Alt Bike Culture - NZ Safety Nazis try to stop sales of Choppers and LowRiders

Voluntary recall of retro bikes requested

THURSDAY , 19 MAY 2005

The Commerce Commission is requesting the voluntary recall of potentially unsafe "retro" style bicycles.

It is currently investigating two retailers for allegedly selling bicycles which contravene safety standards, and is writing to bicycle importers and distributors nationwide requesting the voluntary recall.

The bicycles are sold under a variety of names including, "retro", "chopper", "cruiser", and "lowrider" and the commission believed a large number had been sold recently.

The commission had found bicycles which breached safety standards in one or more ways, including no front brakes, handlebars too wide, no reflectors and frame lengths which cause stability problems, director of fair trading Deborah Battell said.

"Any one of these defects could compromise rider safety or affect handling, especially in an emergency," she said.

"Retailers and wholesalers have an absolute responsibility to ensure that any bicycle sold meets the safety standard.

"Consumers who suspect their bicycle does not meet the safety standard should immediately take the bicycle back to their retailer. Some breaches are easily fixed, but in other cases, a refund may be necessary."

The commission had met with the Bicycle Industry Association which has undertaken to reinforce with its members the necessity for compliance with compulsory safety standards, Ms Battell said.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3285717a11,00.html

Some of the choppers I have seen are cool looking but they don't look safe as far as steering goes. I've never ridden so maybe they are deceptively unwieldy looking, but I can't imagine having handling skills appropriate for tight turns or some traffic conditions... that said... those bikes look like they are designed for cruising at about 8 mph and at that speed I think you'd have all the handling you'd need so I don't see the problem.

As long as people buying them know they handle a little differently than a regular bike and to ride accordingly, then there shouldn't be a problem. This type of over-legislation is crap-tastic!

peace,
sam

Those legislators don't know their a$$ from a hole in the ground. I have a 3-speed beach cruiser, a single-speed low-rider, a 7-speed chopper and a 3-speed stretch cruiser and chances are I am a safer rider than 95% of the others, even with my wide handlebars. Heck, I haven't had even a minor crash in 25 years! Most of my bikes are too slow to have a serious accident anyway. And they're all so low I can put both feet flat on the ground in a split second. And ALL of my bikes are fully equipped with lights, horns and reflectors. Half the fun is finding just the right accessories for our cool bikes. Read some of the other forums and you'll read all about the guys on the fast bikes having accidents, not the guys on cruisers, choppers and lowriders. I say take those legislators for a ride and let 'em see they are full of donkey donuts.

In socialist countries like New Zealand the government provides things such as free healthcare. If I was a taxpayer in NZ I would be quite keen for the govt. to minimise the burden of healthcare costs.

Does your govt. allow you buy unsafe vehicles of any description?

In a socialist country like Sweden, we are still free to do what we want. I suppose what I'm saying is that you shouldn't bring in politics in the equation. If any government would want to reduce healthcare costs, there are a gazillion things (including sports) which are already vastly more dangerous than riding a chopper. And... in the end, no matter what political system you have - you always end up with paying for other peoples mistakes and bad fortunes, be they war, bike crashes or company fraud.

In socialist countries like New Zealand the government provides things such as free healthcare. If I was a taxpayer in NZ I would be quite keen for the govt. to minimise the burden of healthcare costs.

Does your govt. allow you buy unsafe vehicles of any description?
In the USA, you put the CPSC reflectors on, and yer good to go!!!

If you don't know how to ride it, or are unwilling to accept the risks and responsibilities, then you shouldn't be doin' it!

In a socialist country like Sweden, we are still free to do what we want. I suppose what I'm saying is that you shouldn't bring in politics in the equation. If any government would want to reduce healthcare costs, there are a gazillion things (including sports) which are already vastly more dangerous than riding a chopper. And... in the end, no matter what political system you have - you always end up with paying for other peoples mistakes and bad fortunes, be they war, bike crashes or company fraud.
True, and very pragmatic.

