Member of the Month

profa_212
July, 2025

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Ski helmets compulsory from 2012

profile picture
alexg1687
Posts: 1505 - Karma: 1,582
So apparently ski helmets are going to be compulsory in all Australian resorts starting 2012.

http://www.skiandboard.com.au/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=36&cntnt01returnid=15

I love wearing a helmet and I know 95% of freeskiers wear them by choice. Either way, discuss....
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
LIL_WAT
Posts: 1900 - Karma: 475
Pretty safe idea, but authoritarian nonetheless.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Gnams
Posts: 891 - Karma: 31
It gets pretty standard and some helmets you dont even notice. My Holt Park is feather light and has protected me from some pretty nasty wipeouts. Its just a safety issue.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Dhane
Posts: 3866 - Karma: 1,722
it says helmets like this!

Click for larger image


all you little steeze kiwis are gonna look so silly all thugged out with gaper helmets. ha!
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
dizzydizzy
Posts: 306 - Karma: 1,031
helmets should be mandatory in 2012 to protect us from the end of the world.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
erazzleski
Posts: 117 - Karma: 14
I wore mine every day that I rode this season. Even though there was only a couple of times I was glad I had it on, I would hate to take the risk of not wearing it at all.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Malcolm
Posts: 15953 - Karma: 9,501
helmets are mandatory in all parks in Quebec already
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
midwestpowhunter
Posts: 2198 - Karma: 189
same bullshit as seatbelt laws......yes they save....noone should make you be safe. it is a personal choice. you should not be barred legally from anything on account of personal safety. if you arent smart enough to put it on then you deserve what comes.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
PJS.
Posts: 11943 - Karma: 900
yeah fuck seatbelts! you're retarded
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
If anyone sees something negative in this, they are mentally challenged and won't need a helmet anyway.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
nickyp
Posts: 5673 - Karma: 215
This.

Not wearing a helmet is natural selection at its finest.Mandating helmet wearing has twofold benefits:

1. It protects people against their own stupidity, when they seem to believe that jumping 40+ft, or spinning onto a solid piece of metal is totally risk-free.

2. It drives down resort insurance costs so passes are cheaper.



If you don't like it, get a Holt, or an R.E.D. Trace, both superlight, and unnoticeable. Or GTFO
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
right because your brain injuries dont effect anyone but you. not like anyone has to spend man hours and time to save you.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
nickyp
Posts: 5673 - Karma: 215
Your freedom of choice ends where you inability to see what is objectively good for you begins
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
casual
Posts: 6712 - Karma: 6,753
You guys all sound ridiculous....it's the government's job to dictate safety equipment to be worn during a leisure activity? Give me a break. And, Nicky (I think) that last statement was just scary, man. No hate, not trying to start another helmet debate, but holy shit.

For the record, I think it's acceptable for privately owned resorts to make demands of its customers—including mandating helmets in parks.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
to clarify i dont think it should be the governments job to make that rule either, but dont pretend that you not wearing a helmet only effects yourself.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
nickyp
Posts: 5673 - Karma: 215
All I'm saying is that law makers have a responsibility to make up for the fallibility of their citizens. The reason why the government mandates certain payroll taxes is because there is evidence that people undersave for retirement. The reason why employers offer default savings levels with 401(k) options is because people choose the level that is too low to sustain their desired pension level.

People make choices that go against their rational preferences, and that is where mandating steps in.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
Your second example is private business though. I dont think anyone has an issue with individual resorts mandating helmets to lower insurance costs, the issue is with the government dictating it.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
But Australia has universal health care, so it should be the government's business to protect you and to save others and yourself from astronomical rehabilitation costs if you fuck yourself up.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
skedge
Posts: 31 - Karma: 10
This.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
E.F.M.
Posts: 510 - Karma: 1,990
helmets are the shit Why wouldn't you wear one
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Hughes
Posts: 1023 - Karma: 941
i'm so happy i wear a helmet. its saved me so many times and if i ski without it it feels weird
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Justo8484
Posts: 3905 - Karma: 206
bingo. if your government in any way funds your healthcare (which, indirectly, it still does even in the US), then they have every right to mandate something that will in turn save them, and you, money.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
I just think that a lot of you opinionated ones, including Casual, act simply on principle for some odd reason. Look at all the athletes that could have died, but are now in recovery thanks to helmets, such as our own Pekka Hyysalo (thread is a Sticky). Attacking against this regulation seems like a slap in the face to every advocate of helmet use who has actually been through something like that and survived.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
tommyp1ckles
Posts: 1337 - Karma: 55
all laws should be based on principle,

this has nothing to do with helmets preventing injury, they do; no one is denying this. i am a "helmet advocate" but that doesn't mean i think its my right to use force against others to wear one

what would you say if your government passed a law banning skiing for "your own good." every one of your previous arguments could just as easily be used to justify that.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
Hypotheses are always a good argument point, right?

Don't veer this off-topic, governments aren't banning skiing at the moment so it's not an issue.

