Thread: Cyclists.

The graph doesn't show what might have been. Compulsory helmet use is a big turn off for many people, especially if you are commuting to work. There is the "helmet hair" factor that may seem frivilous to some but it's a deal breaker to others....50% of the population maybe?

ps it's safe to say there are not more people riding because helmets are compulsory...

pps we are almost out on our own on this, check out the red areas

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicy...aws_by_country

Originally Posted by vnx205

I'm not sure that generalisation is supported by the following graph. It may have happened in some capital cites, but it overstates the effect in most and it certainly didn't happen in Canberra.

5 major cities experienced decline.
Adelaide being the biggest decline, (where I noticed it)

Would you ride or ride a bicycle more often then if there were no mandatory helmet laws ?

Originally Posted by trog

Would you ride or ride a bicycle more often then if there were no mandatory helmet laws ?

i dont know. i no longer have a bike so the question is moot on me.

the graph shows conclusively the effect of mandatory helmet.

Originally Posted by trog

Would you ride or ride a bicycle more often then if there were no mandatory helmet laws ?

Yes. I say it without hesitation.

Obviously on a motor vehicle based website perspectives are going to be biased. But the graph showing only 1-3% of commuters use bikes is pretty poor regardless of whether it's going up or down by the proverbial bees willy. Yes helmets are a turn off, but not anywhere near as much as the danger of riding our roads where car is king and attitudes towards cyclists are so appalling. In other countries' big cities (eg Paris, Berlin, etc) where cycling is a huge part of the culture, helmets aren't worn mainly because it's a lot safer - because car drivers are much more considerate towards cyclists and cities / roads are designed with cyclists in mind.

Originally Posted by mikehzz

Compulsory helmet use is a big turn off for many people, especially if you are commuting to work. There is the "helmet hair" factor that may seem frivilous to some but it's a deal breaker to others....50% of the population maybe?[/URL]

Yep, deinitely a factor with me.
But more because of the distances involved.

Originally Posted by trog

Would you ride or ride a bicycle more often then if there were no mandatory helmet laws ?

Yes.
Further to that, I would like to see some of the laws SA have introduced here. The riding on footpaths for example.

A bit of searching reveals these figures -

In Queensland, cycling participation slipped from 17.9% in 2011 to 17.0% in 2013, an estimated reduction of 40,291 cyclists. Analysis at this website shows that Queensland had an average 321,900 daily bicycle trips in 1985/86 and 198,546 daily bicycle trips in 2013, despite 74.6% population growth

You don't have to be Einstein to draw conclusions from those figures. Helmets were introduced in 1989. My wife hasn't rode her bike since then, it's dead under the house. If she doesn't ride then we don't ride, so I ride less. If you do go to Europe, it is pleasing to see grannies on their bikes with a shopping basket on the front. It puts a different face on the bike riding community.