Quote:

Australia's 1.3 million motorcycle riders would be forced by law to wear fluoro jackets under proposals splitting the biker and scooter community. A country policeman has started a national battle over the possibility of compulsory hi-visibility clothing as part of a bid to make riding safer and reduce the toll of about 200 deaths a year from motorcycle accidents. One meeting of riders tonight is likely to start a national rebellion against forcing motorcycle licence holders, including the 750,000 who use their machines every week, into day-glo safety wardrobes. Anger over the proposal for mandatory protective clothing is nearing the level of fury reached when daytime headlight use was pushed as a safety measure 25 years ago. A Victorian Government road safety inquiry will consider the hi-viz option and, if adopted, other states could be expected to follow. The public debate began when the fluoro idea was pushed by Senior Sergeant Bill Gore of the Wangaratta Highway Patrol, a 35-year police motorbike veteran. Opponents now refer to it as "Gore's law", although it's a long way from being legally enforceable. Sgt Gore recommended the measure at a June meeting of locals on motorcycle safety. He denies a report he told the meeting it would become law, but has not retreated from endorsing the idea. "If a motorcyclist can make himself more visible he's less likely to be hit," Sgt Gore told ABC radio. "I would encourage motorcyclist to wear as much high-visibility gear as they could. I wear it myself, and if it can be done, that should be the choice." Damien Codognotto, Melbourne-based spokesman for the Independent Riders' Group, is fighting compulsory fluoro because it could affect the liability of a bike or scooter rider after an accident. And there was no evident the jackets would add to safety. "Gore's law is likely to change the legal standing of motorcycle and scooter riders and their liability after a crash regardless of who was at fault," Mr Codognotto told news.com.au. "We went through all this about 25 years ago with the lights-on ADR (Australian Design Rules). "Compulsory third party insurers are looking to reduce payouts for victims of road trauma who were on two wheels (who are) seen as easy targets for reduced compensation. That is not only unjust considering the premiums and taxes we pay, it is disastrous for riders' families." He said there had not been much research into the issue and the collection of crash-site data had been patchy. One bike rider named Pee Wee, from a Gold Coast Christian motorcycle club, says it's others on the road who need high visibility as they cause most accidents. "Maybe we should fluoro all the pedestrians and P-plate drivers and riders," Pee Wee said.

I've got a better idea - how about drivers just pay attention? 

Haha well in a place where ppl want to ban the burka it opens the door to be told yourselves what to wear.

SOB

I don't want to ban the burka either. 
I'd rather individuals have the right to refuse entry or service to anyone wearing them, if they so choose.

But then, I have actual principles which apply to all, not just designated victim groups.

... wrote on Aug 16^th, 2012 at 2:20pm:

I don't want to ban the burka either.  I'd rather individuals have the right to refuse entry or service to anyone wearing them, if they so choose. But then, I have actual principles which apply to all, not just designated victim groups.

I didnt mean you in particular but its the environment where if clothing can be banned it can be made mandatory too.

SOB

Dark skinned people in dark clothes are very hard to see, especially on a moonless night.

Fluoro burqas should be mandatory, to reduce the horrendous number of Muslim women killed on the roads:


Quote:

Saudi Arabia has recorded the highest rate of road accident fatalities at the Arab and world levels, according to a report issued by the World Health Organisation (WHO)

http://images.smh.com.au/2010/09/27/1951371/lynxmain-420x0.jpg

(Fluoro burqas - artist's impression)


Get with the program, Wes.

Soren wrote on Aug 16^th, 2012 at 9:40pm:

Saudi Arabia has recorded the highest rate of road accident fatalities at the Arab and world levels, according to a report issued by the World Health Organisation (WHO)

Didn't they just start letting women behind the wheel?

I wonder if thats got something to do with it.... 

That and the old saying: women should be seen, not heard. It saves lives.

... wrote on Aug 16^th, 2012 at 1:57pm:

Quote: Australia's 1.3 million motorcycle riders would be forced by law to wear fluoro jackets under proposals splitting the biker and scooter community. A country policeman has started a national battle over the possibility of compulsory hi-visibility clothing as part of a bid to make riding safer and reduce the toll of about 200 deaths a year from motorcycle accidents. One meeting of riders tonight is likely to start a national rebellion against forcing motorcycle licence holders, including the 750,000 who use their machines every week, into day-glo safety wardrobes. Anger over the proposal for mandatory protective clothing is nearing the level of fury reached when daytime headlight use was pushed as a safety measure 25 years ago. A Victorian Government road safety inquiry will consider the hi-viz option and, if adopted, other states could be expected to follow. The public debate began when the fluoro idea was pushed by Senior Sergeant Bill Gore of the Wangaratta Highway Patrol, a 35-year police motorbike veteran. Opponents now refer to it as "Gore's law", although it's a long way from being legally enforceable. Sgt Gore recommended the measure at a June meeting of locals on motorcycle safety. He denies a report he told the meeting it would become law, but has not retreated from endorsing the idea. "If a motorcyclist can make himself more visible he's less likely to be hit," Sgt Gore told ABC radio. "I would encourage motorcyclist to wear as much high-visibility gear as they could. I wear it myself, and if it can be done, that should be the choice." Damien Codognotto, Melbourne-based spokesman for the Independent Riders' Group, is fighting compulsory fluoro because it could affect the liability of a bike or scooter rider after an accident. And there was no evident the jackets would add to safety. "Gore's law is likely to change the legal standing of motorcycle and scooter riders and their liability after a crash regardless of who was at fault," Mr Codognotto told news.com.au. "We went through all this about 25 years ago with the lights-on ADR (Australian Design Rules). "Compulsory third party insurers are looking to reduce payouts for victims of road trauma who were on two wheels (who are) seen as easy targets for reduced compensation. That is not only unjust considering the premiums and taxes we pay, it is disastrous for riders' families." He said there had not been much research into the issue and the collection of crash-site data had been patchy. One bike rider named Pee Wee, from a Gold Coast Christian motorcycle club, says it's others on the road who need high visibility as they cause most accidents. "Maybe we should fluoro all the pedestrians and P-plate drivers and riders," Pee Wee said. I've got a better idea - how about drivers just pay attention?

... wrote on Aug 16^th, 2012 at 1:57pm:

Quote: Australia's 1.3 million motorcycle riders would be forced by law to wear fluoro jackets under proposals splitting the biker and scooter community. A country policeman has started a national battle over the possibility of compulsory hi-visibility clothing as part of a bid to make riding safer and reduce the toll of about 200 deaths a year from motorcycle accidents. One meeting of riders tonight is likely to start a national rebellion against forcing motorcycle licence holders, including the 750,000 who use their machines every week, into day-glo safety wardrobes. Anger over the proposal for mandatory protective clothing is nearing the level of fury reached when daytime headlight use was pushed as a safety measure 25 years ago. A Victorian Government road safety inquiry will consider the hi-viz option and, if adopted, other states could be expected to follow. The public debate began when the fluoro idea was pushed by Senior Sergeant Bill Gore of the Wangaratta Highway Patrol, a 35-year police motorbike veteran. Opponents now refer to it as "Gore's law", although it's a long way from being legally enforceable. Sgt Gore recommended the measure at a June meeting of locals on motorcycle safety. He denies a report he told the meeting it would become law, but has not retreated from endorsing the idea. "If a motorcyclist can make himself more visible he's less likely to be hit," Sgt Gore told ABC radio. "I would encourage motorcyclist to wear as much high-visibility gear as they could. I wear it myself, and if it can be done, that should be the choice." Damien Codognotto, Melbourne-based spokesman for the Independent Riders' Group, is fighting compulsory fluoro because it could affect the liability of a bike or scooter rider after an accident. And there was no evident the jackets would add to safety. "Gore's law is likely to change the legal standing of motorcycle and scooter riders and their liability after a crash regardless of who was at fault," Mr Codognotto told news.com.au. "We went through all this about 25 years ago with the lights-on ADR (Australian Design Rules). "Compulsory third party insurers are looking to reduce payouts for victims of road trauma who were on two wheels (who are) seen as easy targets for reduced compensation. That is not only unjust considering the premiums and taxes we pay, it is disastrous for riders' families." He said there had not been much research into the issue and the collection of crash-site data had been patchy. One bike rider named Pee Wee, from a Gold Coast Christian motorcycle club, says it's others on the road who need high visibility as they cause most accidents. "Maybe we should fluoro all the pedestrians and P-plate drivers and riders," Pee Wee said. I've got a better idea - how about drivers just pay attention?

Good luck with that....people simply WON'T..unless it affects them...
Only people who have family members that ride, even notice bikes or scooters...

My father always said that every driver should, during their L or P plate years, be forced to ride a bike, and drive a truck.....just so they'd have some hope of understanding other road users.....I don't think he was wrong.

Yeah.  I know...but I can still dream.

Soren wrote on Aug 16^th, 2012 at 9:40pm:

[quote]Saudi Arabia has recorded the highest rate of road accident fatalities at the Arab and world levels,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tJJNp-Is_c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUTlKaliW90
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9grajOShXl8

f*ck yeah!

JC Denton wrote on Aug 21^st, 2012 at 11:24pm:

f*ck yeah!

Fancy doing that to a statesman.. 0.58 seconds looks like 200km as in the title
Then straight after the reasonably priced car from top gear

Nanny state needs to take a step back and re-assess it's own long term targets IMO. It's become a victim to it's own methods.

As an example of what I'm saying:

If you point yourself to a known destination far off into the distance, then you automatically know the path that you must take and adjust accordingly.

It's nigh on impossible to be pushed and shoved at every point along a journey towards a pre-determined destination and be expected to make it there in one piece.

A little guidance can be helpful, but most times, nobody really cares to hear the advice of others.

So save your advice Nan and show me something of general use to me.

Our nanny state will only show the general public how to be incompetent, and then they'll wonder why they keep trying to wipe the blood from their useless enslaved control-ass hands.

