Alox

VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) - Vancouver Police are getting tough on cyclists without helmets. On Wednesday, they handed out 30 tickets to riders crossing the Burrard Street Bridge.

At the beginning of a bike safety campaign, which started about a month ago, police were handing out warnings, but say they are now giving out $100 tickets to anyone without a helmet.

The VPD says its decision to target cyclists using the newly rearranged bridge was made because of the increase in the number of people using the bike route.


Kind of makes me wish I owned the bike shop that sits at the north end of the bridge!

abstractform20

which is great because now these people will be at leat $100 short for a helmet. and in the time the could save to get a helmet, they will 100 short for a taxi or gas money. dumb dumb dumb stuff

noisebeam

If there must be a law and enforcement, this should be a fix it ticket.

But of course there should not be a law..

tehdely

They should force drivers to wear helmets, too. It's only fair.

frymaster

shhh... they might hear you and decide they need to make us wear seatbelts too.

Nichole

I don't know about Vancouver, tehdely, but I know there are places in the US that do require seat belts. Same idea. $100 ticket is still outrageous, though. Talk about counterproductive.

LesterOfPuppets

Is Vancouver, Canada's helmet law for all ages? I thought it was ridiculous when Vancouver, USA enacted an all ages helmet law this January. I've yet to hear of any stings like that down here, I think the police just wished to have another reason to initiate contact. At least half the riders I see still ride helmetless in this Vancouver.

closetbiker

News 1130 might have the story wrong. I'll have to check on it. The fine is $29, although BC MHL states a fine can be up to $100.

It's not surprising this is happening, there are a lot of people upset a lane has been given to cyclists, so the pressure is on to make sure cyclists are following the law. The cops are giving out many more tickets to drivers who are not following the new lane rules (such as right turns at no right turn intersections) so they have to be fair.

Additionally, a few weeks ago police ran an awareness campaign giving out fake tickets at this area (and a couple of other areas) letting cyclists know they can be and will be fined in the near future if such violations happen again.

I'm staying away from the bridge for just this reason. I flaunt the helmet law and am pretty cheap, so I'm not interested in paying $29, let alone $100.

FYI - riding a motorcycle without a helmet is a $138 fine and driving without a seat belt is $167. $29 seems to be a bargain!

closetbiker

Yes it is and police in general do not enforce the law, but on occasion, they pick an area where it is easy to pull over cyclists (like bikeways) and hand them out all day.

I've been riding without one for over a year now and have had plenty of interaction with police where they had an easy chance to give me a ticket and none of them have.

From what I've seen, the wearing rate is about 50%. Looking at yearly traffic collision reports, about half the cyclists involved in collisions were wearing helmets and half were not.

*and the law is not just for Vancouver, but for all of BC*

ModeratedUser26092018

Get a helmet, wear a seatbelt, follow the rules of the road if you don't want to risk paying a ticket...quite simple

pacificaslim

My son was ticketed just the other day here in Pacifica, CA. He had his helmet in his backpack but wasn't wearing it. They all wear helmets when they are up in the mountains on their dirt jumping course but when they come down into town to ride home or catch the bus, they take off their gear.

I suspect there is more to the story than what I'm getting out of my son, i.e. another reason the cop stopped him in the first place and just decided to issue the helmet citation instead of coming up with something else (whatever vehicle code type laws the boys were surely violating as they rode their mountain bikes around town, like riding the wrong way, on the sidewalk,no reflectors, rolling stop signs, whatever). But still, it's unbelievable he actually wrote a helmet ticket for that to a teenage boy.

California law allows for the ticket to be dismissed for first time offenders so that's what'll happen, but it'll require a waste of our time going to the juvenile traffic court to handle it.

Nichole

Ah, $29 is much more reasonable. Best to just grab a helmet for about that price and avoid the hassle of a ticket.

That's good that they're trying balance between the motorists and cyclists. Shared road = shared responsibilities.

closetbiker

it would be simple if the police enforced the laws consistently, but they don't. If you get away with something 99 times out of 100, you might be surprised and annoyed when you are fined.

