petty, but at the end of the day you wilfully broke the law. Wear the
consequences of your actions.

I don't agree with compulsion but I agree even less with willful law
breaking. You knew what you were doing was wrong so you have no
excuse.


--
EuanB

[Humbug]

On 06/10/05 at 05:59:40 Biker somehow managed to type:

> My husband and I have just returned to Australia after almost a year
> of
>
> travelling around the world. We had our bicycles with us and used them
> to cycle in three continents, concluding our trip with over 3000 km of
> cycling around Southern Africa (Zimbabawe, Mozambique & South Africa).
> Nowhere did we experience any problems; to the contrary - travelling
> on

Sounds good....


>
> bikes seems to arouse people's curiosity and we had many friendly
> chats
>
> with the locals.
> We arrived back in Australia and thought we would stop over in WA for
> a
>
> month or so, to catch up with friends in Perth and cycle down to
> Albany
>
> & Esperance and back, before continuing on home to the East Coast.
> It only took one little, slow ride on the beach bike path from
> Duncraig
>
> to Cottesloe for us to be pulled over by two gun-carrying police on
> mountainbikes. Reason? Australia's favourite: No helmets!
> Upon learning we were not WA residents, the police decided not to
> issue

<snip>


Yawn....helmet debate....

You, and loads of others, may not agree with it but the law here is
that you wear a helmet whilst riding a bike on the road / cycle path /
footpath / etc.

Buy an el-cheapo helmet and wear it, problem solved...

--
Humbug

[Bleve]

Biker wrote:
> My husband and I have just returned to Australia after almost a year of
>


troll troll troll your boat ...

[GPLama]

"Bleve" wrote in message ...
>
> Biker wrote:
>> My husband and I have just returned to Australia after almost a year of
>>
>
>
> troll troll troll your boat ...
>

lol!


cheers,
GPL

[David M]

Biker wrote:
> life we Australians generally take for granted. However, this damned
> helmet law is one major blot on that lifestyle. Nowhere else have we
> been hassled for peacefully riding along a road, minding our own
> business. No other country we visited penalizes its citizens for
> exercising their bodies and using an environmentally friendly mode of
> transport at the same time - not even some of the semi-dictotorial
> regimes!

Last week my wife came off her bike on some loose road surface. She was
maybe doing 25kph at the most, but hit the ground hard with her head.
Her helmet was absolutely fsck'd, crushed in some areas, broken clean
through along several lines. It was only *just* held together by the
thin plastic shell.

If she'd been one of the anti-helmet brigade, she'd now be chewing up
untold amounts of money as a head injured patient, possibly ICU,
possibly permanently incapacitated...which iself would be an
unneccesary impost on the health system and thus the taxpayer.

> Alas, I don't think we'll be doing that Albany bike trip after all.

Well you're the idiot then. Either that or you're a troll who never
rode 3000km anywhere.

Cheers
David M

[David M]

Biker wrote:
> Alas, I don't think we'll be doing that Albany bike trip after all. Who
>
> wants to be constantly hassled? Hiring a car, maybe?

Nah, you wouldn't want to have to wear that seat belt now, would you.

Cheers
David M

[EuanB]

David M Wrote:
>
> If she'd been one of the anti-helmet brigade, she'd now be chewing up
> untold amounts of money as a head injured patient, possibly ICU,
> possibly permanently incapacitated...which iself would be an
> unneccesary impost on the health system and thus the taxpayer.
> Unlikely. Brusing, abraision and perhapse a mild concussion. That's
all a helmet's good for.


--
EuanB

[EuanB]

David M Wrote:
> Biker wrote:
> > Alas, I don't think we'll be doing that Albany bike trip after all.
> Who
> >
> > wants to be constantly hassled? Hiring a car, maybe?
>
> Nah, you wouldn't want to have to wear that seat belt now, would you.
>
> Cheers
> David M
The difference is that accident statistics support seatbelt
compulsion. There is no data that supports helmet compulsion, just
anecdotal `evidence' such as your story about you wife.


--
EuanB

[Graeme Dods]

On 5 Oct 2005 17:31:14 -0700, David M wrote:

> Last week my wife came off her bike on some loose road surface. She was
> maybe doing 25kph at the most, but hit the ground hard with her head.
> Her helmet was absolutely fsck'd, crushed in some areas, broken clean
> through along several lines. It was only *just* held together by the
> thin plastic shell.

A helmet that is crushed has offered *some* protection as the crushing has
absorbed some impact energy. A helmet that has broken through or cracked
has failed as cracking absorbs very little energy.

> If she'd been one of the anti-helmet brigade, she'd now be chewing up
> untold amounts of money as a head injured patient, possibly ICU,
> possibly permanently incapacitated...which iself would be an
> unneccesary impost on the health system and thus the taxpayer.

She could also "possibly" have experienced just a nasty bump to the head,
or at worst, concussion. The only way to know is to repeat the accident
with identical conditions except minus the helmet. It's simple to use the
emotive "he/she could have been killed/crippled" but there's little
evidence to back up how effective helmets are (particularly as they're
designed to protect from impacts at far less than the speed that most
cyclists travel).

