Give Way rule poised to change

[Max Preload]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4178822/Give-way-road-rule-change-confirmed

Just what we need - further dumbing down of the driving populace.

They're also removing the incentive for motorcyclists to spend money on further training to reduce their time on the restricted license. That'll do wonders.

Oh, and I see they've rolled out the misleading "Motorcyclists are 20 times more at risk of being involved in a fatal or serious injury crash than car drivers per kilometre driven." soundbite.

At least power-to-weight ratio restrictions will come in, which I'm sure will be like Australia. That is much fairer than simply engine capacity. If only that were applied to vehicle licenses ('rego') though.

[Swoop]

Is Eric (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10676716) a KB member?



Well, it's about time. An international body, the International Transport Forum (ITF) has agreed with what I've been banging on about for years - Kiwis are crap drivers.

In fact we're worse than that, we're downright dangerous and menace to anyone who shares the road with us. The ITF report states New Zealand has the seventh-highest ratio of deaths per billion vehicle kilometres travelled and is the ninth highest in deaths per capita.

That puts us up there with Cambodia, Malaysia, South Korea, the Czech Republic, Slovenia and Lithuania. All countries where most of the time you don't need a license to drive. Here we have to sit a test. I'd like to meet the fool who thought it was okay to hand out a certificate to drive a tonne of killing machine, simply based on answering a series of multi-guess questions.

Maybe our driving standards are so poor because our testing system is so poor. It doesn't take rocket science to deduce that, to improve driving standards and deaths, you have to educate the nut behind the wheel.

Our roads are the equivalent of blacktop goat tracks compared to most of the developed world yet there's no system in place to train young, old, new or immigrant drivers how to deal with our particular conditions.

The AA bloke's statement in the Press that, "Safer Journeys [new AA safety programme] recognises that drivers will make mistakes, but it's the road or the roadside that determines the outcome of those mistakes. Cars, roads and roadsides need to be protective" just about sums up why the problem will never be fixed.

Put the blame somewhere else why don't you - again. First, we had all that nonsense that speed kills, which it doesn't, bad driving does, and now, apparently it's roads that kill us. God knows what they'll come up with next.

If you train a driver that on a narrow road you have drive more slowly and with care, rather than getting them to tick a box on a piece of paper, it might just sink in.

The incumbent rulers of this country recently had the best chance in lord knows how long to rip up the current driving licence legislation and deliver something really worthwhile. But all we got was a soggy chip approach that will achieve nothing.

I have now come to the conclusion that to become a politician, not only is there a requirement to have a slightly wonky moral compass, but you also have to be neutered.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Implement the recommendations below and watch the problem solve itself.

* The test before you get in a car is NOT multi guess; it has to have written answers.

* Raise the driving age to 17 for a learner's plate, and then only for a car up to 1300cc. And the driver must have had at least three driving lessons from a qualified driving instructor before they are allowed to actually drive the car.

* To get a restricted licence the driver must show proof of at least two defensive driving lessons from an approved training organisation over a minimum 12 months prior.

* If any traffic infringement occurs during that 12 months, the driver starts from day one all over again.

* Full licence granted only after being assessed by a traffic officer sitting in the car during a test.

* Only on gaining a full licence, can the driver buy any car they want.

* Compulsory third party insurance.

And ditch the advertising agency that came up with the 'driving's in the blood' campaign. If anything summed up what a bunch of dorks we are when it comes to driving campaigns that one did and would have won a Golden Lion at the The Cannes Lions International Advertising Festival. That's right, get your Dad to teach you how to drive and have an accident.

By Eric Thompson

[neels]

Can't see how changing the give way rules will make any difference, people are too stupid to understand now so instead they will be confused and stupid. At the moment it's pretty simple, if they're coming at your drivers door with the horn going then you didn't have right of way. They haven't managed to get people indicating sensibly at roundabouts yet, how the hell will they figure out different rules depending on the type of intersection?

Agree completely with the tests for moped riders though, I always thought it was weird that you need one for a motorcycle, but no licence/test/WOF before you wobble along the road on your dodgy old scooter.

[pzkpfw]

I happen to like the current rules, and don't find them confusing.

Taking the picture off stuff, what happens in a situation like their second example, if it's a four-way intersection?

If it's different than the main+side road example (i.e. my added picture is wrong), then that's confusing.

