Ducati Monster Forum

Browsing the web I came across this little piece of news that while probably won't impact many people on this forum, is a sign of things to come. Mandatory wearing of boots when riding bike or scooter or a $176 fine. No clarification on what constitutes a "boot" per se but at least it'll target the thong and t-shirt crowd.

http://m.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/more-speed-cameras-among-new-measures-to-cut-road-toll/story-fnat79vb-1226587970571 (http://m.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/more-speed-cameras-among-new-measures-to-cut-road-toll/story-fnat79vb-1226587970571)

To people like us it's common sense but if you think about the way MC road laws are going then it's only a jump to the left and then bike jackets are the next mandatory item and then flouro vests come close behind :P. Call me paranoid, call me delusional but all my [leo] contacts say it's only a matter of time, i.e. the next 2-3 years.

The day they make us wear flouro vests is the same day I sell my bike. [thumbsdown]

I have a personal view that if you want to get on a bike, then bloody well cover up with the best gear that you can access / afford!

I saw an ad once in a mag and it said something like "If it's too hot to wear gear, then it's too hot to ride" (Qld publication in summer). Now, that was a little cheesy, but they had a point & it somehow stuck with me.

The only thing that get's me going with this one is that I'm not that comfortable being told what to do. My Wife has been trying for years & I'm still learning..........

i agree wholeheartedly with wearing gear, i learned the hard way and would never venture out without it.

fluoro vests on the other hand i disagree with, as it harks back to the headlights on debate and the onus being on riders to be seen rather than car drivers opening their make the beast with two backsing eyes!

fluoro clashes with my bikes colours too

I'm with you Looney!!  [thumbsup]

The "Being seen to be doing something" Lobby just dont get it(Or maybe they do? Thats why they keep dreaming up this shit)  ???

That you can have headlights on (Which didnt do squat! And in some circumstances proved dangerous! And was brought in using dubious logic and faulty and selective data) Flashing/revolving light on the helmet! Fleuro vests, a loudhailer warning of the approaching rider, blah, blah, blah!  [bang]

But unless you make the car driver aware that they will be banged shitless if they dont treat the rider as a valid road user and worth consideration, all the "Safety Measures" foisted upon the motorcyclist will be useless!! [roll]

But with the "Motorcycle" clothing the major problem with it is that to make it mandatory there has to be a "Standard"!! Which all the Brands, Types and the like has to adhere to! Impossible!!

But its great that some of these dickheads will be forced to wear reasonable gear!  [thumbsup] [clap]

So does this mean the cost of boots is gonna triple, to pay for the AS sticker?

Aren't they punishing us because of morons in cars????????

Personally, half of the dickheads on the road wouldn't see me if I was wearing a flashing blue and red vest with a
friggin Mr Whippy tune playing at full tilt.  With mobile phones, everyone in a car is texting or facebooking or tweeting
or whatevering, and nobody is looking anyway.  Us wearing anything bright isn't going to make any difference, because
nobody is actually looking.

As for the safety gear, due to everything I just said above, if you aren't wearing it, you're a fool anyway.

I don't see mandating that which I always do (and most of not all here too) as punishment.  IMO it's aimed at morons on motorcycles.... those who are too stupid to work out for themselves that wearing appropriate gear may be a good idea. 

And it's those morons we'll have to thank if....
This is the potential downside I fear too.  If boot wearing is mandatory, then there's gotta be a standard that defines what constitutes a friggin' boot....  [bang].

But more than anything else.... this ^^.

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/1044379_560480043998735_1779233946_n.jpg)

Not everyone in cars are like this and we all have cars i'm sure. To be honest, I see just as many dickheads/wankers on bikes these days. I hear what your saying though mate and i'm not out to contradict you   [thumbsup]

It can be hard in a car, you check your mirrors and blindspot, indicate and change lanes, checking again as you move. problem is, a bike can accelerate a dam sight quicker than your average car, the person on the bike needs to remember this. Self preservation is what its all about.       [coffee]

 [popcorn]

^^ This is also true.  But somebody must be speaking bollocks - it's probably me  ;D.

If Our Great Victorian Leaders [ [laugh] [laugh] [laugh] [laugh] [laugh] [laugh] [laugh] [laugh] [laugh] [bang] [laugh]] are gonna mandate that we must protect out tootsies...... will the gloveless dickheads still be able to fasten their AS3521 boots after they've ground their fingers off due to lack of hand protection? ???