It's not an issue of politics. These bikes are obviously contravening some existing regulations are therefore illegal. Safety rules are a fact of life. Governments have a responsibility to protect their citizens (to a point at least.)

Additionally in New Zealand you cannot litigate against people or entities as a result of accidents no matter how they were caused.

In socialist countries like New Zealand the government provides things such as free healthcare. If I was a taxpayer in NZ I would be quite keen for the govt. to minimise the burden of healthcare costs.

Does your govt. allow you buy unsafe vehicles of any description?

People think healthcare in Oz is free. If only they udnerstood how it really works. As far as NZ, I love it there. Can't blame them for trying to keep it one of the safest places in the world, even if they get a bit misguided.

It's not an issue of politics. These bikes are obviously contravening some existing regulations are therefore illegal. Safety rules are a fact of life. Governments have a responsibility to protect their citizens (to a point at least.)

Additionally in New Zealand you cannot litigate against people or entities as a result of accidents no matter how they were caused.

Ok, but if it is not an issue of politics, why not just skip the part about "In socialist countries like..."? After all, the government type does not bring with it a hard set of laws like "Though shalt not have a mean looking chopper to cruise the streets with because they are more dangerous than a downhill mountainbike is to ride down one of our super steep mountains". Additionally, political statements have a tendency to bring with it some nasty angry replies that have nothing to do with bikes.

To reply to the initial post - as much as it would suck from my point of view, I have no problems with choppers being banned in NZ if they indeed violate existing laws. Every country has its drawbacks.

It's not actually a socialist country - it has a 'mixed' economy (as do most countries), but it is closer to being a socialist country than the US, hence my description.

Government type does have an impact on the laws in creates. New Zealand, in this case, could be termed a 'nanny' state. However, if you wish to talk politics this isn't the appropriate forum.

In socialist countries like New Zealand the government provides things such as free healthcare. If I was a taxpayer in NZ I would be quite keen for the govt. to minimise the burden of healthcare costs.

Does your govt. allow you buy unsafe vehicles of any description?

With few, if any, enforced regulations regarding bicycles either here in Canada (essentially a socialist nation) or the US, I'd venture to say that the government would be hard pressed to prove any bicycle, regardless of style, as being inherently unsafe. I'll put my alt bikes up against anything on the road when it comes to safety and equipment. I would more than meet any legal inspection. It is possibly libelous to suggest that choppers, cruisers, lowriders (most of which are cared for with greater affection and attention than regular bikes) are unsafe and a threat.

In a socialist country like Sweden, we are still free to do what we want. I suppose what I'm saying is that you shouldn't bring in politics in the equation. If any government would want to reduce healthcare costs, there are a gazillion things (including sports) which are already vastly more dangerous than riding a chopper. And... in the end, no matter what political system you have - you always end up with paying for other peoples mistakes and bad fortunes, be they war, bike crashes or company fraud.

NZ would do better to ban cars, citing them as unsafe. We can prove how much they kill, after all: accidents, pollution, etc. How many people have died while bike riding when cars weren't involved?

With few, if any, enforced regulations regarding bicycles either here in Canada (essentially a socialist nation) or the US, I'd venture to say that the government would be hard pressed to prove any bicycle, regardless of style, as being inherently unsafe. I'll put my alt bikes up against anything on the road when it comes to safety and equipment. I would more than meet any legal inspection. It is possibly libelous to suggest that choppers, cruisers, lowriders (most of which are cared for with greater affection and attention than regular bikes) are unsafe and a threat.


Hard to attend to a bicycle if you can't buy it in the first place.

What are the legal requirements to use a bike on the road in Canada?

NZ would do better to ban cars, citing them as unsafe. We can prove how much they kill, after all: accidents, pollution, etc. How many people have died while bike riding when cars weren't involved?


Presumably the legislation in NZ is mostly aimed at kids bikes.

Hard to attend to a bicycle if you can't buy it in the first place.

What are the legal requirements to use a bike on the road in Canada?

