Is a new initiative by a group of people seeking to reform the State and Territory Mandatory Helmet Laws. The first priority is to gain an immediate helmet exemption for the Melbourne and Brisbane Bike share schemes. Freestyle Cyclists campaign to repeal bicycle helmet laws, to allow cycling in Australia to flourish.
I hope some people will support this cause - doing so will help restore the bicycle to it's rightful place as practical means of transport for many more people.
If you are only a sports cyclists you should also support this even though you may typically wear a helmet yourself.
Encouraging other people to cycle who would not otherwise ride will help make YOU and ME and other people including pedestrians,cyclists and motorists safer.
1. Car drivers who have riding experience may be more aware of other bike riders and how they behave on the roads.
2. There will be less traffic to contend with if more journeys are by bike - that means less exhaust fumes for all road users and nearby people and it reduces audible noise and pollution, and leaves more parking space for people who do need to drive and park.
3. Larger volumes of bike riders mean motorists even ones who don't ride actually become more aware of bike users and less likely to hit them.
4. More bike journeys and less car journeys may reduce risk to pedestrians from motor traffic.
5. If the law is repealed the bike share schemes will actually get used so they can continue to exist may expand and do not become a white elephant to be shut down the moment the council funds run out. Next time you visit these cities you and other tourists can actually use the bikes without having to buy or find a helmet which you may only use for 15 minute ride then have to dispose of. !.
I limit myself to these 5 points for now. :-)
Don't forget we have a helmetless riders forum with similar aims on adelaide cyclists so you can also show support by joining that group too.
The mhl debate has been going on for a while now and support will continue to grow. Sydney cyclist was having a similar debate a couple of years ago, the overwhelming majority is now pro choice.
Hi Not an electronic mouse people are clearly eager to put forth and discuss the the topic and learn that's what these forums are for :-).
Cart before the horse, MHLs don't reduce participation, etc, etc.
Below is an inspiring video - it's nice to watch. I know it doesn't gel with the cycling is dangerous, MHLs are absolutely necessary to protect those too stupid to protect themselves meme. But what the heck. Israel had all ages MHLs which were repealed for a variety of reasons, Tel Aviv had an unsuccessful bike share scheme which many attributed to the MHLs.
Now look at it - wouldn't it be nice if the bike share schemes in Australia were like this?
I'm failing to see the connection between MHLs and Amsterdam like infrastructure. Their seems to be an argument that revoking MHLs will get more people riding and that, in turn, will lead to better segregrated bike paths everywhere.
No MHLs in the UK and from what I see every time I go back no segregated paths everywhere. In fact I'd say Adelaide is a far better city to ride in, with much better infrastructure than, say, Manchester. I'd also say, from my experience, that we have far more cyclists here than in the UK, certainly far more than in my home town.
The cycling infrastructer in Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Portland has bugger all to do with helmets, lycra, or anything other than city officials with vision and forethought. That is what we are lacking in Adl (and Oz), MHLs' are a complete red herring in this debate.
For the record I'm pro choice but I think those who bang on endlessly about Amsterdam, conspiracy theories, nanny states etc will never win the argument because you alienate too many people.
Patrick, you said " I'd also say, from my experience, that we have far more cyclists here than in the UK,"
Um, is london in the UK? If it is i disagree.... There is a bike riding boom in the UK.
"Even more striking, TfL's counts of vehicles crossing key Thames bridges show that in some places bikes now outnumber cars during rush hour.
Last year, cyclists made up 35.5 per cent of northbound traffic over Blackfriars Bridge, but cars and taxis just 31.9 per cent.
Across all eight bridges in Zone 1, from Vauxhall to the Tower, bicycles made up 27.7 per cent of the almost 35,000 vehicles crossing northbound between 7am and 10am compared with 28.2 per cent for private cars. Yet back in 2006, with similar overall levels of traffic, bikes were just 19 per cent of the total, outnumbered two to one by cars.
There is a similar shift in the City, where cyclists are now reported to make up more than half of rush-hour traffic on streets such as Cheapside.
This is londons bike share alone (people not normally considered cyclists)
London is not the best comparison IMO. It has a congestion tax which most other cities/towns don't have, lots of measures taken to reduce car use and promote sustainable/green transport. Comparing Adelaide to the provincial towns and cities I visit Adelaide "seems" to have far more cyclists.
I have a mate who rides Land's End to JOG and similar rides, he struggles to find a training partner. My mum @69 yo cycles everywhere and people think she's some mad eccentric (she probably is) because there are so few cyclist around. We are from a flat seaside town on a bay 20kms from the Lake District, I doubt you could find a better spot for cycling but apart fromthe two I've mentioned I don't know any other cyclists and i don't see any when I'm driving or riding over there.
Patrick said "London is not the best comparison"
Thats why i originally chose Darwin.
mayswell also mention japan
ditto Pat, congestion charge is what motivates people to use bikes (motorised or unmotorised) in London, it's got nowt to do with helmet laws, they just hit you in the wallet to the tune of about $20/day if you drive you car in and that's before you've paid for parking. I've lived and worked in London in recent years and have seen it first hand.
If they want people out of cars and onto other forms of transport, bring in a congestion charge and watch the roads empty. Bicycle usage will treble virtually overnight, helmet law will make no difference.
don't let the conspiracy theorists on to that secret Phil and Pat!
London congestion charge is 90% discounted for local vehicles and fuel efficient vehicles and other types and is similar to typical car parking costs in Australia. !
Parking in adelaide costs around $16 per day - certainly does not stop people filling up the multi story parks. Melbourne also charges for parking - and had quite a number of toll roads too.
It may have some effect but it certainly does not explain the failure of the Melbourne scheme. Dublin hire and many other cities manage to succeed (Israel, mexico etc) where we fail because of the ridiculous nanny states helmet laws..
Dublin have some good advice for us - drop the helmet law.
Enjoy watching - The australian bike helmet law's failure is famous worldwide.
Local vehicles are only those that live with in the congestion charging zone. An area with very little residential parking. So anyone who travels to the city by car for work will either need a new car which meets the standard or still be hit with the full amount. It has had a huge impact on reducing motor vehicle numbers and increased both public transport and bicycle use.
I agree with Pat. I lived in Norwich for 7 years, I lived one block from the number 1 cycle way a round country cycle route on disused train lines etc. This was not tarmac'd but had a solid base for riding a hybrid. It was much less used than the linear park even though it linked to a system that coul take you round the country, off the roads, perfect for your average non lycra clad cyclist, all of this and yet even without MHL's people still didn't use it!