Victoria strikes again!!

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Victoria strikes again!!

Post  rolls on Wed 16 Sep 2015, 7:44 am

First topic message reminder :

Another queer as fuck law from Victoria. What about bluetooth units?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-16/court-to-hear-legal-challenge-over-helmet-cameras/6778744
avatar
rolls

Posts : 342
Join date : 2010-06-10
Age : 48
Location : Queanbeyan

View user profile

Back to top Go down


Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  2wheelsagain on Thu 17 Sep 2015, 9:25 pm

Found the Facebook post. 

Here is more information regarding yesterdays court case regarding a gopro camera mounted to a helmet. If you are going to pass comment please read the whole thing first is there is a fair bit of info here.

Okay. Firstly, the case that was found proven today at Frankston Magistrates' Court was determined on the basis  that wearing a helmet that doesn't comply with AS/NZS 1678 makes you guilty of offence of failing to wear an approved helmet.

One of the requirements of AS/NZS 1678 is that there can be no external rigid protrusions greater than 5mm. In this case, the device in question was  a GoPro, the nature of the mounts for that particular type of device includes a post/ stem that extends perpendicular from the base at length greater than 5mm (as opposed to a Contour or similar device where the fixed component doesn't protrude beyond 5mm). The rationale behind the relevant legislation & standard being that (in accordance with the philosophy of such high end manufacturers such as Arai) that a fixed rigid protrusion greater than 5mm creates a significant risk of causing injury to the cervical spine due to rotational force of such a protrusion catching & dragging in the event of a crash/slide event, or alternatively for a  post mount like in the case of GoPro potentially compromising the integrity of the shell & causing an intracranial injury ala Schumacher.

Regarding the prosecution of this case by Vicpol, the offence was detected by a member of the HWP who issued an infringement which was then referred to court by the accused. A brief of evidence was then compiled & forwarded to the Prosecutions Division. 

Prosecutions then evaluate whether or not there is sufficient evidence to have the matter proven beyond reasonable doubt & if it is the public interest to proceed to prosecute. In the case it was firstly determined that there was at law a case to answer, but secondly that as it was considered a technical & therefore relatively minor breach of legislation, that it is was appropriate for the matter to be found proven & dismissed with no penalty by the court under s.76 of the Sentencing Act. This was rejected by the accused's legal reps Maurice Blackburn, as was a later offer to have the matter withdrawn with no costs being sought against the prosecution on the basis of it not bring in the public interest to have the matter proceed to contest once the legal position, as stated by the prosecution, had been sufficiently publicised. So in short they offered to drop the fine but the defendant and lawyers wanted their day in court (personally I would have taken that win and gone home happy).

Therefore the matter ran on it's merits & was found proven, confirming the stance taken in this case regarding the legality of that particular type of device (& in particular it's mounting system).

The bottom line in the wash up of today's events is therefore as such:
It's legal to mount a camera to your bike.
It's legal to body wear a GoPro or similar device or similar if you are prepared to accept the risk of injury that attaches to having solid objects on or about your body when riding.
However, if you choose to RIGIDLY mount any device to your helmet via screws, pins, adhesives or similar, any FIXED & RIGID component of that device that is attached to your helmet cannot legally protrude beyond the OUTER shell of the helmet by greater than 5mm. (buy a contour roam or any camera that has a thin mount unlike the gopro)

This is all about education / information & making sure the membership are appropriately advised in such a way to maximise enjoyment of our common interest while minimising risk (both physically & legally).

_________________
My posts reflect my personal  experience or opinion. You don't have to agree with me.
~ Chris ~
~ 0466 Ask ~
~ My Photography Blog Page ~
~ My YouTube Channel ~
~ Suzuki Bandits Australia Facebook Page ~
~ Half hr from the hills. Two minutes from the coast ~

~ My Bikes ~
Graphite 2014 VFR1200F - How Fast Do You Want To Tour?
Silver 2014 MV Agusta B3 Brutale 800 - Triple Treat
avatar
2wheelsagain
Admin

Posts : 6163
Join date : 2009-08-26
Age : 52
Location : Sale Area Vic

View user profile https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU-axKVr_wDILSSK0-8GQ1A

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  paul on Thu 17 Sep 2015, 9:52 pm

@2wheelsagain wrote:Found the Facebook post. 

