This was supposed to be published a week ago otherwise I hope you enjoy:
Should Bicycle Helmets Be Required By Law To Ride A Bicycle?
In 1994 a bill was passed through parliament to make approved helmets for bicycles compulsory for all cyclists. Though the approved helmets only offer protection in low speed crashes to a slight consent, but in high speed crashes they do nothing to protect. With the ticketing system for being caught ridiculously high ,and with the law reducing cycling numbers with unfair targeting. These are some of the reasons I’ll be going over that make me believe that ‘Cyclists shouldn’t require a helmet to ride a bicycle!’
Firstly the helmets are too flimsy! Since the law was put out the approved helmets have been identified a major flaw, The helmets provide slight protection to the head in a low speed crash ,for example a collision with another rider. But in a high speed incident as in a bicycle hitting a car the helmet is useless as it’s too flimsy to protect the rider. With other means of transport similar to biking don’t require a helmet even though the risk is similar or worse!
Secondly the ticketing system for this is ludicrous with $*55 being fined if you are caught riding without a helmet. If you're sent to court for the charge and you're convinced guilty you could be having to pay up to $*500, in some cases police have handed out speeding tickets when people ride bikes without a helmet. It is not a massive offence to ride without a helmet with no one except yourself in tiny danger of minimal injuries, so would you ticket someone for it?
Thirdly the law has had a devastating effect on the cycling community! The law has scared many from their hobby, and scared people from starting with it being made out by that a safety helmets are required, so it is assumed to be dangerous. As it is supposed to be a relaxing pastime, that’s not what it’s being treated by the government which passed the law. If anything it’s unfair targeting on a common pastime when there is more important issues that need to be addressed, but cycling doesn’t need silly helmets.
The morals behind the law were unfair and with the execution of it being poor. With approved helmets providing little to no protection to a rider, and ticketing for the offence making no sense. Also with the law making out cycling to be something it isn’t. I go out cycling about every weekend and I’ve never had a time that my helmet has helped in an accident. The law is ludicrous with other ridable things with higher risks of crashing and with more risk to the head don’t require helmets? These are all reason that make me and hopefully you now believe that ‘Cyclists shouldn’t require a helmet to ride a bicycle!’
$*=NZD
By
Alexander Mather
Room 3
Comments
Post a Comment