When it comes to safety, as opposed to where one can operate a bicycle, a biccycle must be equipped with front and rear lights, reflectors and a horn. I have never heard of a cyclist ever being required to have a front brake or being cited for handlebars that are too wide or forks too long. I doubt any cop could tell if the gearing or brakes were operating properly anyway. And while cyclists have been involved in accidents that were their fault, in everything I read it was because they were riding recklessly or unsafely, not because their equipment failed or could not be handled in an emergency situation.

Presumably the legislation in NZ is mostly aimed at kids bikes. If that's the case, I still don't see how choppers, etc are any less safe than all the other type of bikes I see them falling off of. After all, kids aren't trying to jump ramps with a lowrider or chopper...at least not many are.

They are still on sale ,I think the main concern is how some of them have been assembled by the retailers & the poor quality copies that pop up in some stores , dangerious brakes , steering ect.There has been prosicutions in the past against dept. stores that have assembled & sold bikes that were unsafe through poor assembaly.
We have an accident insurance scheme (ACC) that covers every person in the country, its funded by our taxes , a levy on our road vech.reg. fee & a levy on employers for every person they employ , the more dangerous the occupation ,the more they pay. ACC pays for our treatment ,medication & 80% of lost wages & insome cases monetary compensation.

Explains why all the Kiwis I met were so happy-go-lucky.

update: sorry about the crapy copy

Before you apply the label "Nazi" to any person you disagree with (a practice begun by Rush Limbaugh "the thinking man's thinker") read up on the REAL Nazi's. The Nazi's of the Hitler era murdered millions of children, and launched wars that resulted in the death of over 100 million children from violence, hunger and disease.

Comparing Hitler's Nazi's to people working to make bikes safer for children is outrageously insulting and astoundingly ignorant. Take a few hours to examine children's bikes at Wal-Mart and K-Mart. Many of those bikes will be purchased by adults who have no training and experience on safely assembling a bike. The US government has some (rather weak) regulations that are intended to "guarantee" that a bike leaves the store in a condition that is safe for children.

In the "real" world, the bikes sold at Wal-Mart for children include many that have brakes that do not work when the rims are wet, handlebars that bend under stress, "stylish" features that will impale a child's body during a "crash", and many other hazards to children's health.

Government agencies seeking to make bikes safer, especially bikes sold for use by small children, need the help of experienced cyclists. Those of us who ride every day can look at a bike, and see its weaknesses and its dangerous features more quickly than an engineer who never rides a bike. And, we know how kids ride bikes in the "real world, where "curbs" are not barriers, but are "ramps" where nine year old boys launch their bikes into the street.

The government should hire my nine year old nephew as a "safety consultant". His Giant Modem BMX bike has taken more abuse than any five of my road bikes combined. But, Giant is a responsible corporation. After all of the pounding that Modem has taken, its frame and wheels are as straight and true as on the day the bike left the store. And, my nephew has never had more than a few scrapes and bruises when he has crashed his bike. (Luckily, he loves wearing a helmet that covers his entire head).

A fifty dollar Wal-Mart bike? A Wal-Crap bike would have lasted maybe two days under the same riding conditions. And, when its handlebar broke, or the frame snapped, or the brakes failed, or a rim collapsed, my nephew would likely have been on his way to a hospital.

Two friends of mine are doctors who work in emergency rooms with injured children. When they see a young boy come in with a broken arm, or broken nose, or similar injuries, they know the cause: a Wal-Crap bike has failed again. Instead of attacking folks who are pushing for safer bikes for children, we ought to be encouraging them, and sharing with them our experience and expertise.

Sorry I wasn't PC enough for you when I composed the title... :rolleyes:

If govenrment agencies were serious about bike safety, (1) they would have come up with a better lighting standard than the CPSC reflector standard, which isn't legal for night riding in any of the 50 states, as far as I am aware, and (2) none of the bikes you describe would ever be for sale in a WalMart in the first place. That's a lot different than banning certain styles of bikes simply because they are different from the 'standard' bike design (whatever that is...).

