www.boxertrix.com

As painful as it undoubtedly is, and I always ride with full gear, I think we have gone too far with the paranoia over motorbike gear.

The police in most hot countries ride in shirt sleeves. There is surely a trade off between being comfortable and being protected with regards to safety.

Herb wrote:As painful as it undoubtedly is, and I always ride with full gear, I think we have gone too far with the paranoia over motorbike gear.

The police in most hot countries ride in shirt sleeves. There is surely a trade off between being comfortable and being protected with regards to safety.

France for one, and of course who can forget Ponche and Jon in CHiPs

I pretty much have kit on, and if wearing less kit tone the riding speeds down appreciably. I guess it's the ones at 90+ with flips flops and shorts that are worrying but hey it's their skin

Not wearing proper gear makes me feel totally vulnerable, just like driving a car without a seatbelt. Just woulden't do it.

It is possible to wear proper protection in hot climates and still be comfortable using mesh gear and ventilated boots etc. No excuse for T shirts, trainers and shorts in my book.

Should there be new laws introduced making the wearing of protective gear (ATGATT) compulsory ?

bikesnbones wrote:Should there be new laws introduced making the wearing of protective gear (ATGATT) compulsory ?

No, but perhaps an advertising campaign to press home the dangers/effects

slparry wrote:

bikesnbones wrote:Should there be new laws introduced making the wearing of protective gear (ATGATT) compulsory ?

No, but perhaps an advertising campaign to press home the dangers/effects

This is wear I have the problem.
We condemn people who ride in shorts and T shirts, but then in the same breath protect their freedom to do exactly that.
If you believe there should not be laws, then you can't really condemn people who exercise the very freedom of choice you seem to advocate by rejecting those laws

The advent of mesh jackets and kevlar / denim mixes has revolutionised summer riding for me - I can now buy kit that's appropriate for the weather conditions whilst still maintaining adequate levels of protection.

[quote="bikesnbones
"This is wear I have the problem.
We condemn people who ride in shorts and T shirts, but then in the same breath protect their freedom to do exactly that.
If you believe there should not be laws, then you can't really condemn people who exercise the very freedom of choice you seem to advocate by rejecting those laws"[/quote]



I can see both sides of the argument, but many ofus will remember the same arguments being used when helmets became compulsory. Can anyone seriously ague in hindsight that the helmet law was wrong?
I rest my case M'lud.

bikesnbones wrote:

slparry wrote:

bikesnbones wrote:Should there be new laws introduced making the wearing of protective gear (ATGATT) compulsory ?

No, but perhaps an advertising campaign to press home the dangers/effects

This is wear I have the problem.
We condemn people who ride in shorts and T shirts, but then in the same breath protect their freedom to do exactly that.
If you believe there should not be laws, then you can't really condemn people who exercise the very freedom of choice you seem to advocate by rejecting those laws

There's plenty of situations like this in a democracy, I don't always agree with many protest groups etc, but in a democracy would always defend their right to say what they say and do what they do, so long as it doesn't intrude or negatively impact others too much(or endanger them) .

eyore wrote: Can anyone seriously ague in hindsight that the helmet law was wrong?
I rest my case M'lud.

Which brings me back to my original question,
I assume then that you believe that protective clothing should be made law, like helmets.

bikesnbones wrote:

eyore wrote: Can anyone seriously ague in hindsight that the helmet law was wrong?
I rest my case M'lud.

Which brings me back to my original question,
I assume then that you believe that protective clothing should be made law, like helmets.

I believe helmets should be up to the individual too, or certainly those who've passed their tests. When abroad a few years ago I've ridden without a lid (and sneakily on quiet lanes on sunny days in the UK) but I tend to really just bimble along, certainly at the type of speeds I'd do on a pushbike and of course there's no requirement on those. Again, it's all about parameters.
What people generally don't realise is if you come to a sudden total dead stop at anything over 30 mph or so it doesn't matter whether you have £40 or a £400 helmet you still have a good chance of dying as your brain continues to move inside your skull and mushes against it.

bikesnbones wrote:

eyore wrote: Can anyone seriously ague in hindsight that the helmet law was wrong?
I rest my case M'lud.

Which brings me back to my original question,
I assume then that you believe that protective clothing should be made law, like helmets.

No, not at all. Just pointing out that not all laws restricting (such as seatbelts or imo helmets) "restricting personal freedom" are actually stupid or unreasonable.

slparry wrote:What people generally don't realise is if you come to a sudden total dead stop at anything over 30 mph or so it doesn't matter whether you have £40 or a £400 helmet you still have a good chance of dying as your brain continues to move inside your skull and mushes against it.

Exactly, and this is what people fail to realize.
CE approved 1.5mm leathers with plastic coated polysterene inserts don't prevent broken bones and internal injuries.
If you lose it on the road, hitting a solid object like a lamppost, or another vehicle is going to become an issue long before gravel rash.
An example of that is racing.
On the track, deaths are rare because most of the time riders just slide away.
At the IOM TT, deaths are sadly relatively common, despite the riders wearing identical protective kit.
Hit a dry stone wall at speeds over 30mph, and you're as likely to die in full protective gears as you are in a T shirt.
Don't get me wrong.
I wear protective gear, but I don't put all my faith in it.

eyore wrote:No, not at all. Just pointing out that not all laws restricting (such as seatbelts or imo helmets) "restricting personal freedom" are actually stupid or unreasonable.

But you think ATGATT would be a stupid law.
You didn't really answer my question