Here is more information regarding yesterdays court case regarding a gopro camera mounted to a helmet. If you are going to pass comment please read the whole thing first is there is a fair bit of info here.

Okay. Firstly, the case that was found proven today at Frankston Magistrates' Court was determined on the basis  that wearing a helmet that doesn't comply with AS/NZS 1678 makes you guilty of offence of failing to wear an approved helmet.

One of the requirements of AS/NZS 1678 is that there can be no external rigid protrusions greater than 5mm. In this case, the device in question was  a GoPro, the nature of the mounts for that particular type of device includes a post/ stem that extends perpendicular from the base at length greater than 5mm (as opposed to a Contour or similar device where the fixed component doesn't protrude beyond 5mm). The rationale behind the relevant legislation & standard being that (in accordance with the philosophy of such high end manufacturers such as Arai) that a fixed rigid protrusion greater than 5mm creates a significant risk of causing injury to the cervical spine due to rotational force of such a protrusion catching & dragging in the event of a crash/slide event, or alternatively for a  post mount like in the case of GoPro potentially compromising the integrity of the shell & causing an intracranial injury ala Schumacher.

Regarding the prosecution of this case by Vicpol, the offence was detected by a member of the HWP who issued an infringement which was then referred to court by the accused. A brief of evidence was then compiled & forwarded to the Prosecutions Division. 

Prosecutions then evaluate whether or not there is sufficient evidence to have the matter proven beyond reasonable doubt & if it is the public interest to proceed to prosecute. In the case it was firstly determined that there was at law a case to answer, but secondly that as it was considered a technical & therefore relatively minor breach of legislation, that it is was appropriate for the matter to be found proven & dismissed with no penalty by the court under s.76 of the Sentencing Act. This was rejected by the accused's legal reps Maurice Blackburn, as was a later offer to have the matter withdrawn with no costs being sought against the prosecution on the basis of it not bring in the public interest to have the matter proceed to contest once the legal position, as stated by the prosecution, had been sufficiently publicised. So in short they offered to drop the fine but the defendant and lawyers wanted their day in court (personally I would have taken that win and gone home happy).

Therefore the matter ran on it's merits & was found proven, confirming the stance taken in this case regarding the legality of that particular type of device (& in particular it's mounting system).

The bottom line in the wash up of today's events is therefore as such:
It's legal to mount a camera to your bike.
It's legal to body wear a GoPro or similar device or similar if you are prepared to accept the risk of injury that attaches to having solid objects on or about your body when riding.
However, if you choose to RIGIDLY mount any device to your helmet via screws, pins, adhesives or similar, any FIXED & RIGID component of that device that is attached to your helmet cannot legally protrude beyond the OUTER shell of the helmet by greater than 5mm. (buy a contour roam or any camera that has a thin mount unlike the gopro)

This is all about education / information & making sure the membership are appropriately advised in such a way to maximise enjoyment of our common interest while minimising risk (both physically & legally).
Thanks 2WA .............always more to something than meets the eye I think the saying goes

_________________
Four wheels move the body. Two wheels move the soul.






avatar
paul

Posts : 6837
Join date : 2011-08-19
Age : 64
Location : Morphett Vale Sth. Aust.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  madmax on Thu 17 Sep 2015, 10:02 pm

@paul wrote:
@2wheelsagain wrote:Found the Facebook post. 

Here is more information regarding yesterdays court case regarding a gopro camera mounted to a helmet. If you are going to pass comment please read the whole thing first is there is a fair bit of info here.

Okay. Firstly, the case that was found proven today at Frankston Magistrates' Court was determined on the basis  that wearing a helmet that doesn't comply with AS/NZS 1678 makes you guilty of offence of failing to wear an approved helmet.