Gloves are a great example of why this is just a little bit too silly. The Boss and I have five pairs of riding boots ... as far as I know none of them have been certified to an AS - will I need to have them certified if I cross the border or (not unlike helmets) go and purchase more, perhaps less safe, boots that have the sticker.

I don't think there is anything wrong with having a choice to wear boots or not. I have ridden a bike without boots before (sneakers or something) ... but can't remember ever going out on the road without gloves.

We all take risks in life ... shit, I have even ridden a pushy on the road faster than the posted speed limit wearing a t-shirt, shorts and sneakers. There are no limits to this type of legislation ... it could be quite fun to come up with further suggestions.

In reference to the morons in cars, I was talking about the hi vis gear.  If you read the last line of my post it also said you are a moron yourself if you don't wear safety gear as it is.

...yup. 

The point being: If you're relying on THEM to see YOU as your primary defence strategy.....

.... you're soon gonna get hit.

But then I doubt these compulsory boots will be required to be hi-vis.....not even here in Vic  ;D

... but now that you have mentioned it - I foresee a last minute amendment.

If Hi-vis vests become mandatory, the incorporation of flouro and reflective material will at some point merge with leather one and two piece gear. We'd all end up looking like Rossi in "clown leathers".

I view the Hi-vis argument similar to the helmet laws. I'm sure at the time, and our Yank friends still do, that it was argued that wearing one should be a choice and they're to ridiculous to consider blah blah. Yet here we are.

 ;D

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/946224_10151727469542037_1515894179_n.jpg)

Victoria: The Nanny State!

"Come on kiddies, do up your booties!"

I certainly see the point of such legislation, as I wear boots every time I ride (almost every) but I also wonder if this is the tip of the iceberg.

I also see the libertarian argument that says that you should be allowed to wear whatever when you ride, as you do so at your own risk.

Let's see where this goes though.

GK

The f**king future. [puke]

(http://i1291.photobucket.com/albums/b560/mishka08/Picture_zps2ceb88e7.jpg) (http://s1291.photobucket.com/user/mishka08/media/Picture_zps2ceb88e7.jpg.html)

The jacket looks great, if you're into Power Rangers! LOL!

GK

I'm conflicted.  I don't like being told what to do either, but then again I'm clever enough to wear appropriate safety gear without legislation  ;D.

I understand this view too..... But in fact on our roads you do NOT ride at your own risk.  You ride at MY (and every other taxpayer's) risk.  When you turn up at an emergency ward it's - more often than not - the State $$$ which picks up the bill for reattaching your missing toes.... it's the State which finances your rehabilitation.... and to some extent I feel this muddies the waters of "do whatever you like".  I want my government to not waste the money they extract from me....  so if it costs less to repair your accident damage by insisting you take a little responsibility for your own personal protection.... then on balance... I guess I'm fine with that.

We are funny creatures...

These are fine....
(http://stores.sportbiketrackgear.com/images/InitialSet/alpinestars_charger_suit_red_LG.jpg)
(http://www.a1leathershop.com/gallery/Ducati_Brand_Red_White__Motorbike_leather_jacket_212_21.jpg)

But this would never do....

Can I wear steel capped boots that have heel protection, a steel shank in the sole and double leather over the ankle?. They are heavy duty "industry" boots, but you cant buy them in a moto shop, (you can buy them in worksafety shops).

Yeah.... you're right.  This IS the problem..... when is a boot a motorcycle boot?

Bureaucrats will waste reams composing a definition...  [bang]

Which will require a common standard and ASA approvals and logo to signify that it is indeed a motorcycling boot that meets the requirements. It'll be no different to any other OH&S classified protective clothing, in that there has to be a standard for policing the law to work. It may take a while but there will be a standard definition and then we'll have to go out and buy boots again.

I wonder if any other country has a boot standard? It'd be a big ask for the boot manufacturers to have to maybe redesign their standard boot models which are good enough for other countries except for a small market like AU. It might shrink the options we have for buying different types of boots, i.e. racing, street, summer, winter, low cut etc.

Well Im pretty much AGATT. Just need to buy a boot I can stand in all day. I hope these boots are passable for when I ride to work.

I have not seen one ad or got one pamphlet about this. Just the normal bullshit propoganda. So much for concern for our safety.

It'll be up to the cops use common sense and discretion and recognize a riders attempt to protect themselves. Its enforcement on the coal face that will be the issue, so it pays to be respectful.

