Those Contentious Bullbars

[Valve Bounce]

This has been a topic of discussion and argument on our Channel 9 TODAY show this week. These bull bars are fitted to the front of vehicles to supposedly protect the occupants in the event of running into a kangaroo.
These things are mostly illegal, but are tolerated by the police, with even some police vehicles fitting them. They often have sharp protrusions in them including fishing rod holders, and even some have outboard motors clamped onto them. The point was made that many vehicles fitted with these devices are never driven away from the city, but are paraded by their owners to create a macho image. In Melbourne they are called Toorak Tractors, and in Sydney Mossman Trucks.
In the event of a collision with a pedestrian, the pedestrian will suffer much more serious injuries from such devices. The point is also made that these prevent the crumple zone at the front of the car from working, and can also prevent the air bags from operating, making them more dangerous to the occupants in a collision.
The argument for these devices from some guy who lives outback is that if a vehicle runs into a kangaroo, and the roo comes in through the windscreen, the occupants can suffer serious or terminal injury. Also, running into a roo can disable the car in the outback, which could be very dangerous in remote locations.
So what are the implications? These devices only exist because the law against them is never enforced. Does the excuse that they may be needed in the event of an accident with a kangaroo justify its illegal usage?
And what is the answer to the problem? Bullbars that are properly designed to protect the occupants and the front of the car, but does not pose any more danger to pedestrians if fitted? Can such be made? How about fitting laminated windscreens? What do you think?