One of the requirements of AS/NZS 1678 is that there can be no external rigid protrusions greater than 5mm. In this case, the device in question was  a GoPro, the nature of the mounts for that particular type of device includes a post/ stem that extends perpendicular from the base at length greater than 5mm (as opposed to a Contour or similar device where the fixed component doesn't protrude beyond 5mm). The rationale behind the relevant legislation & standard being that (in accordance with the philosophy of such high end manufacturers such as Arai) that a fixed rigid protrusion greater than 5mm creates a significant risk of causing injury to the cervical spine due to rotational force of such a protrusion catching & dragging in the event of a crash/slide event, or alternatively for a  post mount like in the case of GoPro potentially compromising the integrity of the shell & causing an intracranial injury ala Schumacher.

Regarding the prosecution of this case by Vicpol, the offence was detected by a member of the HWP who issued an infringement which was then referred to court by the accused. A brief of evidence was then compiled & forwarded to the Prosecutions Division. 

Prosecutions then evaluate whether or not there is sufficient evidence to have the matter proven beyond reasonable doubt & if it is the public interest to proceed to prosecute. In the case it was firstly determined that there was at law a case to answer, but secondly that as it was considered a technical & therefore relatively minor breach of legislation, that it is was appropriate for the matter to be found proven & dismissed with no penalty by the court under s.76 of the Sentencing Act. This was rejected by the accused's legal reps Maurice Blackburn, as was a later offer to have the matter withdrawn with no costs being sought against the prosecution on the basis of it not bring in the public interest to have the matter proceed to contest once the legal position, as stated by the prosecution, had been sufficiently publicised. So in short they offered to drop the fine but the defendant and lawyers wanted their day in court (personally I would have taken that win and gone home happy).

Therefore the matter ran on it's merits & was found proven, confirming the stance taken in this case regarding the legality of that particular type of device (& in particular it's mounting system).

The bottom line in the wash up of today's events is therefore as such:
It's legal to mount a camera to your bike.
It's legal to body wear a GoPro or similar device or similar if you are prepared to accept the risk of injury that attaches to having solid objects on or about your body when riding.
However, if you choose to RIGIDLY mount any device to your helmet via screws, pins, adhesives or similar, any FIXED & RIGID component of that device that is attached to your helmet cannot legally protrude beyond the OUTER shell of the helmet by greater than 5mm. (buy a contour roam or any camera that has a thin mount unlike the gopro)

This is all about education / information & making sure the membership are appropriately advised in such a way to maximise enjoyment of our common interest while minimising risk (both physically & legally).
Thanks 2WA .............always more to something than meets the eye I think the saying goes
I still think its pretty fucked up. Their whole argument stems from the 5mm which is a manufacturer requirement. Supposedly because anything greater will cause neck injuries if the rider comes off and the accessory is dragged along the road. More than likely the accessory will just snap off. If I was to attach my Sena with double sided tape it too would fail in the eyes of this ruling. As its clamped on I'm definitely heading to the gallows.
Although I'm not interested in attaching a camera to my helmet, this applies to all accessories including bluetooth units. There is currently no bluetooth unit that sits within the 5mm limitation.
Remember too that this seems to only be a problem for Victoria and NSW All the other states the police are encouraging the use of helmet mounted camera.

_________________
2011 GSX1250FA in Candy Indy Blue
avatar
madmax

Posts : 3827
Join date : 2011-10-19
Age : 53
Location : Carrum Downs, Victoria

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  paul on Thu 17 Sep 2015, 10:10 pm

@madmax wrote:
@paul wrote:
@2wheelsagain wrote:Found the Facebook post. 

Here is more information regarding yesterdays court case regarding a gopro camera mounted to a helmet. If you are going to pass comment please read the whole thing first is there is a fair bit of info here.