If I was a cop I'd fine a rider in thongs for being a dickhead. I'd also fine grown men for wearing baseball caps backwards! [bang] [laugh]

well put.  I posted a similar thing on the ducati.net email list and got a fair amount of agro from various us guys about how we in aust have no civil rights, etc (all pro gun guys) and how they wouldn't do this in the usa.  ie, no helmet laws.  I don't get it.  it's all about the money, and nothing we do is done in isolation.  people who say it shouldn't be about the money need to accept reality.

how pissed off do you get when the navy spends a million $ rescuing some solo, round the world, yacht sailing make the beast with two backswit?

True, we'd all like our TAC premiums go down.
Thongs in a crash = anglegrinder.

Anyone seen a formal document so we know what the law actually is? Is it on the TAC or VicRoads sites?

Haven't seen or heard a word about it (other than here - maybe Sundog made it up  [laugh] [cheeky]).

Secret law :o [laugh]!
Conspiracy!
The subjugation of the populace started with footwear laws! [laugh]

 From Koko
You've got to be kidding.

In the end you will be at their mercy. Some will be reasonable and some...
I hope the law is well draughted and clear so we know where we stand. I would like to read it though!
A respectful attitude is no guarantee, but it helps your odds. l I've got no sympathy for thong nongs.
 I've had mixed experiences with cops, so I'm not going to generalize.

There is a link to a news article at the start of this thread. I couldn't make this sh*t up.

Im sure it is the thin edge of the wedge.
No consultation most likely.
We need to be in a powerful lobby group like the AMA in the States.

Here in the sunshine state the thong nongs seem to be more than just a small minority.  The number I see wearing a jacket and shorts just astounds me.

In Vic I was always surprised that the  [leo] who should be demonstrating the right behaviors, wore short sleeve cotton shirts.  Not sure if that's still the case now.

[laugh]  Good one.

Reckon I'll need a lawyer as pillion? [laugh]

So if you don't like the government wasting your hard earned, you must hate the millions spent to treat cancer caused by smoking! LOL!

It's boots now, but it will probably move to gloves, kevlar jeans as a minimum, back protectors. From there, the only place to go is airbag jackets and hans racing devices! LOL!

Like I've said, I don't mind wearing safety gear. In fact, I wear more now than I ever have in my life, including MX style knee and shin protection under my kevlar jeans.

I suppose that I get concerned everytime those in power legislate to 'protect' us, even if it's from our own stupidity, because then, anything can be justified in the name of safety.

Case in point - speed cameras save lives!

If it can easily be justified, then the average Joe has no real say, or is forced by way of PC BS to be quiet, even if they do object. There is way too much group think and group speak in our nation now.

I agree with Koko 64, we need a strong riders association like they do in the States.

GK

There is also too much Big Brother babysitting us as well.  I am a plumber.  You should see the idiotic things I have to do in the name of "protecting people" from apparently themselves.

Firstly, you can't have water over 50 degrees C, or you could burn yourself, or your kids.
You can't have water coming out at more than 9 litres per minute, or you will waste water.
We have to put a coating over exposed pipes on your hot water unit, or you will bump it and burn your arm.
You can't even call a hot water system a hot water system, or a hot water unit.  It is a "water heater"

This is just another unnecessary way to control us.  I am a big boy.  I should be able to ride my bike wearing whatever I like.  To go out and shorts and thongs, I would be a moron, but surely that is my decision to make.  Why is it that we are not capable or making our own moronic decisions, yet the people who run this country are allowed to do just that.

My grandfather lived to be 92, on a farm, eating things like lard, and butter, and fat, and pork and god knows which other thing that is apparently going to kill us all now.  He had proper hot water and never scalded himself, and had none of the safety devices that are around today.  HOW IN THE HELL DID HE SURVIVE??

Didn't a couple of people in Qld die recently from legionnaires? That had been growing in a hot water system where the water wasn't hot enough?

Yep, in a hospital, but that was from being a tight arse and turning down the hot water units.

You are supposed to have your hot water set to 60 degrees + because legionella can't survive at that temperature, and
then have a tempering valve or a thermostatic mixing valve to reduce the temp back under 50.  Legionella also can't survive
in the pipe.  It needs a storage tank to live, so if you raise it to 65, then lower it in the pipe back to 50, Legionella will never get into your home.  Another thing, you should never EVER drink water out of your hot water tap if you have a water tank type water heater because of the magnesium and other impurities that will be in the tank, especially if the tank is old.

edit:  Having said that, it probably wont kill ya.