Bicycle helmet legislation Where?

Discussion in 'Australia and New Zealand' started by Wally, Feb 4, 2006.

  1. Wally

    Wally Guest

    Hello,

    I have gone through the group and the web trying to find the compulsory
    helmet legislation for Western Australia.
    I have found a lot of websites containing opinions and statistics but
    no actual legislation.

    Please can someone direct me to the actual legislation?

    Cheers,
    Wally

    P.S. I am not interested in anyones opinion on helmets.
     
    Tags:


  2. In aus.bicycle on 4 Feb 2006 11:49:42 -0800
    Wally <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Hello,
    >
    > I have gone through the group and the web trying to find the compulsory
    > helmet legislation for Western Australia.
    > I have found a lot of websites containing opinions and statistics but
    > no actual legislation.
    >
    > Please can someone direct me to the actual legislation?


    Go to http://www.austlii.edu.au/forms/search1.html and search for
    "bicycle helmet" as "all of these words" instead of "boolean search"
    and select "western australia - all legislation" from the large pick
    box.

    You will get, amongst others:

    ROAD TRAFFIC CODE 2000 - REG 222
    Protective helmets to be worn

    222 . Protective helmets to be worn

    (1) In this regulation and in regulation 223 —

    "protective helmet" means a helmet that is, or is of a standard or
    type that is, approved by the Director General, for the purposes of
    this regulation, by notice in the Government Gazette .

    (2) Except as provided in this regulation, a person shall not ride a
    bicycle on a road or any path unless —
    (a) that person is wearing a protective helmet securely fastened on
    his or her head; and

    (b) where any other person is being carried on that bicycle, that
    other person is wearing a protective helmet securely fastened on his
    or her head.

    Modified penalty: 1 PU

    (3) Subregulation (2) does not apply to a person who —
    (a) is a member of a religious or cultural group and who is wearing a
    headdress customarily worn by members of that group, if the wearing of
    that headdress makes it impractical for a person to wear a protective
    helmet; or

    (b) has been exempted in writing by the Director General from wearing
    a protective helmet for medical reasons, and is complying with any
    terms and conditions of that exemption.

    (4) The Director General may at any time, by notice in writing to the
    person, amend or revoke an exemption granted under subregulation
    (3)(b).

    (5) Subregulation (2)(b) does not apply to a person riding a three or
    four-wheeled bicycle who is carrying a paying passenger, or any paying
    passenger on a three or four-wheeled bicycle.
     
  3. Wally wrote:

    > I have gone through the group and the web trying to find the
    > compulsory helmet legislation for Western Australia.
    > I have found a lot of websites containing opinions and
    > statistics but no actual legislation.
    >
    > Please can someone direct me to the actual legislation?


    I can't help with a link to the enabling legislation, but the
    general details of the requirement is contained in the uniform
    "Australian Road Rules". See for example

    http://tinyurl.com/bcc8s

    Part 15 ("Additional rules for bicycle riders"), rule 256
    ("Bicycle helmets") for details.

    There's a good exposition of the application of the rules to WA
    at

    http://www.dpi.wa.gov.au/cycling/1976.asp

    but I'm not sure that's what you want.

    John
     
  4. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-02-04, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    > (5) Subregulation (2)(b) does not apply to a person riding a three or
    > four-wheeled bicycle who is carrying a paying passenger, or any paying
    > passenger on a three or four-wheeled bicycle.


    Oddlical.

    So when the rickshaw thingy is being driven back to base, and the
    paying passengers have gone, the driver has to put his helmet back on?

    --
    TimC
    I bet the human brain is a kludge.
    -- Marvin Minsky
     
  5. rooman

    rooman New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,167
    Likes Received:
    0
    prezachary
     
  6. In aus.bicycle on Sun, 05 Feb 2006 04:58:31 GMT
    TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
    > On 2006-02-04, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
    > was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    >> (5) Subregulation (2)(b) does not apply to a person riding a three or
    >> four-wheeled bicycle who is carrying a paying passenger, or any paying
    >> passenger on a three or four-wheeled bicycle.