'
Sorry I wasn't PC enough for you when I composed the title... :rolleyes:

If govenrment agencies were serious about bike safety, (1) they would have come up with a better lighting standard than the CPSC reflector standard, which isn't legal for night riding in any of the 50 states, as far as I am aware, and (2) none of the bikes you describe would ever be for sale in a WalMart in the first place. That's a lot different than banning certain styles of bikes simply because they are different from the 'standard' bike design (whatever that is...).
Love the 'Drive with Hitler' poster,going to print that out for the notice board at work.
Here in NZ ,if you ride a bike after dark you have to have a red light at the back & a light at the front(not red), the law has just been revised to allow LED,s flashing or steady.Some of the bikes in question are being sold with a front brake ,if you take it off after purchase then its your decision but the shop has fullfilled it's obligation & sold a safe bike.
PS: not wearing a helmet is against the law here too :$40 fine :eek:

A little more freedom taken away.

A little more freedom taken away.
True,I think it should be up to the individual , but parents should be held responsible for their kids.
PS: i allways wear a helmet !

I understand your outrage about the Nazi quip, however it may be closer to the truth than you allow. One of the awful characteristics of the Nazi regime was the blandness of its death-dealing bureaucracy, "The Banality of Evil being one memerably eloquent description. Now I'm not going to compare our own harmless little Commerce Commission to the Nazis but they do have one thing in common; they too are faceless bureaucrats. I know this since I work for one of the shops mentioned in the original artricle, or at least I think I do. In a manner of mystery befitting a government department (but not professional dignity) we only found out we had been ivestigated when the C.C. told another shop that they had been to see us! We may be under investigation or we may not, nobody will willingly divulge that information. Sound familiar?

The C.C. are not interested in K-Mart, The Warehouse (an NZ cash and carry) or any other big box retailers. The guy they have really set their sights on is a small operator who has been in the bike trade since working in his father's shop after school. Again, sound familiar? We (a bicycle shop operating constantly since the 1940s) have been mostly left alone apart from that anonymous visit. We fit front brakes and other legal requirements as a matter of course, wheter they are supplied by the wholesaler or not. The only thing the C.C. could pick us on were the over-wide hangers, careful with that hacksaw, Eugene.

Now comes the interesting part, and I'm sorry if this is a little political, but this really is a political topic! Laws are Made to be Broken. That old axiom is closer to the truth than many of us are willing to admit. In truth it is the law enforcement agencies and the courts which choose how to interpret and apply (or not, as the case may be) a law. An example of this in NZ has already been given in this thread. Blinking red rear bicycle lights have only recently become legalized in New Zealand; their use by cyclists has, however, long been endorsed by the Police. In short, the cops realized it would be patently ridiculous to book people for using a useful safety device. The handlebar width laws dredged up by the C.C. have been on the books since the 1920s, but are so obscure that nobody knew of their existence.

Ahh, but what about the kids? Surely they're doing it for the kids? Well, no, not exactly. Hereabouts these bikes are not being bought by Mums and Dads, they're being bought by youths and young adults and a few of us old men who should know better. Kids are being bought those aforementioned K-Mart klunkers or, worse still, folding scooters with donut wheels which scoot along footpaths at bumper hight. The C.C. has studiously ignored the bikes sold in boxes issue. Even non compliant bikes which do not fit the C.C.s idea of DANGEROUS are ignored. The investigators must have walked past a non-compliant (but very safe and sensible) semi recumbent in their rush to measure the cruisers and lowriders! Meanwhile we've had a heavily promoted HPV race attempting to promote better bike designs, none of which will be able to be sold legally under the current legislation. Recumbents, it seems are safe, but lowriders are dangerous. It all smacks of culturally based bias to me.

What we have here is an archaic law being inconsistently applied on what appears to be culturally biased grounds by bureaucrats lacking the will to go after the really dangerous stuff. If these people really cared about the kids they would investigate cash and carry bikes (any mechanic will tell them that 20x1.75 painted or chromed rims with caliper brakes obey the letter of the law but are potentially fatal) and advise their Minister to legislate accordingly.