By the way, I've come across very few people who are in the "anti-helmet
brigade". What I've written above may make me sound anti-helmet. I'm not (I
wear one myself, even in countries without compulsory helmet laws). The
group you're thinking of are more likely to be the "anti-compulsory helmet
law brigade". Less catchy I know, but more accurate.

Graeme

(smack!- must not enter helmet discussions must not enter helmet
discussions - smack!) :)

[HellenWheels]

On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 10:05:17 +1000, EuanB
> wrote:

>
>Biker Wrote:
>>
>> to Cottesloe for us to be pulled over by two gun-carrying police on
>> mountainbikes. Reason? Australia's favourite: No helmets!
>> ....
>> No other country we visited penalizes its citizens for
>> exercising their bodies and using an environmentally friendly mode of
>> transport at the same time - not even some of the semi-dictotorial
>> regimes!
>>
>
>Ask yourself this question about some of the semi-dictatorial regimes
>you've been under; could you have lost your life legally for infracting
>on what you may consider an innocuous law?

Are you comparing Australia with Singapore, where they put people to death
for shoplifting, or whatever? I'm not following you. 'lost your life
legally...' - what the heck does that mean?

Also, I'm surprised that nobody's considered it might have been an
oversight - they'd been out of the country for a while - maybe they didn't
-have- helmets with them and had not yet re-oriented to Aussie law. Sheesh.
It's pretty harsh to force someone to walk 15 miles back to the car - I
don't believe their chief would have been very happy with that
'punishment'. In fact, I'd be calling my lawyer and claiming damages for
being forced to walk an unreasonable distance (I've got a bad leg, for one
thing, but I ride just fine).

-Wheels


>I don't agree with the actions of the police, what they did was rather
>petty, but at the end of the day you wilfully broke the law. Wear the
>consequences of your actions.
>
>I don't agree with compulsion but I agree even less with willful law
>breaking. You knew what you were doing was wrong so you have no
>excuse.

[EuanB]

Walrus Wrote:
> Is it that uncomfortable to wear?
>
In forty degree heat, you bet they're uncomfortable to wear. A sun
hat would me far more beneficial, I rate my risk of sun cancer to be
higher than having a head injury.

>
> It's the law, I don't understand why you don't just save yourself the
> hassle and wear one.

Correct, which is why I wear a helmet. That doesn't mean I agree with
it.


--
EuanB

[Walrus]

EuanB Wrote:
> In forty degree heat, you bet they're uncomfortable to wear. A sun hat
> would me far more beneficial, I rate my risk of sun cancer to be higher
> than having a head injury.
>
>
>
> Correct, which is why I wear a helmet. That doesn't mean I agree with
> it.Fair points. Maybe pop a visor on your helmet and kill 2 birds with one
stone :p


--
Walrus

[David M]

EuanB wrote:
> In forty degree heat, you bet they're uncomfortable to wear. A

I don't buy that. I wear one in WA heat, regularly 40 or over in the
summer. The only probs I have on a long ride, say 100km Audax in
40-45C, is with my feet swelling, but the helmet is no problem at
all...

Cheers
David M

[Walrus]

David M Wrote:
> EuanB wrote:
> > In forty degree heat, you bet they're uncomfortable to wear. A
>
> I don't buy that. I wear one in WA heat, regularly 40 or over in the
> summer. The only probs I have on a long ride, say 100km Audax in
> 40-45C, is with my feet swelling, but the helmet is no problem at
> all...
>
> Cheers
> David MI hear you David. I wore a helmet in this years Alpine Classic where it
reached over 38. There are some soft puppies out there.


--
Walrus

[Graeme Dods]

On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 10:58:40 +1000, EuanB wrote:

> The difference is that accident statistics support seatbelt
> compulsion.

That depends on how you read it, or more accurately, how it is selectively
presented. There's plenty of evidence that shows that the introduction of
compulsory seatbelt laws actually increased the overall number of
accidents/injuries, particularly among vulnerable road users (cyclists,
pedestrians etc.). What most seatbelt stats present are the reduction in
injuries *in the event of a crash* not the fact the the chances of a crash
are slightly increased (risk compensation and all that).

Graeme

[HellenWheels]

On 5 Oct 2005 18:51:30 -0700, "David M" >
wrote:

>EuanB wrote:
>> In forty degree heat, you bet they're uncomfortable to wear. A
>
>I don't buy that. I wear one in WA heat, regularly 40 or over in the
>summer. The only probs I have on a long ride, say 100km Audax in
>40-45C, is with my feet swelling, but the helmet is no problem at
>all...
>
>Cheers
>David M

Well I think it's pretty obvious from the OP's story that if you are not
wearing a helment, but have one with you, you'll just get a warning, after
which you'll have to put it on. If they were clearly flaunting the law
that's one thing and dumb of them not to have the helmet at least strapped
to the back of the bike or on the handlebars.

And, of course if you're in an accident you probably risk not getting
coverage if you're not wearing one and it makes the police report, head
injury or not. But seems like the enforcement could be spotty. Any data on
that?