    >
    > Oddlical.
    >
    > So when the rickshaw thingy is being driven back to base, and the
    > paying passengers have gone, the driver has to put his helmet back on?
    >


    REad it again - only the passenger can be helmetless. 2b is the
    passenger, 2a is the rider.

    So the rider has to wear a lid, the passenger doesn't have to. IF
    that doesn't show the utter hypocrisy of the whole deal....

    Zebee
     
  7. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-02-05, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    > In aus.bicycle on Sun, 05 Feb 2006 04:58:31 GMT
    > TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> On 2006-02-04, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
    >> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    >>> (5) Subregulation (2)(b) does not apply to a person riding a three or
    >>> four-wheeled bicycle who is carrying a paying passenger, or any paying
    >>> passenger on a three or four-wheeled bicycle.

    >>
    >> Oddlical.
    >>
    >> So when the rickshaw thingy is being driven back to base, and the
    >> paying passengers have gone, the driver has to put his helmet back on?

    >
    > REad it again - only the passenger can be helmetless. 2b is the
    > passenger, 2a is the rider.


    Ah yes. Brane working now after that sleep.

    > So the rider has to wear a lid, the passenger doesn't have to. IF
    > that doesn't show the utter hypocrisy of the whole deal....


    Now now. Can't get in the way of a good money making excercise. If
    you don't like capitalism, we shall brand you a heretic and burn you
    at the stake!

    --
    TimC
    The universe was strange after we had beauty and truth replaced
     
  8. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-02-05, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    > In aus.bicycle on Sun, 05 Feb 2006 04:58:31 GMT
    > TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> On 2006-02-04, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
    >> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    >>> (5) Subregulation (2)(b) does not apply to a person riding a three or
    >>> four-wheeled bicycle who is carrying a paying passenger, or any paying
    >>> passenger on a three or four-wheeled bicycle.

    >>
    >> Oddlical.
    >>
    >> So when the rickshaw thingy is being driven back to base, and the
    >> paying passengers have gone, the driver has to put his helmet back on?

    >
    > REad it again - only the passenger can be helmetless. 2b is the
    > passenger, 2a is the rider.


    Ah yes. Brane working now after that sleep.

    > So the rider has to wear a lid, the passenger doesn't have to. IF
    > that doesn't show the utter hypocrisy of the whole deal....


    Now now. Can't get in the way of a good money making excercise. If
    you don't like capitalism, we shall brand you a heretic and burn you
    at the stake!

    --
    TimC
    The universe was strange after we had beauty and truth replaced
     
  9. Wally

    Wally Guest

    Many thanks for the legislation, it is exactly what I wanted.

    Now I will have to think up a headdress to wear.
    I could become a satanist and wear some horns, which would make the
    helmet impractical. I'll think of something.

    Cheers,
    Wally
     
  10. cfsmtb

    cfsmtb New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    Messages:
    4,963
    Likes Received:
    0
    You could go the coral implants similar to Enigma's. Or vulcan ears. Ok that was silly.
     
  11. Theo Bekkers

    Theo Bekkers Guest

    Wally wrote:

    > Now I will have to think up a headdress to wear.
    > I could become a satanist and wear some horns, which would make the
    > helmet impractical.


    You'd need some kind of headgear to attach the horns. A helmet perhaps?

    Theo
     
  12. Resound

    Resound Guest

    "Zebee Johnstone" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > In aus.bicycle on Sun, 05 Feb 2006 04:58:31 GMT
    > TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> On 2006-02-04, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
    >> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    >>> (5) Subregulation (2)(b) does not apply to a person riding a three or
    >>> four-wheeled bicycle who is carrying a paying passenger, or any paying
    >>> passenger on a three or four-wheeled bicycle.

    >>
    >> Oddlical.
    >>
    >> So when the rickshaw thingy is being driven back to base, and the
    >> paying passengers have gone, the driver has to put his helmet back on?
    >>

    >
    > REad it again - only the passenger can be helmetless. 2b is the
    > passenger, 2a is the rider.
    >
    > So the rider has to wear a lid, the passenger doesn't have to. IF
    > that doesn't show the utter hypocrisy of the whole deal....
    >
    > Zebee


    "does not apply to a person riding a three or four-wheeled bicycle who is
    carrying a paying passenger"

    Sounds like the rider to me.
     
