...and bells on her toes...

I've been having a light hearted yet ongoing argument with Snooze over whether or not bells on bikes are compulsory. Well, turns out I'm wrong as Snooze has discovered courtesy of the Bicycle Victoria website.

Traffic regulations require a rider to have a bell fitted. The penalty for riding a bicycle without a bell is $50. The penalty refers specifically to a bell. The old definition of an audible warning device no longer applies - so you can't argue that your voice meets the regulations.

A bicycle for normal road use must be sold with 'an efficient bell or some other suitable audible warning device'.

OMGWTFBBQ indeed!

I can understand the point of cars being required to have horns, trams to have bells, trains hooters and emergency vehicles sirens, but bicycles!?

OK, so a bell on a bike might be handy to warn pedestrians of an approaching bike, BUT RIDING ON THE FOOTPATH IS ILLEGAL, so THAT can't be the reason.

So why else would you need be required at the point of a $50 fine to have a bell on your bike? To alert cars to your presence? As if anyone in a car is going to hear a pathetically pinging warning bell from a cyclist.

It's a silly rule.