-Wheels.

[Resound]

> Also, I'm surprised that nobody's considered it might have been an
> oversight - they'd been out of the country for a while - maybe they didn't
> -have- helmets with them and had not yet re-oriented to Aussie law.
> Sheesh.
> It's pretty harsh to force someone to walk 15 miles back to the car - I
> don't believe their chief would have been very happy with that
> 'punishment'. In fact, I'd be calling my lawyer and claiming damages for
> being forced to walk an unreasonable distance (I've got a bad leg, for one
> thing, but I ride just fine).
>
> -Wheels
>
>

They were gone "almost a year". I'm fairly sure the law on whether or not
helmet usage is compulsory has been in effect throughout the country for
substantially longer than that. They willfully broke the law. Not that I
agree with the described actions of the police either; I would have had the
frame pump going the moment they were out of sight myself.(They MUST have
had a frame pump...what lunatic would do a 3000km tour around Africa without
one?)

This is, of course, assuming that this isn't a wilful troll.

[Terry Collins]

Biker wrote:
> Who wants to be constantly hassled?

1) buy a cheapie K mart helmet stick on top of hat in city limits.
constable plod just looks for helmet.

2) visit doc, seek med cert t say it gies you migranes/head aches, etc,

[Terry Collins]

Walrus wrote:
> I hear you David. I wore a helmet in this years Alpine Classic
> where it reached over 38. There are some soft puppies out there.

Age will change your tune.

[Terry Collins]

Walrus wrote:

>Correct, which is why I wear a helmet. That doesn't mean I agree with
>it.Fair points. Maybe pop a visor on your helmet and kill 2 birds with one
> stone :p

Ears?

[Terry Collins]

Bleve wrote:
> Biker wrote:
>
>>My husband and I have just returned to Australia after almost a year of
>>
>
>
>
> troll troll troll your boat ...
>
pedal pedal pedal your bike
gently down the road .....

[Resound]

>
> I'm just suggesting that maybe they had forgotten their helmets, or gotten
> out of the habit of wearing them or something. I'm not suggesting right or
> wrong. They were definitely not thinking straight to rebuff the police
> when
> they were first warned, causing the sterner reaction.
>
> Maybe where they were riding did not have compulsory laws. Heck they
> probably were flaunting the law, but jeeze, everyone seemed to jump to
> that
> conclusion a bit harshly and prematurely is all I'm saying. Certainly
> ignorance of the law is no excuse. Maybe if they'd have said 'sorry
> officer, we've been abroad and it just slipped our minds, we'll go get our
> helmets, or maybe one of you can drive us to our car...'. So they weren't
> blameless.
>
> Having said that, I think the cops were out of line with the 'punishment'.
> Cops are there to protect, detain, and maybe arrest you, but it's up to
> the
> courts to punish. Maybe a 15 mile walk was within their ability. Not for
> me
> and I think the cops should be censured for taking that step. For all we
> know, they didn't get back to their car until dark. Would that be
> responsible policing, stranding a guy and a girl out on a remote bike
> trail
> after dark?
>
> You stop a driver for speeding or mild reckless driving, you give him a
> ticket. You don't make him drop and give you 20 pushups, fercryinoutloud.
> ;-) Stranding someone for a victimless crime, 15 miles from their car is
> cruel and unusual punishment and they should contact a lawyer.
>
> -Wheels.
>

Oh, I agree with you on the behaviour of the police. It sounds like general
pigheadedness all around.

[HellenWheels]

On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 13:04:09 +1000, "Resound"
> wrote:

>> Also, I'm surprised that nobody's considered it might have been an
>> oversight - they'd been out of the country for a while - maybe they didn't
>> -have- helmets with them and had not yet re-oriented to Aussie law.
>> Sheesh.
>> It's pretty harsh to force someone to walk 15 miles back to the car - I
>> don't believe their chief would have been very happy with that
>> 'punishment'. In fact, I'd be calling my lawyer and claiming damages for
>> being forced to walk an unreasonable distance (I've got a bad leg, for one
>> thing, but I ride just fine).
>>
>> -Wheels
>>
>>
>
>They were gone "almost a year". I'm fairly sure the law on whether or not
>helmet usage is compulsory has been in effect throughout the country for
>substantially longer than that. They willfully broke the law. Not that I
>agree with the described actions of the police either; I would have had the
>frame pump going the moment they were out of sight myself.(They MUST have
>had a frame pump...what lunatic would do a 3000km tour around Africa without
>one?)
>
>This is, of course, assuming that this isn't a wilful troll.
>

I'm just suggesting that maybe they had forgotten their helmets, or gotten
out of the habit of wearing them or something. I'm not suggesting right or
wrong. They were definitely not thinking straight to rebuff the police when
they were first warned, causing the sterner reaction.

Maybe where they were riding did not have compulsory laws. Heck they
probably were flaunting the law, but jeeze, everyone seemed to jump to that
conclusion a bit harshly and prematurely is all I'm saying. Certainly
ignorance of the law is no excuse. Maybe if they'd have said 'sorry
officer, we've been abroad and it just slipped our minds, we'll go get our
helmets, or maybe one of you can drive us to our car...'. So they weren't
blameless.