  13. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-02-06, Resound (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    > "Zebee Johnstone" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    >> So the rider has to wear a lid, the passenger doesn't have to. IF
    >> that doesn't show the utter hypocrisy of the whole deal....
    >>
    >> Zebee

    >
    > "does not apply to a person riding a three or four-wheeled bicycle who is
    > carrying a paying passenger"
    >
    > Sounds like the rider to me.


    So the rider is not fined if one of his passengers is not wearing a
    helmet.

    --
    TimC
    "Any sufficiently complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad hoc
    informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of half of Common
    Lisp." -- Greenspun's Tenth Rule of Programming
     
  14. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-02-06, Theo Bekkers (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    > Wally wrote:
    >
    >> Now I will have to think up a headdress to wear.
    >> I could become a satanist and wear some horns, which would make the
    >> helmet impractical.

    >
    > You'd need some kind of headgear to attach the horns. A helmet perhaps?


    To which standard are viking hats built to?

    --
    TimC
    -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
    Version: 3.12
    GS d- s:- a-- C+++(++++) UL(SOBI)+++(++++) P+++ L+++ E++(----)
    W++(--) N+++ o K+++ w---(++) O- M--(+) V PS++ PE-(--) Y PGP t->+
    !5 X R? tv- b- DI+ D--- G e++>++++ h* r(--) y?
    ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
     
  15. In aus.bicycle on Mon, 6 Feb 2006 13:34:28 +1100
    Resound <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>>> (5) Subregulation (2)(b) does not apply to a person riding a three or
    >>>> four-wheeled bicycle who is carrying a paying passenger, or any paying
    >>>> passenger on a three or four-wheeled bicycle.

    >
    > "does not apply to a person riding a three or four-wheeled bicycle who is
    > carrying a paying passenger"
    >
    > Sounds like the rider to me.


    It is still about 2b which is about the passenger not the rider.

    2a is the rider.

    Zebee
     
  16. Resound

    Resound Guest

    "TimC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On 2006-02-06, Theo Bekkers (aka Bruce)
    > was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    >> Wally wrote:
    >>
    >>> Now I will have to think up a headdress to wear.
    >>> I could become a satanist and wear some horns, which would make the
    >>> helmet impractical.

    >>
    >> You'd need some kind of headgear to attach the horns. A helmet perhaps?

    >
    > To which standard are viking hats built to?
    >

    I seem to recall that Viking weren't actually prone to putting horns on
    helms. So Viking standard is riveted iron, no horns.
     
  17. Peter Keller

    Peter Keller Guest

    On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 11:43:47 +1100, cfsmtb wrote:

    >
    > Wally Wrote:
    >> Many thanks for the legislation, it is exactly what I wanted.
    >>
    >> Now I will have to think up a headdress to wear.
    >> I could become a satanist and wear some horns, which would make the
    >> helmet impractical. I'll think of something.
    >>
    >> Cheers,
    >> Wally

    >
    > You could go the coral implants similar to Enigma's. Or vulcan ears. Ok
    > that was silly.


    The thing I find most impracticable is the chinstrap. Perhaps if I could
    persuade a surgeon to screw some posts into my skull onto which I can
    screw the helmet in place?

    Peter

    --
    No Microsoft involved. Certified virus free --
     
  18. cfsmtb

    cfsmtb New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    Messages:
    4,963
    Likes Received:
    0
    Kitten helmets include both:
    http://www.vikingkittens.com/
     
  19. Resound

    Resound Guest

    "cfsmtb" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > Resound Wrote:
    >>
    >> I seem to recall that Viking weren't actually prone to putting horns
    >> on
    >> helms. So Viking standard is riveted iron, no horns.

    >
    > Kitten helmets include both:
    > http://www.vikingkittens.com/
    >

    Trad metal Veitchian kittens are a special case.
     
  20. cfsmtb

    cfsmtb New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    Messages:
    4,963
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thought you were going to type Victorian 'pressed metal' kittens.
     
Loading...
Loading...