Don't people understand the pure sillyness in statements like "If I don't wanna __________ and I die, then it's my business and not the governments"?
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
tommyp1ckles
Posts: 1337 - Karma: 55
no..no,
you're absolutely wrong

thats completely relevant to legislating helmet use; because its a legitimate opinion, there are people who legitimately and sincerely believe we shouldn't be allow to do dangerous sports, there are people who think we should ban cigarettes, why is your cause any more noble...why are helmet/seatbelt/cigarette law advocates somehow the "anointed ones" and every other crazy nanny law advocate groups not

it all stems from the same well intentioned goal of protecting people. The only difference is that its not YOUR opinion, and thats what this is; a group of people trying to legislate their own opinion on how everyone else should act. wanting and educating people to wear helmet is a noble thing and i respect that you want to protect others; but anyone who uses government force to make others do so can legitimately go fuck themselves.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Jaggy_Snake
Posts: 2287 - Karma: 1,418
This.

And whoever previously said that helmets are shit is a prime example of the above quote.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
Well, I'm happy that we are on the road to banning cigs, I've smoked far too long to be happy about it. Kush kush FTW.

I see where you're coming from, but you're really jumping the gun there on banning dangerous sports. Humans, as a common consciousness, can gather under certain restrictions in their lives in modern society, but until we create safe and non-addictive ways of stimulating our good ol' adrenal glands to get our precious fixes, I highly doubt that recreational activities, even ones with more risk, would be disallowed.

14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
casual
Posts: 6712 - Karma: 6,753
You're "acting" on something other than principle, Mike?

The athletes you're speaking about are world-class, whose daily routines involve serious and grave risks. That's like mentioning formula 1 drivers and insisting that a 9-5 commuter should also wear helmets.

A slap in the face? What are you talking about? I've already stated that I'm in favor of helmets and think that they're common sense—ever more so when discussing the sort of skiing that we're all into...Frankly, that entire post/argument is more offensive in my opinion as it's a cheap appeal to emotion and sympathy. Accident survivors and helmet advocates should, and do, make PSA's and reach out to kids; that's the sort of thing that makes an impact, not a law.

The bottom line is that it's not legislators duty/right to make decisions for its people to this degree. Issues of state sponsored healthcare are admittedly completely out of my league, so I won't touch that. I'm not really speaking on Australia as I don't know enough about the culture/political climate, etc. But, in this country, there's a real problem with the govt. and other entities having the audacity to tell us what's right for us. I have a problem with that personally, and obviously this is all my opinion and no more valid than yours or anyone else's.




14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
Could just be that I can never completely understand the respectable, albeit a bit stereotypical, US way of looking at life and rights, standing on the outside looking in.

Yes, I'm acting on a principle as well, one that I have not always stood for - I used to abhor wearing a helmet and seldom did. At least you (and many others) can express themselves properly without drawing in hate in the matter.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
casual
Posts: 6712 - Karma: 6,753
Mike.....it IS an issue. How you can dismiss that? Skiing without a helmet has obviously been deemed unsafe and/or a potential financial issue (healthcare post-injury). It may seem far-fetched now, but forcing helmets could easily segue into wearing back/spine protectors....crash pads...wrist guards, etc. The truth is that mandating helmets is an arbitrarily drawn line, drawn by the hand of people almost certainly unfamiliar with the sport. Laws like this are used as precedents to craft new ones, it happens all the time.

I believe that people are entitled to make choices, and I also believe that more often than not, people act in their own self-interest and that governments wasting time, money, and energy on legislation like this is completely removed from their purpose. Fine if you disagree, but swatting away that guy's comment isn't reasonable and you're acting completely out of principle, like everyone else participating in this discussion.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
casual
Posts: 6712 - Karma: 6,753
No hate at all, man....I respect you a lot, I just happen to see this issue vastly differently—almost certainly due to cultural differences, and personal experience.

Remember, I'm not against helmets, they're fantastic and save many lives. I'm against being legally obligated to wear one. There's a big difference, no?
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
To both your posts, yeah, as a seque for more restrictive legislations I can see that as a very controversial issue. It's a shame the world works this way. Instead of...well, enforcement, I wish everyone would happily agree that protecting ourselves better in potentially dangerous activities is the most important thing instead of looking cool or besides the cost -- sadly it seems that even in these situations bigger powers come to play and could fuck things up for everyone (in a figurative way).
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
nickyp
Posts: 5673 - Karma: 215
It is almost certainly to do with cultural differences. We in Europe aren't as suspicious of government as Americans tend to be. We tend to prefer strong checks and balances on big government, rather than a small government to start off with. Which is why we're more concerned about stuff like media freedom, and rights to protest, etc, rather than basic rights to choose.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
I think what would be better would be individual resorts requiring them. Once a few do it, others will jump on board, and it would surprise me if that helped a) lower insurance costs allowing the mountain to either make cheaper passes or pour it into other things (park) and b)help allow parks to build bigger features.
14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
suckmyjagon
Posts: 142 - Karma: 22

Next they'll be making us all wear pants.  Fucking fascists!!!

The man-hours argument doesn't fly .  There's a lot more man-hour efficiency to be gained in Australia than the hours wasted on preventable head injuries from skiing.  As a counter-point, a woman drown last year when her helmet got caught between underwater rocks in a mountain stream.

I know all you little kids grew up wearing helmets and knowing they are awesome.  That is a great trend.  A law forcing minors to wear helmets is one thing.  A law forcing Billy Kidd to wear a helmet instead of his cowboy hat is another thing entirely.

Click for larger image

Laws like this and you'll quickly turn into the US where topless tanning is unheard of, no boobs are allowed on TV, and "roadies" don't exist.

Promote safety.  But let people do what they want.......man.

14 years ago
0 0
profile picture
huge-go
Posts: 1451 - Karma: 33
Basically my stand on this issue.
14 years ago
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4); Currently it's 2:05AM