Having said that, I think the cops were out of line with the 'punishment'.
Cops are there to protect, detain, and maybe arrest you, but it's up to the
courts to punish. Maybe a 15 mile walk was within their ability. Not for me
and I think the cops should be censured for taking that step. For all we
know, they didn't get back to their car until dark. Would that be
responsible policing, stranding a guy and a girl out on a remote bike trail
after dark?

You stop a driver for speeding or mild reckless driving, you give him a
ticket. You don't make him drop and give you 20 pushups, fercryinoutloud.
;-) Stranding someone for a victimless crime, 15 miles from their car is
cruel and unusual punishment and they should contact a lawyer.

-Wheels.

[vaudegiant]

EuanB Wrote:
> Ask yourself this question about some of the semi-dictatorial regimes
> you've been under; could you have lost your life legally for infracting
> on what you may consider an innocuous law?
>
> I don't agree with the actions of the police, what they did was rather
> petty, but at the end of the day you wilfully broke the law. Wear the
> consequences of your actions.
>
> I don't agree with compulsion but I agree even less with willful law
> breaking. You knew what you were doing was wrong so you have no
> excuse.

I know we're only talking about helmets, and I always wear one because
I think they probably work, but willful law breaking does have its
place in society....bad laws should be broken, otherwise what is to
stop goverments enacting draconian laws etc etc....


Pat


--
vaudegiant

[suzyj]

Resound wrote:

> This is, of course, assuming that this isn't a wilful troll.

Well it may not have been in 2001, when it first did the rounds, but it
is now.

See
http://tinyurl.com/bafax for the original.

Cheers,

Suzy


--
suzyj

[Biker]

suzyj wrote:
> Resound wrote:
>
> > This is, of course, assuming that this isn't a wilful troll.
>
> Well it may not have been in 2001, when it first did the rounds, but it
> is now.

it seem's if it was a post from a as you call it a troll - but if
people still have it put on "My husband and I have just returned to
Australia" then is's a good in put if it was a troll that posted it.

[Bleve]

Biker wrote:
> suzyj wrote:
> > Resound wrote:
> >
> > > This is, of course, assuming that this isn't a wilful troll.
> >
> > Well it may not have been in 2001, when it first did the rounds, but it
> > is now.
>
> it seem's if it was a post from a as you call it a troll - but if
> people still have it put on "My husband and I have just returned to
> Australia" then is's a good in put if it was a troll that posted it.


Sausages.

[cfsmtb]

suzyj Wrote:
> Well it may not have been in 2001, when it first did the rounds, but it
> is now.
>
> See
> http://tinyurl.com/bafax for the original.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Suzy

And see: http://tinyurl.com/d3kcu

for all posts by 'biker'.

sausages indeed.


--
cfsmtb

[Resound]

"Biker" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> suzyj wrote:
>> Resound wrote:
>>
>> > This is, of course, assuming that this isn't a wilful troll.
>>
>> Well it may not have been in 2001, when it first did the rounds, but it
>> is now.
>
> it seem's if it was a post from a as you call it a troll - but if
> people still have it put on "My husband and I have just returned to
> Australia" then is's a good in put if it was a troll that posted it.
>

It tweaked my troll-o-meter simply because it seemed specially tailored to
start another round of the great helmet debate. It even had the "omg the
COPZ were LAMAZ and they SUXX0R3D!!!11!one! so the helmet law must SUK
TWO!!1!" factor. Ok, maybe without the AOL factor, but it seemed an
appropriate vehicle to demonstrate how I read it.

[[email protected]]

On 5 Oct 2005 12:59:40 -0700, "Biker" > wrote:

> to Cottesloe for us to be pulled over by two gun-carrying police on
> mountainbikes. Reason? Australia's favourite: No helmets!
> Upon learning we were not WA residents, the police decided not to issue
>
> us with traffic infringement notices - probably too much hard work,
> having to chase payment from Qeensland! Instead, we were ordered to
> walk
> back - that is, 25 kilometers! Naturally, we refused to do this, and

Those Police officers could well have saved your lives. Next time wear helmets.

I don't give a **** about any of the arguments put up by the moron anti-helmet brigade because it is
an undisputable fact that helmets can stop you being killed or injured.

[Graeme Dods]

On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 06:28:48 GMT, wrote:

> it is
> an undisputable fact that helmets can stop you being killed or injured.

So can a large sheet of plywood painted pink. Should we make those
compulsory too?

[TimC]

On 2005-10-06, suzyj (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
> Resound wrote:
>
>> This is, of course, assuming that this isn't a wilful troll.
>
> Well it may not have been in 2001, when it first did the rounds, but it
> is now.
>
> See
> http://tinyurl.com/bafax for the original.

BTW, the original poster of this particular thread (not the original
2001 thread) matches my rules that Bratton matches. Not proof, but
a useful piece of evidence.

And then look at the English ability displayed in biker's response to
your post...

--
TimC
Er, RFC 882 put the dot in .com.