So while you might find the term Safety Nazi offensive, I'm sure you'll understand why the petit burgeiosie bicycle shop owners who have comnmitted much of their lives to a trade which will not, lets face it, make them rich find the intractable arrogance of faceless and ultimately gutless officialdom equally offensive. To be told that they are doing it for the kids only adds insult to injury. Oh, and so far, no bikes have been returned to us of the half dozen non-compliant machines we sold. A futile excersise in government make-work?

Those legislators don't know their a$$ from a hole in the ground. I have a 3-speed beach cruiser, a single-speed low-rider, a 7-speed chopper and a 3-speed stretch cruiser and chances are I am a safer rider than 95% of the others, even with my wide handlebars. Heck, I haven't had even a minor crash in 25 years! Most of my bikes are too slow to have a serious accident anyway. And they're all so low I can put both feet flat on the ground in a split second. And ALL of my bikes are fully equipped with lights, horns and reflectors. Half the fun is finding just the right accessories for our cool bikes. Read some of the other forums and you'll read all about the guys on the fast bikes having accidents, not the guys on cruisers, choppers and lowriders. I say take those legislators for a ride and let 'em see they are full of donkey donuts.

what's more dangerous is a teenager in a car on a cell phone.

New Zealand Governments defense on this: " Well them 144 spoke rims are a real danger to our economy, the poses the ability to sheer a sheep".

A little more freedom taken away.

Indeed!

Yes sir, in the rare event that you may need to slalom around a dump truck with the driver asleep at the wheel, you may be in deep trouble on an extended bike! Of course if you were on a skateboard or granny trike, there would be no problem at all, right? Idiots.

Of course, lets not bother cracking down on smoking or gambling, that **** is just fine and dandy.

Oh well, wadda ya gonna do? Say, are cookie cutter bikes really choppers anyway? I always thought chopper defined a bike that was once factory but then "chopped". If they are selling 1 million of the same identical bikes, is not this an insult to the very term chopper?

Take a Stingray, shorten it up and make it look like a standard bike, then you would have a chopper. Doh!

Brad
http://www.chopzone.com

I've actually thought about chopping a 'factory chopper' into a regular bike... Take a chopper, put 26" rims on it, flat mtb bars, Specialized Nimbus tires, a generic gel saddle and block pedals, put on a unicrown fork and an extended seatpost, and commute. ;)

Of course, no one would get the joke... :(

peace,
sam

The only thing the C.C. could pick us on were the over-wide hangers, careful with that hacksaw, Eugene.




Mmmmm... Sid Barrett allusions! Nice work!

'
Love the 'Drive with Hitler' poster,going to print that out for the notice board at work.
Here in NZ ,if you ride a bike after dark you have to have a red light at the back & a light at the front(not red), the law has just been revised to allow LED,s flashing or steady.Some of the bikes in question are being sold with a front brake ,if you take it off after purchase then its your decision but the shop has fullfilled it's obligation & sold a safe bike.
PS: not wearing a helmet is against the law here too :$40 fine :eek:while helmets do prevent less serious injuries, I THINK PEOPLE TALKING ON CELL PHONES ARE MORE OF A THREAT. I'VE ALMOST BEEN HIT 1/2 DOZEN TIMES BY PEOPLE ON CELL PHONES WHILE DRIVING CARS.

what's more dangerous is a teenager in a car on a cell phone.
i just replied the exact same message on a different forum. you can wear a german helmet, a usa army helmet but it won't matter if a teenager driving and talking hits you!!