It's legal to body wear a GoPro or similar device or similar if you are prepared to accept the risk of injury that attaches to having solid objects on or about your body when riding.
However, if you choose to RIGIDLY mount any device to your helmet via screws, pins, adhesives or similar, any FIXED & RIGID component of that device that is attached to your helmet cannot legally protrude beyond the OUTER shell of the helmet by greater than 5mm. (buy a contour roam or any camera that has a thin mount unlike the gopro)

This is all about education / information & making sure the membership are appropriately advised in such a way to maximise enjoyment of our common interest while minimising risk (both physically & legally).
Thanks 2WA .............always more to something than meets the eye I think the saying goes
I still think its pretty fucked up. Their whole argument stems from the 5mm which is a manufacturer requirement. Supposedly because anything greater will cause neck injuries if the rider comes off and the accessory is dragged along the road. More than likely the accessory will just snap off. If I was to attach my Sena with double sided tape it too would fail in the eyes of this ruling. As its clamped on I'm definitely heading to the gallows.
Although I'm not interested in attaching a camera to my helmet, this applies to all accessories including bluetooth units. There is currently no bluetooth unit that sits within the 5mm limitation.
Remember too that this seems to only be a problem for Victoria and NSW All the other states the police are encouraging the use of helmet mounted camera.
Maybe the only answer is one common law between all states , but then some circumstances of law in Qld may not always translate to Tassy for argument sake .I suppose there must be some form of common sense somewhere in the legal system , but trying to prove a point can also sometimes backfire .

_________________
Four wheels move the body. Two wheels move the soul.






avatar
paul

Posts : 6837
Join date : 2011-08-19
Age : 64
Location : Morphett Vale Sth. Aust.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  Hammy on Fri 18 Sep 2015, 6:50 am

Still a "Grey area".

_________________
Non Compus Mentis.    "Not of Sound Mind" .
avatar
Hammy

Posts : 4446
Join date : 2011-08-09
Age : 57
Location : The Rock

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  Ewok1958 on Fri 18 Sep 2015, 8:26 am

@2wheelsagain wrote:...
The bottom line in the wash up of today's events is therefore as such:
It's legal to mount a camera to your bike.
It's legal to body wear a GoPro or similar device or similar if you are prepared to accept the risk of injury that attaches to having solid objects on or about your body when riding.
However, if you choose to RIGIDLY mount any device to your helmet via screws, pins, adhesives or similar, any FIXED & RIGID component of that device that is attached to your helmet cannot legally protrude beyond the OUTER shell of the helmet by greater than 5mm. (buy a contour roam or any camera that has a thin mount unlike the gopro)

This is all about education / information & making sure the membership are appropriately advised in such a way to maximise enjoyment of our common interest while minimising risk (both physically & legally).

Thanks Chris for the extra details.  I'm actually glad to see that the prosecution was based on a technical issue and not a social one.  If it had been the latter, it might have been a first step in banning on-board video cameras, although you would hope not of course. cheers
avatar
Ewok1958

Posts : 3728
Join date : 2010-08-03
Age : 58
Location : Bemboka, NSW

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  Chook on Fri 18 Sep 2015, 9:35 am

@Ewok1958 wrote:
@2wheelsagain wrote:
However, if you choose to RIGIDLY mount any device to your helmet via screws, pins, adhesives or similar, any FIXED & RIGID component of that device that is attached to your helmet cannot legally protrude beyond the OUTER shell of the helmet by greater than 5mm. (buy a contour roam or any camera that has a thin mount unlike the gopro)

Thanks Chris for the extra details.  I'm actually glad to see that the prosecution was based on a technical issue and not a social one.  If it had been the latter, it might have been a first step in banning on-board video cameras, although you would hope not of course. cheers
At least that makes the  Scala headset mount ok, hopefully my trip through Vic in Feb should be relatively incident free then.............(prays!!)
avatar
Chook

Posts : 2848
Join date : 2012-01-20
Age : 52
Location : Between the City and Beach, Adelaide

View user profile https://www.facebook.com/groups/154520904856/?fref=ts

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  paul on Fri 18 Sep 2015, 9:45 am

@Chook wrote:
@Ewok1958 wrote:
@2wheelsagain wrote:
However, if you choose to RIGIDLY mount any device to your helmet via screws, pins, adhesives or similar, any FIXED & RIGID component of that device that is attached to your helmet cannot legally protrude beyond the OUTER shell of the helmet by greater than 5mm. (buy a contour roam or any camera that has a thin mount unlike the gopro)