I'm waiting for the cops to enforce the speed limit. On this bridge, I'd be very surprised if a single car drove within it.

kendall

So get off and walk accross the bridge, that way you're a pedestrian.
I am against mandatory 'safety' laws of any type. (seatbelts or helmets)
Enforce traffic laws, use real punishments for infractions, and require REAL instruction and licensing exams for drivers and you will have fewer accidents.
Think every drivers ed course should have a film composed of footage from traffic accidents, that's NOT prettied up and 'G' rated. SHOW people what the results of stupidity are and you'll have less people doing stupid things.

Ken.

I-Like-To-Bike

Quite a simple [minded] platitude too.

ghettocruiser

Fixed.

Results in your jurisdiction may vary.

drafters65

bleh they got their one month warning.

maddyfish

Make a better dent in safety, and probably generate more income too, if they'd write a bunch of running red light/stop sign tickets instead. For bikes and cars alike.

Alox

Actually the VPD did that back in May:

https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/546639-vancouver-police-cracking-down-cyclists.html

GearsForFears

I lived in Vancouver. It has some serious crime issues. Maybe because the police are busy with this nonsense.

I-Like-To-Bike

But there are lots of "good" things:
1. A city official can place a check mark besides their performance goal of "doing something about safety."
2. Another person can show a Powerpoint Slide showing the improved metrics, i.e. a higher percentage of cyclists wearing helmets.
3. Improved sales of bicycle helmets.
4. Some more spare change in the city coffers

Never mind that no one will try to determine if the helmet crackdown actually has any effect on improving cycling safety. The laudable goal of improving cycling safety has been replaced by the goal of increasing helmet wear, period. The former goal can't be demonstrated, but the half assed later goal can.

closetbiker

It sure seems to be that the goal is simply increasing helmet wear and not what the intent of the legislation was stated to be.

Upon the first reading of the then proposed law, Socred MLA Cliff Serwa opened the debate with this statement,

"The purpose of the Bicycle Helmet legislation Act is to reduce accidental deaths and prevent permanent, severe head injuries throughout the province...Most deaths could be prevented by wearing approved bicycle helmets"

Opening the debate on the second reading of the bill, NDP MLA, Jackie Pement said,

"This bill contains legislation that is designed to save lives"

The third reading that passed the law held no debate, just language clarification.

There seemed to be only one piece of research presented in the debate that showed the effectiveness of helmets. Several times, by several members of the legislature it was repeated that bicycle helmets reduce head injuries by 85% and brain injury by 88%. I think we all know where those numbers come from.

It was also repeated that head injuries were the cause of 75% of all cycling deaths, so it seemed that legislating helmets was a no-brainer if the goal was to save lives but what the honorable members of the legislature did not know was that it was collisions with motor vehicles that caused virtually 100% of the cycling deaths and that the study they used to show reduction of head injury did not include a single collision with a motor vehicle, just simple falls from bicycles.

It's collisions with motor vehicles that kill cyclists and to hand out tickets to cyclists in a car-free environment (such as in this "safe" lane) runs against the intent of the law. Based on past records of death, it is far from likely that any cyclist will die from a simple fall in this lane.

closetbiker

Yup. The media got it wrong.

A couple of weeks after I asked, I finally got my reply (I didn't think I was going to get one)

The fine is $29.

I don't know how the media got it wrong except I'd speculate the police spokesperson relayed the wrong information.

closetbiker

Wait! Hold the phone!

There are 2 fines for riding without a helmet. One is for $29, the other for $100. It's a crap shoot as to which fine you will get if you get nicked.

TRaffic Jammer

"It was also repeated that head injuries were the cause of 75% of all cycling deaths, so it seemed that legislating helmets was a no-brainer if the goal was to save lives but what the honorable members of the legislature did not know was that it was collisions with motor vehicles that caused virtually 100% of the cycling deaths and that the study they used to show reduction of head injury did not include a single collision with a motor vehicle, just simple falls from bicycles.

It's collisions with motor vehicles that kill cyclists and to hand out tickets to cyclists in a car-free environment (such as in this "safe" lane) runs against the intent of the law. Based on past records of death, it is far from likely that any cyclist will die from a simple fall in this lane. "

Ding ding ding we have a winner! Good intentions with a poor execution results in politicians slapping themselves on the back for a job well done while nothing at all changes on the streets.