If that's the case, I still don't see how choppers, etc are any less safe than all the other type of bikes I see them falling off of. After all, kids aren't trying to jump ramps with a lowrider or chopper...at least not many are.
I agree, we in detroit suburbs have ramps for bikes and skateboardsbuilt by the city. I see them wiping out a lot. my chopper can't go up the ramp without bottoming out. OH! and by the way, my grandfather was from Sweden, Nystrom was last name. and the Red Wings rule.not Toronto. what city you from in Sweden? Kaiser

Before you apply the label "Nazi" to any person you disagree with (a practice begun by Rush Limbaugh "the thinking man's thinker") read up on the REAL Nazi's. The Nazi's of the Hitler era murdered millions of children, and launched wars that resulted in the death of over 100 million children from violence, hunger and disease.

Comparing Hitler's Nazi's to people working to make bikes safer for children is outrageously insulting and astoundingly ignorant. Take a few hours to examine children's bikes at Wal-Mart and K-Mart. Many of those bikes will be purchased by adults who have no training and experience on safely assembling a bike. The US government has some (rather weak) regulations that are intended to "guarantee" that a bike leaves the store in a condition that is safe for children.

In the "real" world, the bikes sold at Wal-Mart for children include many that have brakes that do not work when the rims are wet, handlebars that bend under stress, "stylish" features that will impale a child's body during a "crash", and many other hazards to children's health.

Government agencies seeking to make bikes safer, especially bikes sold for use by small children, need the help of experienced cyclists. Those of us who ride every day can look at a bike, and see its weaknesses and its dangerous features more quickly than an engineer who never rides a bike. And, we know how kids ride bikes in the "real world, where "curbs" are not barriers, but are "ramps" where nine year old boys launch their bikes into the street.

The government should hire my nine year old nephew as a "safety consultant". His Giant Modem BMX bike has taken more abuse than any five of my road bikes combined. But, Giant is a responsible corporation. After all of the pounding that Modem has taken, its frame and wheels are as straight and true as on the day the bike left the store. And, my nephew has never had more than a few scrapes and bruises when he has crashed his bike. (Luckily, he loves wearing a helmet that covers his entire head).

A fifty dollar Wal-Mart bike? A Wal-Crap bike would have lasted maybe two days under the same riding conditions. And, when its handlebar broke, or the frame snapped, or the brakes failed, or a rim collapsed, my nephew would likely have been on his way to a hospital.

Two friends of mine are doctors who work in emergency rooms with injured children. When they see a young boy come in with a broken arm, or broken nose, or similar injuries, they know the cause: a Wal-Crap bike has failed again. Instead of attacking folks who are pushing for safer bikes for children, we ought to be encouraging them, and sharing with them our experience and expertise.

Agreed. when my son was 4 yrs. i bought his first bike at a bike only shop that's been in buisiness since 1943. i wouldn't risk my son safety on a pimpled face teenager putting a bike together or buying an inferior bike from a chain like walmart who has become a dictator of sorts forcing companies to produce their products in china for example or walmart won't buy from them. Jim.

[QUOTE=atomiczombie]Indeed!

Yes sir, in the rare event that you may need to slalom around a dump truck with the driver asleep at the wheel, you may be in deep trouble on an extended bike! Of course if you were on a skateboard or granny trike, there would be no problem at all, right? Idiots.

Of course, lets not bother cracking down on smoking or gambling, that **** is just fine and dandy.

Oh well, wadda ya gonna do? Say, are cookie cutter bikes really choppers anyway? I always thought chopper defined a bike that was once factory but then "chopped". If they are selling 1 million of the same identical bikes, is not this an insult to the very term chopper?

Take a Stingray, shorten it up and make it look like a standard bike, then you would have a chopper. Doh!

Brad
http://www.chopzone.com[

/QUOTE] Not everyone is as skilled or has as much timeto hand build thier own choppers. for example, do you make our own cars? televisions? houses? I do have a schwinn spoiler and i love it. it may be cookie cutter, but it's up to me to dress it up the way i see fit. what kind of motor vehicle do you own? does it look like the neighbors down the street or did you make it. or did you perhaps trick out the engine a bit, put special rims on, put a better stereo in? I was a bricklayer. i built my dog a 200 sq. ft. dog house. but i couldn't built my own chopper. But i am pretty sure my schwinn spoiler is not exactly like any others.

Regards, JIm