Thanks Chris for the extra details.  I'm actually glad to see that the prosecution was based on a technical issue and not a social one.  If it had been the latter, it might have been a first step in banning on-board video cameras, although you would hope not of course. cheers
At least that makes the  Scala headset mount ok, hopefully my trip through Vic in Feb should be relatively incident free then.............(prays!!)
That then raises the question , that if something is legal in the state you are from , and you visit a state where it isn't legal ..................which law applies  Question

_________________
Four wheels move the body. Two wheels move the soul.






avatar
paul

Posts : 6837
Join date : 2011-08-19
Age : 64
Location : Morphett Vale Sth. Aust.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  madmax on Fri 18 Sep 2015, 11:41 am

@paul wrote:
@Chook wrote:
@Ewok1958 wrote:
@2wheelsagain wrote:
However, if you choose to RIGIDLY mount any device to your helmet via screws, pins, adhesives or similar, any FIXED & RIGID component of that device that is attached to your helmet cannot legally protrude beyond the OUTER shell of the helmet by greater than 5mm. (buy a contour roam or any camera that has a thin mount unlike the gopro)

Thanks Chris for the extra details.  I'm actually glad to see that the prosecution was based on a technical issue and not a social one.  If it had been the latter, it might have been a first step in banning on-board video cameras, although you would hope not of course. cheers
At least that makes the  Scala headset mount ok, hopefully my trip through Vic in Feb should be relatively incident free then.............(prays!!)
That then raises the question , that if something is legal in the state you are from , and you visit a state where it isn't legal ..................which law applies  Question

The state your in at the time

_________________
2011 GSX1250FA in Candy Indy Blue
avatar
madmax

Posts : 3827
Join date : 2011-10-19
Age : 53
Location : Carrum Downs, Victoria

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  Chook on Fri 18 Sep 2015, 1:15 pm

@madmax wrote:
@paul wrote:
@Chook wrote:
@Ewok1958 wrote:
@2wheelsagain wrote:
However, if you choose to RIGIDLY mount any device to your helmet via screws, pins, adhesives or similar, any FIXED & RIGID component of that device that is attached to your helmet cannot legally protrude beyond the OUTER shell of the helmet by greater than 5mm. (buy a contour roam or any camera that has a thin mount unlike the gopro)

Thanks Chris for the extra details.  I'm actually glad to see that the prosecution was based on a technical issue and not a social one.  If it had been the latter, it might have been a first step in banning on-board video cameras, although you would hope not of course. cheers
At least that makes the  Scala headset mount ok, hopefully my trip through Vic in Feb should be relatively incident free then.............(prays!!)
That then raises the question , that if something is legal in the state you are from , and you visit a state where it isn't legal ..................which law applies  Question

The state your in at the time
This is a AU/NZ standard, it is the same for law for the whole of both countries, it SHOULD be the policed the bloody same anywhere in Australia or New Zealand Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad
avatar
Chook

Posts : 2848
Join date : 2012-01-20
Age : 52
Location : Between the City and Beach, Adelaide

View user profile https://www.facebook.com/groups/154520904856/?fref=ts

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  barry_mcki on Fri 18 Sep 2015, 3:26 pm

The trouble is they have taken a document designed for testing the manufacture and eventual sale of an item and tried to make an ADR out of it.  

To go by the letter of the standard you are not even suppose to remove the plastic bag containing the instructions from the chin strap, to be compliant this little baggie is suppose be flapping around in the breeze whenever you ride.  It is a consumer protection standard, i.e. the helmet have to meet these requirements to be sold in Australia.

I agree wholeheartedly with Ulsterkiwi about the police actually getting on with looking after real crime, the sooner there is an Australian wide rule on this and other transport related things the better.

