Bull Bars at risk

[Bigrig]

I'm less concerned about losing the alloy bar, and more concerned with losing all the lights and UHF mounting point (which are both for safety and communication), and my fishing rod holders. A bull bar = lifestyle for many people ... and saftey in the bush, their jobs, on holidays, etc, etc, etc ... I challenge anyone of our politicans to travel MANY sections of our so called "national highways" at night with spotties and see how safe they feel ...

[MS29431]

This is another example of rubbish from the government and goes to show just how out of touch they are..... I have three vehicles with bullbars 2x steel ('97 Toyota Hilux and an '80 WB Holden utility) and 1x alloy('86 Nissan Patrol) and i would not travel to the places i go without one fitted as i have collided with many animals and vehicle's on our roads and without the bullbars being fitted i think i may not be here today don't let the government ban bullbars....Please the've taken enough off us over the years already i had'nt heard this yet, ( I think Simon Christie on FWD TV mentioned somthing breifly about it) keep the post up as i've only just found it..MS

[AB]

Theres another post running on this forum about it too.

I mentioned in that post that I also heard it on the radio about discussions in Canberra which freaked me out too.

[Finly Owner]

This is another example of rubbish from the government and goes to show just how out of touch they are..... I have three vehicles with bullbars 2x steel ('97 Toyota Hilux and an '80 WB Holden utility) and 1x alloy('86 Nissan Patrol) and i would not travel to the places i go without one fitted as i have collided with many animals and vehicle's on our roads and without the bullbars being fitted i think i may not be here today don't let the government ban bullbars....Please the've taken enough off us over the years already i had'nt heard this yet, ( I think Simon Christie on FWD TV mentioned somthing breifly about it) keep the post up as i've only just found it..MS

Unfortunately, I understand you crediting your life to bullbars, but what did the other vehicle look like, and they are asking would have that damage been less if you had no bullbar? This is what we need to defend, the supposed extra carnage of non-barred vehicles, and severity of injuries of pedestrians hit by vehiles with/without bars. We need find hard evidence counteracting their claims. Prove what they are saying is so minimal, it does not warrant the national ban. And if one state only brings it in, then you will not be able to drive throught that state with one on even if you're rego is another state.

[MS29431]

The cars i have have hit have all been drivable only one of only 5 was drivable.... just.... writen off cause of cost to fix (early 90's commodore) there has only been injury's sustained in the accidents in my old falcon's that had plastic bumper's on 'em.
And also i'm pretty sure if your caught in W.A. with a 5 post bullbar on a vehicle under a certain Gross Vehicle Mass you will have a canary (defect notice) put on your vehicle.....We will have to watch and see

[gbatt64]

been and done

[Nanango]

*************All done************

[DX grunt]

Firstly, my condolences to everyone who has lost a loved one, or been injured in a road crash involving bullbars. My thoughts are also with the drivers.
If any of you need trauma counseling, seek it, please. Critical incident stress needs dealing with sooner rather than later.

Personally, I am in favour of having bull bars on vehicles. I have one on my own vehicle, which is an ex-government fleet
Telstra vehicle. I love my truck and everything on it because it has, and will serve the purpose for which I bought it.

All research undertaken whether favourable or unfavourable to both sides of the topic, needs to be disclosed.
If this research lacks depth, it will provide biased evidence to the decision makers (politicians), and will not be a true reflection
of the information required to make an informed decision.

Each crash involving a pedestrian and a vehicle fitted with a bull bar, needs to be assessed and evaluated individually.
Some of the considerations should be:
What was the speed zone for the area? 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110
What was the attitude and behavior of the driver and pedestrian?
Was the driver and or pedestrian affected by alcohol and or drugs?
What colour clothing did the pedestrian have on?
Was the area safe for the pedestrian to cross?
What was the traffic volume and density like?
What was the health of the pedestrian and driver at the time – ie, any vision impairment, hazard and depth perception,
diminished reaction times for whatever reason, ect?
Did the driver have a current driver’s licence? Should they have been on the road?
Was the vehicle registered? Should it have been on the road?
Did the pedestrian cross at an appropriate place?
Did the pedestrian cross against ‘the red man’
What were the movements of the pedestrian at the time – running, walking, tripped, ect?

The other concern I have is OSH – Occupational Safety and Health.
Employers are, required by law, to provide their employees with a safe workplace.
There are many employees who work in rural and remote areas, alone. I have an ex Telstra vehicle, which in my opinion
was set up to be operated by one person. It has everything, for which I am greatful.
I can – but choose not to go alone - to remote areas with no mobile/satellite phone coverage, believing I can deal with
nearly all situations. I believe some employees don’t have that choice - that’s why employers provide them with as much
safety/recovery gear as possible, because of the nature of their employment.

In my opinion, for an employer not to be able to provide their employees with the safest workplace possible because of a
legislated decision – is a blank cheque waiting to be written – and the winners will be the lawyers.