[TimC]

On 2005-10-06, Terry Collins (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> Walrus wrote:
>> I hear you David. I wore a helmet in this years Alpine Classic
>> where it reached over 38. There are some soft puppies out there.
>
> Age will change your tune.

Young age?

I hate wearing a helmet in summer. And I thought my helmet was a
reasonable fit.

But then again, I usually wimp out of commuting when the temperature
gets above 28, and wimp out of riding for recreation when the
temperature gets above 24.

Further proof that I am unAustralian, a terrorist, and need to be
"reformed" and "interrogated" in a detention centre for 14 days.

--
TimC
Keyboard Not Found: Press <F1> to Continue

[Terry Collins]

TimC wrote:
> On 2005-10-06, Terry Collins (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
>>Walrus wrote:
>>
>>>I hear you David. I wore a helmet in this years Alpine Classic
>>>where it reached over 38. There are some soft puppies out there.
>>
>>Age will change your tune.
>
>
> Young age?

Old age. It was in reply to the "soft puppies" comment.
I've just had a "discussion" with my quack about reducing the contents
of my daily rattle (pills). It is really NOT exciting having to make
sure you've packed certain items every time you want to go out for a
ride and leave a route map and time estimate. <bleh>
>
> I hate wearing a helmet in summer. And I thought my helmet was a
> reasonable fit.

Yep, great with glasses. Tap helment and instant rain shower. If they
can mount cameras and lights on helmets, how big a bettery do a I need
for some fans?

>
> But then again, I usually wimp out of commuting when the temperature
> gets above 28, and wimp out of riding for recreation when the
> temperature gets above 24.

It is the cold wind that does me in. Hopefully next winter my polypil
undershirt will solve this.

>
> Further proof that I am unAustralian, a terrorist, and need to be
> "reformed" and "interrogated" in a detention centre for 14 days.

Err, you ride a bicycle, thats enough.


which reminds me.
what colour is the fridge magnet?
I've looked, but can not find mine anymore amongst the polly and real
estate calendars.
Went riding earlier in the week to check out a new kiddy winks cycle
path; figure of eight around the flood basins and spotted a person of
middle eastern appearance with a radio control device.

He disarmed me by making nice noises about my bicycle and trailer. {:-)

[Euan]

>>>>> "David" == David M > writes:

David> EuanB wrote:
>> In forty degree heat, you bet they're uncomfortable to wear. A

David> I don't buy that. I wear one in WA heat, regularly 40 or over
David> in the summer. The only probs I have on a long ride, say
David> 100km Audax in 40-45C, is with my feet swelling, but the
David> helmet is no problem at all...

I don't care whether you buy that or not. I find them uncomfortable,
plenty of pro cyclists find them uncomfortable (witness mass dumping of
helmets on hill climbs until recent years.)

You don't find them uncomfortable, fine I'm happy for you but don't
presume to call me a liar.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

[Euan]

>>>>> "Walrus" == Walrus > writes:

Walrus> EuanB Wrote:
>> In forty degree heat, you bet they're uncomfortable to wear. A
>> sun hat would me far more beneficial, I rate my risk of sun
>> cancer to be higher than having a head injury.
>>
>>
>>
>> Correct, which is why I wear a helmet. That doesn't mean I agree
>> with it.Fair points.

Walrus> Maybe pop a visor on your helmet and kill 2 birds with one
Walrus> stone :p

My Met's got a visor, good for the sun and better than nothing for
driving rain.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

[Euan]

>>>>> "Graeme" == Graeme Dods > writes:

Graeme> On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 10:58:40 +1000, EuanB wrote:
>> The difference is that accident statistics support seatbelt
>> compulsion.

Graeme> That depends on how you read it, or more accurately, how it
Graeme> is selectively presented. There's plenty of evidence that
Graeme> shows that the introduction of compulsory seatbelt laws
Graeme> actually increased the overall number of accidents/injuries,
Graeme> particularly among vulnerable road users (cyclists,
Graeme> pedestrians etc.). What most seatbelt stats present are the
Graeme> reduction in injuries *in the event of a crash* not the fact
Graeme> the the chances of a crash are slightly increased (risk
Graeme> compensation and all that).

Agreed, however I suspect the net effect was positive?
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

[Euan]

>>>>> "HellenWheels" == HellenWheels <HellenWheels> writes:

HellenWheels> On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 10:05:17 +1000, EuanB
HellenWheels> > wrote:

>> Biker Wrote:
>>> to Cottesloe for us to be pulled over by two gun-carrying police
>>> on mountainbikes. Reason? Australia's favourite: No helmets!
>>> .... No other country we visited penalizes its citizens for
>>> exercising their bodies and using an environmentally friendly
>>> mode of transport at the same time - not even some of the
>>> semi-dictotorial regimes!
>>>
>> Ask yourself this question about some of the semi-dictatorial
>> regimes you've been under; could you have lost your life legally
>> for infracting on what you may consider an innocuous law?

HellenWheels> Are you comparing Australia with Singapore, where they
HellenWheels> put people to death for shoplifting, or whatever? I'm
HellenWheels> not following you. 'lost your life legally...' - what
HellenWheels> the heck does that mean?