_________________
Hacks - more smiles per mile  



Red 2007 GSF-1250S with SRK Premier Sidecar
avatar
barry_mcki

Posts : 1604
Join date : 2010-04-10
Age : 60
Location : Hillwood, Tasmania

View user profile http://g.co/maps/vb84k

Back to top Go down

Victoria strikes again

Post  talon440 on Fri 18 Sep 2015, 3:54 pm

Not sure how the manufactures of helmets came up with this 5mm rule, my Arai Aust approved helmet has vents that protrude 18mm above the surface of the helmet, does that mean in an accident they will cause spinal injuries by catching on the road or any other object same as a mount would, i would also argue that the GoPro stick on mounts would tear off long before they caused any injury in an accident, i can  understand that modifying a helmet by means of drilling or cutting into the surface would make it non complying, but placing a mount or object by means of velcro or double sided tape that is not in any way limiting vision or obstructing the rider in controlling the motorbike would make the helmet non complying, but thats just my opinion, seems they have to make a positive decision either way so we all know exactly what is legal and what is not, if the 5mm rule applies then my helmet is non complying because of the vents, but then it has a sticker to say it is.
avatar
talon440

Posts : 141
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 63
Location : Forster

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  2wheelsagain on Fri 18 Sep 2015, 6:36 pm

@talon440 wrote:Not sure how the manufactures of helmets came up with this 5mm rule, my Arai Aust approved helmet has vents that protrude 18mm above the surface of the helmet, does that mean in an accident they will cause spinal injuries by catching on the road or any other object same as a mount would, i would also argue that the GoPro stick on mounts would tear off long before they caused any injury in an accident, i can  understand that modifying a helmet by means of drilling or cutting into the surface would make it non complying, but placing a mount or object by means of velcro or double sided tape that is not in any way limiting vision or obstructing the rider in controlling the motorbike would make the helmet non complying, but thats just my opinion, seems they have to make a positive decision either way so we all know exactly what is legal and what is not, if the 5mm rule applies then my helmet is non complying because of the vents, but then it has a sticker to say it is.
Mate your lid is compliant because it would have been submitted for testing with the vents in place. Try again.

_________________
My posts reflect my personal  experience or opinion. You don't have to agree with me.
~ Chris ~
~ 0466 Ask ~
~ My Photography Blog Page ~
~ My YouTube Channel ~
~ Suzuki Bandits Australia Facebook Page ~
~ Half hr from the hills. Two minutes from the coast ~

~ My Bikes ~
Graphite 2014 VFR1200F - How Fast Do You Want To Tour?
Silver 2014 MV Agusta B3 Brutale 800 - Triple Treat
avatar
2wheelsagain
Admin

Posts : 6163
Join date : 2009-08-26
Age : 52
Location : Sale Area Vic

View user profile https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU-axKVr_wDILSSK0-8GQ1A

Back to top Go down

Victoria strikes again

Post  talon440 on Fri 18 Sep 2015, 7:45 pm

And your not getting my point, the vents would hit the ground being 18mm high and dig in before the GoPro mount which is only 9mm high yet the vents are legal. i know my helmet is compliant you dont have to tell me that, but now they are saying that something sticking out 5mm from the surface of the helmet is illegal, dont get it
avatar
talon440

Posts : 141
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 63
Location : Forster

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  Hammy on Sat 19 Sep 2015, 5:04 am

It all comes down to a matter of  "covering your arse" .  The Helmet manufacturer is saying that his helmet is safe as it is.  You decide to stick something else on it. Don't  come crying to us when you break your neck, cause we told you so. They have given what they think is maximum and that's about that.

_________________
Non Compus Mentis.    "Not of Sound Mind" .
avatar
Hammy

Posts : 4446
Join date : 2011-08-09
Age : 57
Location : The Rock

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  madmax on Sat 19 Sep 2015, 6:39 am

@talon440 wrote:And your not getting my point, the vents would hit the ground being 18mm high and dig in before the GoPro mount which is only 9mm high yet the vents are legal. i know my helmet is compliant you dont have to tell me that, but now they are saying that something sticking out 5mm from the surface of the helmet is illegal, dont get it

I get your point. Its a legal argument not a factual one.

