Triumph Rat Motorcycle Forums banner

Should complete riding gear be mandated

10K views 139 replies 45 participants last post by  Night Train 
G
#1 ·
Interesting article/poll in the Oct. 8th, 2012 UK MCN regarding the need to mandate by law, wearing full gear. Comments are all over the road which surprised me.The EU and other European countries have a penchant for creating new laws of all types for bike riders but some are being questioned by citizens on the streets.

Whilst we here in the states argue whether the government should mandate helmet use the Europeans and UK seem to be
already onto discussing the next step of requiring full gear. (Motorcycle personal protective equipment: wikipedia)

Unlike America's need for justification of needless bills/laws, no politically driven statistics were given nor one sided insurance studies quoted. Just talking about it seems the logical next step after all the little countries over there mandate helmet use. I found it very interesting. More mothering by the elitists amongst us all.:(:(
 
#5 ·
Everybody should know my politics on this, by now. With my experience falling of a 30 mph bicycle, wearing only a helmet, I will tell you you're crazy if you don't dress up like the Michelon man. Two offs from my Bonneville at speed will full gear confirm my wisdom. Should the behavior be regulated? No. There are just too many times when a rider may want or need to cut corners on gear. Helmets, well that's another story. I feel more strongly about helmet laws but that's probably because I lost a friend who bounced his head of a curb at low speed.
 
#16 ·
can't say I have seen much push to regulate the wearing of motorcycle gear here other than when they tightened up the 'it gives me a headache' helmet exemptions in the late 70s early 80s.

What stuff have you noticed?

One good thing I heard was they were going to drop the need to display the rego sticker in NSW.

One bad thing was some early talk about maybe re-introducing a front number plate requirement (after having dropped it 30 years ago) to allow easier speeding camera recognition but my hunch is that won't get far - they originally dropped the front plate on safety grounds as I recall and it would look silly saying speed cameras are more important than safety.
 
#8 ·
I should be safe here in Pennsylvania, then. It takes decades and decades for stuff to reach us. By the time mandatory gear makes it's way to our Commonwealth, I'll be too old to ride.
 
#9 ·
All that is not forbidden shall be compulsory. All that is not compulsory shall be forbidden.
 
#14 ·
Goverment has too much control already...pretty soon they will be regulating room air consumption. I like having the option of being safe or being a moron....:D I don't need some shat arse politician state or federal telling me what to do. I like having the freedom to do what I want.
 
#19 ·
Jonk,

Firstly number plates. I think the pedestrian slicing thing has been put to bed for good. The main reason plates are not reintroduced nowadays is because there is nowhere to put them. They were toying with the idea of number decals, but where would you put them on a naked. Maybe silly riders who insist on fairing deserve front decals and nakeds should remain unmarked? (just being cheeky) Modern bikes are very dependent on air flow for cooling and much effort goes into understanding how to keep air flowing through our high performance engines. Fortunately our gov't has not been pig-headed enough to go against engineers' advice - so far.

Rego Stickers. Dropping of rego stickers is NOT good news. It is the gov'ts pointless and soft compromise to planned increased traffic surveillance. Not the sort of surveillance that is to our benefit. More of the nature that is beneficial to gov't coffers.

Lastly mandatory safety equipment. I have noticed an increasing frequency of related articles in AMCN. From judging past trends, we seem to follow European standards. As the europeans get used to their new restrictions, AMCN warns us that the new restrictions are on their way then low'n'behold they are introduced in Australia. Being the cynic that I am, I think we should emotionally get ready for the introduction of silly bright clothing. As far as I know front number plates have not been introduced anywhere, and Australians rarely introduce legislation first.

With obvious exception made to carbon tax - but I shan't push that issue.
 
G
#23 ·
This is the most fun part of threads.

How is it that folks can demand and insist that one piece of gear should be mandated, by a government, to wear and yet another should be self regulated when in fact both could save your life?

Seems a rider's choice on how safe he feels when he rides whether after 2-3 drinks at a bar, a toke or two at a friends house, wears a jacket or boots, or even full jeans vs cut offs should always be his choice but when it comes to the holy helmet, that statistics prove saves a billion dollars in health care and a hundred thousand lives, only the government should decide.(of course the statistics part is a jab and not actual figures just as all others are made to order)

Keep the input coming as it is as fun as watching reruns on tv.:D
 
#24 ·
Careful you don't confuse risking your own life and risking others HAP.

Wearing a helmet should be my choice.

Wearing full fluorescent leathers or not should definitely be the rider's choice.

Riding drunk (or other co-ordination inhibiter) is a different matter. When you put others at risk by your behaviour, you've crossed a boundary in my books.
 
#30 ·
Accidents and crashes can happen anywhere at any time. If it was possible to predict them, they would be largely avoidable. That is not the case.

Five years ago we had a run-in with a left-turning driver. We were only 7 miles from home on a "fair weather" ride.

Ride safe everyone.
 
#27 ·
Interesting article/poll in the Oct. 8th, 2012 UK MCN regarding the need to mandate by law, wearing full gear.
Presumably you mean THIS poll on their website? There is no print MCN on the 8th, as it comes out every wednesday. If so, it's hardly an article, is it? :)


Whilst we here in the states argue whether the government should mandate helmet use the Europeans and UK seem to be
already onto discussing the next step of requiring full gear. (Motorcycle personal protective equipment: wikipedia)
Do you have a source for that? I've had a look around, and only found a suggestion in a European Transport Safety Council presentation back in 2008. I've also seen them suggest that we should be able to get down to ZERO road fatalities. What they are suggesting is not really what governments are discussing...


...Not meant to start up any fist fights or arguments....
Best way to avoid starting an argument? Avoid blatantly political statements like this:
More mothering by the elitists amongst us all.:(:(
 
G
#29 ·
Presumably you mean THIS poll on their website? There is no print MCN on the 8th, as it comes out every wednesday. If so, it's hardly an article, is it? :)




Do you have a source for that? I've had a look around, and only found a suggestion in a European Transport Safety Council presentation back in 2008. I've also seen them suggest that we should be able to get down to ZERO road fatalities. What they are suggesting is not really what governments are discussing...




Best way to avoid starting an argument? Avoid blatantly political statements like this:
Knowing you don't research any points I or others make, try these resources.

The Federation of European Motorcyclists Associations

MAG compulsory clothing whilst taking your test in England

bikething.co.uk/viewtopic.php? EU Motorcycle Laws proposed

Hi Viz in France, Ireland

Full gear in Belgium
And of course Wikipedia European motorcycle gear requirements.

You look them up or not. They exist whether you want to believe it or not.
 
G
#34 ·
Jeez Demonic. For sake of expediency I admit to fabricating every thing. Now, no one should read the articles I referenced.

As always, your opinion was not swayed by my made up articles, reports and references with in other forums. Sorry I took up your time. Trust me, I wont ever do this again to you.:rolleyes:
 
#35 ·
My point was that you didn't reference ANY articles, did you? I'm not saying you made anything up, only that you are wrong. :)
 
#36 ·
Whether or not the government should regulate something can never just be about what is the safest choice. It has to also be about the level of intrusion we allow the government to have over individual choice (freedom).

If the argument is only about the safest choice, then we would open the door to the government regulating (dictating) everything from the amount of fat/sugar in food, what we watch on TV, top speed a vehicle can achieve etc.

The resignation of personal freedom for the collective good is insidious and must be guarded against...for the collective good.
 
#37 ·
The promotion of general welfare is the 5th tenet of the Preamble to the U S Constitution. Of course that doesn't give government unlimited rights to control freedom but it does set the stage some regulation.


Sent from my iPhone
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top