I'm saying they're making a mountain out of a molehill. So they were
inconvenienced a bit because they broke the law, big deal. In some
countries that inconvenience could have been years in nasty prisons etc.

HellenWheels> Also, I'm surprised that nobody's considered it might
HellenWheels> have been an oversight - they'd been out of the
HellenWheels> country for a while - maybe they didn't -have- helmets
HellenWheels> with them and had not yet re-oriented to Aussie
HellenWheels> law. Sheesh.

Nothing in the tone or content of the OP indicates it was an oversight.

HellenWheels> It's pretty harsh to force someone to walk 15 miles
HellenWheels> back to the car - I don't believe their chief would
HellenWheels> have been very happy with that 'punishment'. In fact,
HellenWheels> I'd be calling my lawyer and claiming damages for
HellenWheels> being forced to walk an unreasonable distance (I've
HellenWheels> got a bad leg, for one thing, but I ride just fine).

Agreed. If it was me I'd be pumping up the wheels as soon as the cops
left. Be a nice court case that.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

[Marty]

This has been copied and pasted by Mr Bratton.
See here.

http://tinyurl.com/7ao7u

Who is Roger bratton?

Find out here.

http://www.hyperactive.oz.nf/Bratton/Roger%20Bratton.htm




Biker wrote:
> My husband and I have just returned to Australia after almost a year of
>
> travelling around the world. We had our bicycles with us and used them
> to cycle in three continents, concluding our trip with over 3000 km of
> cycling around Southern Africa (Zimbabawe, Mozambique & South Africa).
> Nowhere did we experience any problems; to the contrary - travelling on
>
> bikes seems to arouse people's curiosity and we had many friendly chats
>
> with the locals.
> We arrived back in Australia and thought we would stop over in WA for a
>
> month or so, to catch up with friends in Perth and cycle down to Albany
>
> & Esperance and back, before continuing on home to the East Coast.
> It only took one little, slow ride on the beach bike path from Duncraig
>
> to Cottesloe for us to be pulled over by two gun-carrying police on
> mountainbikes. Reason? Australia's favourite: No helmets!
> Upon learning we were not WA residents, the police decided not to issue
>
> us with traffic infringement notices - probably too much hard work,
> having to chase payment from Qeensland! Instead, we were ordered to
> walk
> back - that is, 25 kilometers! Naturally, we refused to do this, and
> were subsequently formally placed under arrest for disobeying police.
> One of the cops attempted to call a paddy wagon on his two-way radio,
> so, he explained, we could be taken to the station, fingerprinted and
> locked up in the watchhouse for the time being. He was, however,
> usuccessful in getting through (comforting thought for victims of any
> possible real emergency), so they let our tires down and let us go,
> wishing us a "nice walk back to Duncraig" and warning us not to attempt
>
> to pump the tyres up and continue riding, or we really would be taken
> into custody.
> What a homecoming! I must say it's great to be back in Australia and
> only through travelling overseas one can fully appreciate the quality
> of
> life we Australians generally take for granted. However, this damned
> helmet law is one major blot on that lifestyle. Nowhere else have we
> been hassled for peacefully riding along a road, minding our own
> business. No other country we visited penalizes its citizens for
> exercising their bodies and using an environmentally friendly mode of
> transport at the same time - not even some of the semi-dictotorial
> regimes!
> Having had a read through aus.bicycle, I notice the "great debate" is
> still raging - and the authorities are still taking no notice of what
> failure this law, this infringement of civil liberties, has been. The
> helmet zealots are still bleating their naive message of "if it saves
> one child's life, blah, blah, blah..."
> In some ways, it is disappointing to see how easily some people are
> brainwashed into believing whatever the authorities want them to
> believe...
> Alas, I don't think we'll be doing that Albany bike trip after all. Who
>
> wants to be constantly hassled? Hiring a car, maybe? Now, there's an
> idea I'm sure would fix the helmet problem - as it has already fixed
> it,
> once and for all, for many ex-cycling commuters. Shame it's nowhere
> near
> as much fun...
>

[Euan]

>>>>> "grumpy" == grumpy > writes:

grumpy> I don't give a **** about any of the arguments put up by the
grumpy> moron anti-helmet brigade because it is an undisputable fact
grumpy> that helmets can stop you being killed or injured.

If it's `undisputable' how come there's so much dispute?
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

[aeek]

Graeme Dods Wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 06:28:48 GMT, wrote:
>
> > it is
> > an undisputable fact that helmets can stop you being killed or
> injured.
>
> So can a large sheet of plywood painted pink. Should we make those
> compulsory too?

So can amputation of the head! We should make all three compulsory for
this troll.


--
aeek

[ProfTournesol]

Terry Collins Wrote:
> Walrus wrote:
> > I hear you David. I wore a helmet in this years Alpine Classic
> > where it reached over 38. There are some soft puppies out there.
>
> Age will change your tune.

I'm old and I still play the same tune:-)
It's the heat coming up off the road not the helmet that is the
problem.