_________________
2011 GSX1250FA in Candy Indy Blue
avatar
madmax

Posts : 3827
Join date : 2011-10-19
Age : 53
Location : Carrum Downs, Victoria

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Victoria strikes again

Post  talon440 on Sat 19 Sep 2015, 7:40 am

@Hammy wrote:It all comes down to a matter of  "covering your arse" .  The Helmet manufacturer is saying that his helmet is safe as it is.  You decide to stick something else on it. Don't  come crying to us when you break your neck, cause we told you so. They have given what they think is maximum and that's about that.

NOW i know you have an anal problem Hammy and dont worry i wont come crying to you or anyone else, but like MM i will cop the fine if and when it happens because i enjoy videoing my bike trips and looking back to see the fun we all had and the places we go and the people we meet and the safety it provides and evidence in case of the worst, and will continue to do so, we all break the law at some time when riding or driving and cop the fine for it, but doesnt mean you agree with it, just the way it is, in the last 5 years that ive been riding with a camera on my helmet ive been all over Aust and not had a problem with police regarding my camera and also my tinted visor, lucky, who knows
avatar
talon440

Posts : 141
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 63
Location : Forster

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  Chook on Sat 19 Sep 2015, 8:56 am

@talon440 wrote:Not sure how the manufactures of helmets came up with this 5mm rule, 
not the manufacturers, Standards Australia write the standard, if the manufacturer wants to sell it here, they have to manufacture it to the standard
avatar
Chook

Posts : 2848
Join date : 2012-01-20
Age : 52
Location : Between the City and Beach, Adelaide

View user profile https://www.facebook.com/groups/154520904856/?fref=ts

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  Bosco15 on Sat 19 Sep 2015, 9:16 am

The thing that amazes me, is the law and the enforcement of it, the prosecution and penalties are all supposed to be for the protection of the rider. 
We, as a society,  don't want to see a motorcyclist injured because of the camera mounted to his/her helmet and yet it is perfectly legal to wear a complaint helmet in conjunction with shorts, singlet and thongs. Question

_________________
Some people are like slinkys. Not good for anything but they make you smile when you push them down the stairs.
avatar
Bosco15

Posts : 1343
Join date : 2013-12-04
Age : 47
Location : Newcastle

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Victoria strikes again !!

Post  talon440 on Sat 19 Sep 2015, 9:20 am

@Chook wrote:
@talon440 wrote:Not sure how the manufactures of helmets came up with this 5mm rule, 
not the manufacturers, Standards Australia write the standard, if the manufacturer wants to sell it here, they have to manufacture it to the standard

Thanks for that Chook, would be nice to get a complete rulling on it not just a maybe or maybe not, but as others have said on here is it really that much of a problem that needs to cop a fine when the safety aspect of the camera or the two way intercome in an emergency outweighs the the very minor aspect of the damage it will cause in an accident, if  all i had to worry about was the mount on my helmet doing injury to me as i slide down the road heading towards the car thats about to run me over ill take the mount every time
avatar
talon440

Posts : 141
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 63
Location : Forster

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  Hammy on Sun 20 Sep 2015, 6:52 am

@talon440 wrote:
@Hammy wrote:It all comes down to a matter of  "covering your arse" .  The Helmet manufacturer is saying that his helmet is safe as it is.  You decide to stick something else on it. Don't  come crying to us when you break your neck, cause we told you so. They have given what they think is maximum and that's about that.

NOW i know you have an anal problem Hammy and dont worry i wont come crying to you or anyone else, but like MM i will cop the fine if and when it happens because i enjoy videoing my bike trips and looking back to see the fun we all had and the places we go and the people we meet and the safety it provides and evidence in case of the worst, and will continue to do so, we all break the law at some time when riding or driving and cop the fine for it, but doesnt mean you agree with it, just the way it is, in the last 5 years that ive been riding with a camera on my helmet ive been all over Aust and not had a problem with police regarding my camera and also my tinted visor, lucky, who knows

I was meaning "you" , as in general.  My comment was not aimed at you personally.  Smile

_________________
Non Compus Mentis.    "Not of Sound Mind" .
avatar
Hammy

Posts : 4446
Join date : 2011-08-09
Age : 57
Location : The Rock

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Melbourne Country Court judge dismisses helmet camera fine