Those who will not allow human nature as it is, are more guilty for every death than one who was not capable of being bounced around from his/her objective and forced into mistakes which most probably would not have happened when left to their own devices.

It's not new.

The more foolhardy of our politicians have been pushing for this since the 1970s.

Well past time we told these mofos in no uncertain terms that enough is enough!!!

I'm sure the Gypsy jokers, Bandidoes and hells angels guys will all wear flouro ... it'd be worth it just to see them roaring through town on their Harleys with high vis vests on .... i can just see it now ....

;D ;D ;D ;D

Next thing someone will insist they wear a helmet.

Just stupid.

Its only natural selection at work - Put the dumbest people on the roads on the smallest fastest machines with the least protection

Dnarever wrote on Sep 11^th, 2012 at 9:35am:

Next thing someone will insist they wear a helmet. Just stupid. Its only natural selection at work - Put the dumbest people on the roads on the smallest fastest machines with the least protection

You're a dickhead.

... wrote on Sep 11^th, 2012 at 10:10am:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 11th, 2012 at 9:35am: Next thing someone will insist they wear a helmet. Just stupid. Its only natural selection at work - Put the dumbest people on the roads on the smallest fastest machines with the least protection You're a dickhead.

At least you are well qualified to make the assessment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qukUmDfoDpc

Charlie don't surf.

Habibi do....

Is that an ad for sandles?

I'll take a pair. Going by that vid., one pair will see me out.

Dnarever wrote on Sep 11^th, 2012 at 9:35am:

Next thing someone will insist they wear a helmet. Just stupid. Its only natural selection at work - Put the dumbest people on the roads on the smallest fastest machines with the least protection

Heh. You think surfers should wear helmets too? And ppl in wheelchairs?

SOB

This is a stupid idea because it will create a false sense of security for riders and drivers alike.  Seriously if you can't see a motorcyclist when you are out driving then you should not be allowed on the road. Making law abiding riders wear one of these stupid vests won't change the habits of stupid car drivers who seem oblivious to the movements of riders anyway.

fractalign wrote on May 1^st, 2014 at 10:09pm:

This is a stupid idea because it will create a false sense of security for riders and drivers alike.  Seriously if you can't see a motorcyclist when you are out driving then you should not be allowed on the road. Making law abiding riders wear one of these stupid vests won't change the habits of stupid car drivers who seem oblivious to the movements of riders anyway.

Or if you're a cyclist, don't drive like an idiot. Stay out of people's blind spots. Don't ride down the middle of the road until traffic's stopped. And so on.

Get rid of helmet laws.  Get rid of all laws concerning motorcyclists.  But first have all drivers sign a statement that they understand they will be refused any medical care in the case of an accident that is funded, in any way, by the tax payer.

AiA wrote on Nov 29^th, 2014 at 5:53am:

Get rid of helmet laws.  Get rid of all laws concerning motorcyclists.  But first have all drivers sign a statement that they understand they will be refused any medical care in the case of an accident that is funded, in any way, by the tax payer.

Yes - how can you be cool like the Fonz or the Easy Riders  - riding without a helmet?


http://www.choppersaustralia.com/picture_library/Easy-Rider-WS.JPG


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10/06/article-2046157-0E41B29400000578-675_634x571.jpg

I just got my license and am happy to wear a helmet.

Bright colours suit my complexion so I don't even mind fluorescent vests.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 29^th, 2014 at 10:42am:

I just got my license and am happy to wear a helmet. Bright colours suit my complexion so I don't even mind fluorescent vests.

But look at the pic -

how cool is it that Jack Nicholson has a helmet behind him & doesn't wear it!

I suspect that teenaged boys might find that cool. I think it's a bit silly. And the bike itself is revolting.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 29^th, 2014 at 11:49am:

I suspect that teenaged boys might find that cool. I think it's a bit silly. And the bike itself is revolting.

I thought it looked fantastic when I was a teenager.

Now I was hoping for a few bites.  :)

AiA wrote on Nov 29^th, 2014 at 5:53am:

Get rid of helmet laws.  Get rid of all laws concerning motorcyclists.  But first have all drivers sign a statement that they understand they will be refused any medical care in the case of an accident that is funded, in any way, by the tax payer.

Reasonable point, but to be fair, you'd allow pro-rata funding. Then I'd still take the risk if I so desired.

I always have thought that the simplest solution would be to teach people to drive/ride properly in the first place before unleashing them onto the community....

Never gonna happen though, too  much money in insurance.

Oh, and also, change the culture of driving being a right of passage to it being a privilege you have to earn and retest for at regular intervals. Something a bit more advanced that a reverse park, hill start and three point turn though eh?

Making motorcyclists wear fluro or hi-vis vests or gear is stupid.

When riding a motorcycle the only person looking out for your safety is you.

Ride like you're invisible and every front bottom out there in a car is out to kill you and you'll have a chance.

Throw any of the responsibility for your safety onto the drivers around you and you'll soon be laying in a hospital bed mewing like a b!tch about how "waaaaa... they didn't see me.... it's their fault".