On the commercial side of things, the decision makers need to assess their own vehicle fleets and their sub-contractors,
and those departments that have been privatized, before they make their decision.
Their can’t be 2 rules - one for them and one for us. The decision has to be fair and equitable to all.

Will the ruling apply from………(this) date?
Will current vehicles that are fitted with bullbars be affected?
Will there be a ‘bull bar buyback’?
What will happen to the ‘stock pile’ of surrendered bullbars?
How will the government provide a safe workplace for their ‘isolated’ employees and sub-contractors?
How many businesses will have to sack staff or be forced to close their doors because of legislation?
How will this decision affect the mining and tourism industries?

The questions keep going on and on.

Should this ‘ban the bull bar’ discussion become law, I believe people will make their view point loud and clear at the ballot box.

My understanding is that any crash, 60kmh or above, is classed as a ‘high speed’ crash, whether it be vehicle versus vehicle or vehicle versus pedestrian.
I also believe the survival rate for a pedestrian involved in a crash over 40kmh decreases rapidly.

I have done my best to provide a balanced view on this subject. This is a very emotional and passionate issue – for both sides.
I believe we all need to take the emotions out, and deal with facts to attain a fair and unbiased view - provided we are given all the facts.

Take care out there.

Ross
DX grunt

[Finly Owner]

Firstly, my condolences to everyone who has lost a loved one, or been injured in a road crash involving bullbars. My thoughts are also with the drivers.
If any of you need trauma counseling, seek it, please. Critical incident stress needs dealing with sooner rather than later.

Personally, I am in favour of having bull bars on vehicles. I have one on my own vehicle, which is an ex-government fleet
Telstra vehicle. I love my truck and everything on it because it has, and will serve the purpose for which I bought it.

All research undertaken whether favourable or unfavourable to both sides of the topic, needs to be disclosed.
If this research lacks depth, it will provide biased evidence to the decision makers (politicians), and will not be a true reflection
of the information required to make an informed decision.

Each crash involving a pedestrian and a vehicle fitted with a bull bar, needs to be assessed and evaluated individually.
Some of the considerations should be:
What was the speed zone for the area? 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110
What was the attitude and behavior of the driver and pedestrian?
Was the driver and or pedestrian affected by alcohol and or drugs?
What colour clothing did the pedestrian have on?
Was the area safe for the pedestrian to cross?
What was the traffic volume and density like?
What was the health of the pedestrian and driver at the time – ie, any vision impairment, hazard and depth perception,
diminished reaction times for whatever reason, ect?
Did the driver have a current driver’s licence? Should they have been on the road?
Was the vehicle registered? Should it have been on the road?
Did the pedestrian cross at an appropriate place?
Did the pedestrian cross against ‘the red man’
What were the movements of the pedestrian at the time – running, walking, tripped, ect?

The other concern I have is OSH – Occupational Safety and Health.
Employers are, required by law, to provide their employees with a safe workplace.
There are many employees who work in rural and remote areas, alone. I have an ex Telstra vehicle, which in my opinion
was set up to be operated by one person. It has everything, for which I am greatful.
I can – but choose not to go alone - to remote areas with no mobile/satellite phone coverage, believing I can deal with
nearly all situations. I believe some employees don’t have that choice - that’s why employers provide them with as much
safety/recovery gear as possible, because of the nature of their employment.

In my opinion, for an employer not to be able to provide their employees with the safest workplace possible because of a
legislated decision – is a blank cheque waiting to be written – and the winners will be the lawyers.

On the commercial side of things, the decision makers need to assess their own vehicle fleets and their sub-contractors,
and those departments that have been privatized, before they make their decision.
Their can’t be 2 rules - one for them and one for us. The decision has to be fair and equitable to all.

Will the ruling apply from………(this) date?
Will current vehicles that are fitted with bullbars be affected?
Will there be a ‘bull bar buyback’?
What will happen to the ‘stock pile’ of surrendered bullbars?
How will the government provide a safe workplace for their ‘isolated’ employees and sub-contractors?
How many businesses will have to sack staff or be forced to close their doors because of legislation?
How will this decision affect the mining and tourism industries?

The questions keep going on and on.

Should this ‘ban the bull bar’ discussion become law, I believe people will make their view point loud and clear at the ballot box.

My understanding is that any crash, 60kmh or above, is classed as a ‘high speed’ crash, whether it be vehicle versus vehicle or vehicle versus pedestrian.
I also believe the survival rate for a pedestrian involved in a crash over 40kmh decreases rapidly.

I have done my best to provide a balanced view on this subject. This is a very emotional and passionate issue – for both sides.
I believe we all need to take the emotions out, and deal with facts to attain a fair and unbiased view - provided we are given all the facts.

Take care out there.

Ross
DX grunt

I hope you added this to your vote as extra thought Ross.

[DX grunt]

Na. had to have a good think about it first. I've saved it as a word document for future reference.