--
ProfTournesol

[cfsmtb]

Marty Wrote:
> This has been copied and pasted by Mr Bratton.
> See here.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/7ao7u
>

Ah...silly sausages!


--
cfsmtb

[BrettS]

Euan wrote:
>>>>>>"Graeme" == Graeme Dods > writes:
>
>
> Graeme> On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 10:58:40 +1000, EuanB wrote:
> >> The difference is that accident statistics support seatbelt
> >> compulsion.
>
> Graeme> That depends on how you read it, or more accurately, how it
> Graeme> is selectively presented. There's plenty of evidence that
> Graeme> shows that the introduction of compulsory seatbelt laws
> Graeme> actually increased the overall number of accidents/injuries,
> Graeme> particularly among vulnerable road users (cyclists,
> Graeme> pedestrians etc.). What most seatbelt stats present are the
> Graeme> reduction in injuries *in the event of a crash* not the fact
> Graeme> the the chances of a crash are slightly increased (risk
> Graeme> compensation and all that).
>
> Agreed, however I suspect the net effect was positive?

What? No stats to back up your 'gut feel'?

;-)

--
BrettS

[BrettS]

Resound wrote:

>>I'm just suggesting that maybe they had forgotten their helmets, or gotten
>>out of the habit of wearing them or something. I'm not suggesting right or
>>wrong. They were definitely not thinking straight to rebuff the police
>>when
>>they were first warned, causing the sterner reaction.
>>
>>Maybe where they were riding did not have compulsory laws. Heck they
>>probably were flaunting the law, but jeeze, everyone seemed to jump to
>>that
>>conclusion a bit harshly and prematurely is all I'm saying. Certainly
>>ignorance of the law is no excuse. Maybe if they'd have said 'sorry
>>officer, we've been abroad and it just slipped our minds, we'll go get our
>>helmets, or maybe one of you can drive us to our car...'. So they weren't
>>blameless.
>>
>>Having said that, I think the cops were out of line with the 'punishment'.
>>Cops are there to protect, detain, and maybe arrest you, but it's up to
>>the
>>courts to punish. Maybe a 15 mile walk was within their ability. Not for
>>me
>>and I think the cops should be censured for taking that step. For all we
>>know, they didn't get back to their car until dark. Would that be
>>responsible policing, stranding a guy and a girl out on a remote bike
>>trail
>>after dark?
>>
>>You stop a driver for speeding or mild reckless driving, you give him a
>>ticket. You don't make him drop and give you 20 pushups, fercryinoutloud.
>>;-) Stranding someone for a victimless crime, 15 miles from their car is
>>cruel and unusual punishment and they should contact a lawyer.
>>
>>-Wheels.
>>
>
>
> Oh, I agree with you on the behaviour of the police. It sounds like general
> pigheadedness all around.
>
>
You've forgotten that they were 'Eastern Staters' in WA. Everyone over
here knows they probably deserved it...

<ducks>

--
BrettS

[dave]

EuanB wrote:
> David M Wrote:
>
>>If she'd been one of the anti-helmet brigade, she'd now be chewing up
>>untold amounts of money as a head injured patient, possibly ICU,
>>possibly permanently incapacitated...which iself would be an
>>unneccesary impost on the health system and thus the taxpayer.
>> Unlikely. Brusing, abraision and perhapse a mild concussion. That's
>
> all a helmet's good for.
>
>



Bit of an exageration that a half inch of foam saved her from being a
veg. Given that most people could punch thru 6 inches of the stuff
and boxers sometimes cope with being punched in the head for years
without winding up vegtables. But feel free to believe that if you
wish. In some cases who knows.. it may even be true

[dave]

Terry Collins wrote:
> Walrus wrote:
>
>
>>Correct, which is why I wear a helmet. That doesn't mean I agree with
>>it.Fair points. Maybe pop a visor on your helmet and kill 2 birds with one
>>stone :p
>
>
> Ears?

To quote Dougie Bader ¨Have em off Have em off¨ Oh hang on maybe that
wasnt ears.

[dave]

wrote:
> On 5 Oct 2005 12:59:40 -0700, "Biker" > wrote:
>
>
>>to Cottesloe for us to be pulled over by two gun-carrying police on
>>mountainbikes. Reason? Australia's favourite: No helmets!
>>Upon learning we were not WA residents, the police decided not to issue
>>
>>us with traffic infringement notices - probably too much hard work,
>>having to chase payment from Qeensland! Instead, we were ordered to
>>walk
>>back - that is, 25 kilometers! Naturally, we refused to do this, and
>
>
> Those Police officers could well have saved your lives. Next time wear helmets.
>
> I don't give a **** about any of the arguments put up by the moron anti-helmet brigade because it is
> an undisputable fact that helmets can stop you being killed or injured.
>
>

Total agreement on that. From all the experts. You think?