Post  Chook on Fri 12 Feb 2016, 5:16 pm

After 6 visits to court a judge has overturned the guilty ruling based on the standards being too hard for the general public to access

http://motorbikewriter.com/judge-dismisses-helmet-camera-fine/
avatar
Chook

Posts : 2848
Join date : 2012-01-20
Age : 52
Location : Between the City and Beach, Adelaide

View user profile https://www.facebook.com/groups/154520904856/?fref=ts

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  2wheelsagain on Fri 12 Feb 2016, 6:46 pm

Finally. But its still technically illegal. The law hasn't been changed. Just the fine dismissed.
Hopefully now police resources will be better spent elsewhere.

_________________
My posts reflect my personal  experience or opinion. You don't have to agree with me.
~ Chris ~
~ 0466 Ask ~
~ My Photography Blog Page ~
~ My YouTube Channel ~
~ Suzuki Bandits Australia Facebook Page ~
~ Half hr from the hills. Two minutes from the coast ~

~ My Bikes ~
Graphite 2014 VFR1200F - How Fast Do You Want To Tour?
Silver 2014 MV Agusta B3 Brutale 800 - Triple Treat
avatar
2wheelsagain
Admin

Posts : 6163
Join date : 2009-08-26
Age : 52
Location : Sale Area Vic

View user profile https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU-axKVr_wDILSSK0-8GQ1A

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  Chook on Fri 12 Feb 2016, 6:58 pm

@2wheelsagain wrote:Finally. But its still technically illegal. The law hasn't been changed. Just the fine dismissed.
Hopefully now police resources will be better spent elsewhere.
Is it? That depends on interpretation of the standard, SA has interpreted the standard as it's ok so long as you don't drill into the helmet or otherwise damage it. Vic has another view. It's bloody frustrating, we live in one country, supposedly using the Australian Road Rules as a model for each states legislation and this in particullar should have no variation between states as it's is all based on an aus/nz standard that can't have the wording changed by different states  Evil or Very Mad

The way I read it they didn't even look at the legality of a camera on a helmet in this court hearing, just dismissed it on the fact the piece of legislation (standard) is not readily and freely available.
avatar
Chook

Posts : 2848
Join date : 2012-01-20
Age : 52
Location : Between the City and Beach, Adelaide

View user profile https://www.facebook.com/groups/154520904856/?fref=ts

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  2wheelsagain on Sat 13 Feb 2016, 1:18 pm

@Chook wrote:
@2wheelsagain wrote:Finally. But its still technically illegal. The law hasn't been changed. Just the fine dismissed.
Hopefully now police resources will be better spent elsewhere.
Is it? That depends on interpretation of the standard, SA has interpreted the standard as it's ok so long as you don't drill into the helmet or otherwise damage it. Vic has another view. It's bloody frustrating, we live in one country, supposedly using the Australian Road Rules as a model for each states legislation and this in particullar should have no variation between states as it's is all based on an aus/nz standard that can't have the wording changed by different states  Evil or Very Mad

The way I read it they didn't even look at the legality of a camera on a helmet in this court hearing, just dismissed it on the fact the piece of legislation (standard) is not readily and freely available.
Exactly right. The case wasn't won or lost on the legality of sticking something on your helmet. It was dismissed over the availability of the AS document.

_________________
My posts reflect my personal  experience or opinion. You don't have to agree with me.
~ Chris ~
~ 0466 Ask ~
~ My Photography Blog Page ~
~ My YouTube Channel ~
~ Suzuki Bandits Australia Facebook Page ~
~ Half hr from the hills. Two minutes from the coast ~

~ My Bikes ~
Graphite 2014 VFR1200F - How Fast Do You Want To Tour?
Silver 2014 MV Agusta B3 Brutale 800 - Triple Treat
avatar
2wheelsagain
Admin

Posts : 6163
Join date : 2009-08-26
Age : 52
Location : Sale Area Vic

View user profile https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU-axKVr_wDILSSK0-8GQ1A

Back to top Go down

Re: Victoria strikes again!!

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum