Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Should under 16's be banned from riding

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by pvda, Sep 11, 2007.

  1. Now that I've got your attention.

    An accident which took the life of a 3 year old on a PeeWee 50 at the weekend has brought calls from the usual suspects to ban under 16's from riding motorcycles.

    MOD: removed offending link but kept the gist of the post.

    Perhaps a 3yo is a bit young to be riding but to ban under 16's would've severely affected our current crop of Moto GP & SBK riders as well as 99% of those in the various championsips throughout the country.
  2. I think you'll get the expected answer!

    Tragic as it is, a freak accident does not constitute any action.
  3. well no offence but at 3 i also believe it is too young aswell, whats the correct age.....guess it does depend on the child.....very sorry to hear the news of such a young life being lost :cry:
  4. Children die in cars too. I say that all children should be banned from being passengers in cars.

    Oh, and while we're at it. Children also die being hit by cars while walking and/or riding bicycles. Children should be banned from walking and riding bikes of any kind.

    Further to that, children also die while falling out of trees. Children should be banned from climbing trees.

    Children have even been known to be electrocuted when they stick things into power points, so all children should be banned from doing so.
  5. Given that the accident happened on private property and no laws were being broken, what's the point of the argument?? If you say children can't ride bikes around farms and paddocks, who's going to police it???
  6. +1 - sad and tragic as it is, darwin in action does not constitute a change to the rules - also think of every kid on a rural property

    From the article -
    He was being responsible, it just seems like a freak accident.
  7. Let's be realistic NO BANS will be put in place because of this, the media always rediculously over-reacts everytime. Its how they sell papers/advertising time.

    It was an accident, maybe having a 3 year old riding in the open on a motorcycle isnt the best idea but it happened and sadly everyone except the family and friends will forget this in a few weeks time, thats just how it works.
  8. If they can't ride a push bike without training wheels then the parents should have no desire to place there kids on a motorised toy that isn't designed for that age group. Not to sound hash but its like giving a 5 year old a loaded pistol there is only 1 out come....death or maiming, those parents should be sent to jail for pre-meditated manslaughter due to the fact its there choice to place the child in harms way, thought about it then allowed the child to do it. Wheres the childs saftey gear? Parental guidence?
  9. Sorry, but that sounds like a city-dweller's attitude and that you in no way understand how different things are on the land.
  10. Earp, you've got the wrong end of the stick.

    The toy was specifically designed for kids of that age.

    It was fitted with training wheels and a speed limiter, child was apparently wearing a helmet.

    The incident involved a creekline which would still be dangerous to a 3-y.o. if he or she were riding a bicycle or walking.

    I was phoned by this reporter and interrogated and it was obvious that he had decided to write a "beat-up" article attacking the product, because it was the only angle.
    Can you attack the bush for being bushland? Nope.
    Can you attack the kid, no that'd be harsh he was 3 and he's dead.
    Can you attack the parents? no, that'd be harsh as they have lost a child while taking some apparently reasonable precautions.
    The only responsible way to write this story would be to blame noone, and leave that to the coroner. However that'd be boring, and boring don' t pay in today's mass media. This was NOT fair and objective writing.

    I hate media beat-ups. It's so common for them to blame a type of product (i.e. motorcycles).
  11. lol, I grew up on a farm until I was 10 and then on a cattle station up near lily springs. I was driving before I was 10 and my dad wouldn't allow me to ride a motorbike till I could prove to him I could handle my pushy. AFter that I was rarely at home. Between horses and motorcycles I was in my element, now that i'm married and have kids of my own I gravitated to a small town where I'm iching to go back to a farm just so the kids can have the same enjoyment that I did growing up.

    But until the morgage is paid then its only a dream.

    So maybe my family had more of a responsibility in raising their kids to understand their limitations and consequences on our actions but that should be the same if you are a city slicker or a country folk.
  12. [RANT]Why is that always the excuse, its different on the land. All over the world you get that excuse your rules don't apply to us, we live on the land bollocks I say.[/RANT]

    While 3 seems young I'm sure I've seen both Rossi and Schumacher racing at 5, So they must have started earlier than that.
  13. Because, if you had bothered to read a couple of posts above your's, you would have found out that things ARE different on the land!! :roll:.
  14. Sorry HotCam I was under the impression that the parents modified the pee wee by limiting and adding trailing wheels not buying it already with them installed. I am pretty sure that there is a minimum age to ride a pee wee and its definatley not 3 years old. The other question is why did the parent(s) let the child to ride near a creek in the first place, at the very least they should have been standing between the child and the creek just in case the child headed that way.

    Can't blame the 3 year old because they are still learning the difference between right and wrong and their limitations. Its the parents responibility to steer the child in the right direction and to minimise the harm thats around them.

    Yes the parents have to live with it, which is in itself very sad, but look at it the other way. The child will never grow up now due to the fact that the parent(s) made the wrong choice in allowing the child to ride there in the first place without a parent/sibling being close just in case something went wrong, its like leaving a child in a swimming pool while you go inside for a drink.

    Media will never be fair nor objective, they are there to make money and to do that that need to make readers want to buy their newspaper of watch their television station. You have to remember they will always make a story bigger than it is and that there is always 2 sides of any story. I don't watch TV unless its to get a weather report or a movie.
  15. Whoa back, mate. It's got nothing to do with rules and at no stage did I say so.

    Where I was coming from is that country kids grow up differently to city kids and vice versa. They grow up with hazards like bikes, horses, etc and are, generally, more capable of getting to these things at an earlier age than city kids would be.

    Earp's post makes my point exactly, driving before he was 10. How many city kids do that???
  16. Given the amount of joyriding that takes place in the city, probably just as many as in the country would be my guess.
  17. I did prefix it with the [RANT] tags, but yeah as a country dweller probably with acreage you can allow your kids the luxury of trying to kill themselves at a younger age. A privilege most city kids would kill for.

    What I object to is the holier than thou attitude that city dwellers cannot understand what the country is like.
  18. Not many city kids are double clutching old tractors while hanging off the steering wheel as they can't reach the pedals while sitting in the seat. Not many city kids have had to go out and shoot feral dogs at 8 years old when Dad was away. Not many city kids get given a full size agbike that they need to start and stop next to stumps/trees/etc to get on and off.

    The truth is that most country kids are thrown in at the deep end more often due to necessity. Riding at 3 is being thrown in at the deep end, though not irresponsibly in my opinion.
  19. So that's all right then...
  20. What a load of bolocks, in the rite enviroment, properly supervised and with the right saftey gear kids should be riding bikes, driving cars, water skiing, snow skiing, shooting etc, etc at whatever age they are capable and deemed competent by there PARENTS.
    No amount of laws and rules demanded by nosey dogooders will stop accidents.
    If you havent got kids pull your head in and mind your owen fcuking business, if you do have kids and wrap them in cotton wool i pity the poor little sods when they grow up and are at an age when they have to learn from scratch with a typical teenagers 'i'm indestructable' attitude.