[dave]

TimC wrote:
> On 2005-10-06, Terry Collins (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
>>Walrus wrote:
>>
>>>I hear you David. I wore a helmet in this years Alpine Classic
>>>where it reached over 38. There are some soft puppies out there.
>>
>>Age will change your tune.
>
>
> Young age?
>
> I hate wearing a helmet in summer. And I thought my helmet was a
> reasonable fit.
>
> But then again, I usually wimp out of commuting when the temperature
> gets above 28, and wimp out of riding for recreation when the
> temperature gets above 24.
>
> Further proof that I am unAustralian, a terrorist, and need to be
> "reformed" and "interrogated" in a detention centre for 14 days.
>

Proof that you aint an arab actually :)

[aeek]

TimC Wrote:
>
> Further proof that I am unAustralian, a terrorist, and need to be
> "reformed" and "interrogated" in a detention centre for 14 days.
>

You realise that's 14 days without riding. The ankle charm is likely to
be inconvenient riding too. More rotating mass = bad.


--
aeek

[David M]

Euan wrote:
> You don't find them uncomfortable, fine I'm happy for you but don't
> presume to call me a liar.

Geez, settle petal :-)

I was just suggesting that I'm a normal person, with a normal $60
helmet (although i tried many to get the best fitting one, and it does
have a visor and good ventilation) and I commute 52 weeks of the year
irrespective of weather as well as rec cycling and shopping etc, and
I've never found the helmet uncomfortable in the heat (or cold FWIW).

That might, of course, be due to the fact that I generally only cycle
on the flat - when the pros ditch their helmets it seems to be on steep
hills, and Perth dosn't really have too many of those. However the OP
(had they not been the sockpuppet) was in Perth I believe, and riding
along the coast which is flat, and it's only been in the low twenties
over here for quite a while now...ie good helmet wearing weather!

Anyway, I think we've now exceeded the length of the vegie gardening
and urban design thread. Keep up the good work y'all :-)

Cheers
David m

[Biker]

Marty Wallace wrote:
I had in the past the most ridiculous erection in the world,4in.I'm not



poor and then,I used all the supposed "miraculous products" to
rectify.Vainly.Until one of my friends,who experimented it
himself,advise me to use an african grass,in the way of tea.As long as
I haven't obtain the desired size.I bought it.
It tooks to me 2months to reach 9.5in.
I fully enjoyed it 3years long.


But now,I'ld like to loose 2in.I think I'ld had stop the grass-tea
2weeks earliers.9.5in is a little too long.
Girls and men often run away when they see it.Too big bar.
What is more ,at the beach,it is really umpleasant to be always
remarked because of it.
I am now exasperated,I'll really want to loose a little.


Help me finding a way.
Do some one know something who can help me or a good surgeon?(if it is



possible and riskfree)

[Moriarty]

We cycled in three continents, concluding our trip with over 3000 km of
cycling around Southern Africa (Zimbabwe, Mozambique & South Africa).

Nowhere did we experience any problems.

We arrived back in Australia and in WA It only took one little, slow ride on
the beach bike path from Duncraig to Cottesloe for us to be pulled over by
two gun-carrying police on mountain bikes.





"Euan" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>> "HellenWheels" == HellenWheels <HellenWheels> writes:
>
> HellenWheels> On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 10:05:17 +1000, EuanB
> HellenWheels> > wrote:
>
> >> Biker Wrote:
> >>> to Cottesloe for us to be pulled over by two gun-carrying police
> >>> on mountainbikes. Reason? Australia's favourite: No helmets!
> >>> .... No other country we visited penalizes its citizens for
> >>> exercising their bodies and using an environmentally friendly
> >>> mode of transport at the same time - not even some of the
> >>> semi-dictotorial regimes!
> >>>
> >> Ask yourself this question about some of the semi-dictatorial
> >> regimes you've been under; could you have lost your life legally
> >> for infracting on what you may consider an innocuous law?
>
> HellenWheels> Are you comparing Australia with Singapore, where they
> HellenWheels> put people to death for shoplifting, or whatever? I'm
> HellenWheels> not following you. 'lost your life legally...' - what
> HellenWheels> the heck does that mean?
>
> I'm saying they're making a mountain out of a molehill. So they were
> inconvenienced a bit because they broke the law, big deal. In some
> countries that inconvenience could have been years in nasty prisons etc.
>
> HellenWheels> Also, I'm surprised that nobody's considered it might
> HellenWheels> have been an oversight - they'd been out of the
> HellenWheels> country for a while - maybe they didn't -have- helmets
> HellenWheels> with them and had not yet re-oriented to Aussie
> HellenWheels> law. Sheesh.
>
> Nothing in the tone or content of the OP indicates it was an oversight.
>
> HellenWheels> It's pretty harsh to force someone to walk 15 miles
> HellenWheels> back to the car - I don't believe their chief would
> HellenWheels> have been very happy with that 'punishment'. In fact,
> HellenWheels> I'd be calling my lawyer and claiming damages for
> HellenWheels> being forced to walk an unreasonable distance (I've
> HellenWheels> got a bad leg, for one thing, but I ride just fine).
>
> Agreed. If it was me I'd be pumping up the wheels as soon as the cops
> left. Be a nice court case that.
> --
> Cheers | ~~ __@
> Euan | ~~ _-\<,
> Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)