World Streets reports on a case study of mandatory bicycle helmet laws in West Australia , as presented to the 29 May 2014 VeloCity Global Conference in Adelaide:
At the beginning of the 1990s, the federal Minister for Transport decided that all cyclists should be forced to wear helmets. He did so on the basis of no research or analysis, other than the almost tautological observation that helmets can protect against head injuries.
This policy was forced on the states and territories by a threat to withhold road safety funding.
The immediate result was a dramatic fall in the amount of cycling. Cycling to work, where many were already voluntarily wearing helmets, fell by 35% between 1991 and 1996. Cycling for all purposes fell by two-thirds, from 5.2% of trips to 1.7%, between 1986 and 2006.
More than two decades after helmets were made compulsory for cyclists in Western Australia, cycling other than for work or recreation has almost disappeared from the Perth scene. …
There appears to be a climate of what can only be called policy protection, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Despite having all this information available to them (this paper is based entirely on published, mainly Department of Transport, information), public servants and politicians refuse to consider even relaxation of the helmets laws.
When this author contacted the WA Department of Transport to enquire how best to get this evidence considered in the policy process, the answer, from two people separately, was effectively ‘not through us’ and ‘there’s no chance of doing so’.
Meanwhile, in the “World’s Greenest City” TM: https://twitter.com/modacitylife/status/473977136068300800
It’s funny you know, I have heard people complain about getting jaywalking tickets but never with the attitude that they should be getting rewarded instead.
I don’t think there should be a law against jaywalking.
Sounds much like BC: an antiquated helmet law because ” we said so”
I thought though that Sydney has different helmet laws and that therefore their bike rental program was a success but Melbourne’s wasn’t ? Maybe some can confirm or deny this here please.
Sydney council simply took a stand a few years ago, and said they wouldn’t invest in a bike-share scheme until the feds offered an exemption. They’re still waiting…
It is perhaps the most reckless of public policies when the policy stops people from doing what is good for them
I’m genuinely curious; how does it stop them? I have never met someone who really wanted to cycle but couldn’t because, helmet law. The ticket is 29 dollars; they don’t even collect on them. People ride without helmets all the time. If there is someone out there reading this who wants to cycle, yet chooses alternate transportation (which is surely more expensive than a 29 dollar ticket and/or the cost of a helmet) please speak up. I’m sorry I still don’t see the logic…
Nothing to do with the cost.
Most likely because helmet laws are part of convincing people that cycling is dangerous, even though the stats show it isn’t.
Well people can still be afraid of falling off their bikes. I was at my clients last week and he’d dumped himself off his bike that very day. He’s got to be about 6’6 tall and as you may know Jeff, when you tall people fall it hurts! (Before anyone gets up in arms, yes it hurts when all people fall, but I’d say the bigger they are, harder they fall tends to be true) Of course he still rides. I ran by some of the arguments for NOT wearing a helmet and the perception of danger was the only one he was familiar with. He still wears one.. writing his dissertation for his doctorate (non medical) so I’d imagine he’s not taking any chances!
Let’s all wear inflatable suits as they do protect us from a fall. No more cars without airbags . Seat belts on buses too. Limit traffic speeds to 20 km/h for bikes and cars. No more ferries as some seem to sink all the time somewhere.
Where to draw the line ? Clearly most jurisdictions do not require bike helmets. Why in BC ?
Thank you Thomas for your very rational reply, it was funny.