If it's the same as the main+side road example (i.e. my added picture is correct), then it's different than if both vehicles are going straight instead of both turning (unless they are ditching "give way to your right" altogether), and that's confusing.
219947

[SMOKEU]

The majority of drivers don't even know how to indicate properly at a roundabout, now the government wants to confuse those people even more! Where is the logic in that?

I'd hate to see how many crashes will happen due to these rule changes.

[Hitcher]

I fail to see how creating further confusion at intersections will reduce accidents there by 7%.

I don't know why distinctions are drawn between "give way" and "stop" intersections. I suggest that replacing "give way" signs with "stop" signs and leaving the law as it is regarding which vehicle gives way to which would make a major difference to intersection accidents.

New Zealanders are crap drivers. This is why I would never suggest we adopt the "turn left on red" law (or right-hand equivalent) that many civilised countries have.

[Max Preload]

If it's different than the main+side road example (i.e. my added picture is wrong), then that's confusing.Well then, consider it confusing. A 4-way intersection with neither road having a centreline that crosses the intersection is treated like a roundabout (just like a signal controlled intersection where the signals are out) in that you give way to the right...

[Banditbandit]

I fail to see how creating further confusion at intersections will reduce accidents there by 7%.

I don't know why distinctions are drawn between "give way" and "stop" intersections. I suggest that replacing "give way" signs with "stop" signs and leaving the law as it is regarding which vehicle gives way to which would make a major difference to intersection accidents.

New Zealanders are crap drivers. This is why I would never suggest we adopt the "turn left on red" law (or right-hand equivalent) that many civilised countries have.

Yeah . the change to the current law was supposed to reduce accidents - and now they say changing it back will reduce accidnerts - don't see how ...

If they make a "turn left on red" rule there'll be anarchy and more deaths on the roads ..

[Max Preload]

Yeah . the change to the current law was supposed to reduce accidents - and now they say changing it back will reduce accidents - don't see how...
So all they need to do to eliminate all intersection accidents is just change it back and forth for a while! Assuming a 7% reduction each time it changes, after 9 changes we'll be down 48% and after 25 changes it'll be a 94% reduction. Awesome! :rofl:

[slofox]

The first suggested change is actually just a reversion to the way things were some years ago. I didn't think it should ever have been changed in the first place.

The second proposed change creates an exception to the principle of giving way to the right and when turning right. BUT. It actually reflects what happens already, most of the time, so is maybe not such a bad idea...

Getting people to indicate correctly at roundabouts? Mission Impossible...they're too thick.

Replace all Give Way signs with Stop signs?

Wouldn't make any difference in The Tron. I'm the only driver in the entire city who actually stops for a Stop sign...must be a fucking Luddite I guess....

[Gibbo89]

with the power to rate ratio thing, does that mean bigger bikes will be restricted in their power until you are on your full?

[Str8 Jacket]

Dear God, how the hell are us woman going to cope now?!?!

[Max Preload]

with the power to rate ratio thing, does that mean bigger bikes will be restricted in their power until you are on your full?No. More likely the system used in Australia will be used where different bikes are classified suitable for provisional license holders based on their factory output and weight figures.
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/tests/motorcycleridertrainingscheme/motorcyclesnoviceriders.html

[Max Preload]

Dear God, how the hell are us woman going to cope now?!?!I'm expecting nothing will change for them. They'll just keep barreling through the intersections doing their lippy, oblivious to the presence of other road users. :dodge:

[Str8 Jacket]

I'm expecting nothing will change for them. They'll just keep barreling through the intersections doing their lippy, oblivious to the presence of other road users. :dodge:

Since I have moved to a full-head helmet I have found that it's virtually impossible to apply lipstick whilst riding now! :facepalm:

I can just imagine a line full of blnde-like woman sitting at an intersection not moving as they are completely confused.... :whistle:

[Banditbandit]

Dear God, how the hell are us woman going to cope now?!?!

Oh .. I'm sorry .. I didn't think you cope now

[Gibbo89]

No. More likely the system used in Australia will be used where different bikes are classified suitable for provisional license holders based on their factory output and weight figures.
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/tests/motorcycleridertrainingscheme/motorcyclesnoviceriders.html

ahh ok, so 2 stroke 250's are shafted. and parallel 500's are all good.

sooo what if you already own a rs250 and are a learner driver. they will come around to your house and ban you from driving your vehicle?? :shutup:

[bogan]

Since I have moved to a full-head helmet I have found that it's virtually impossible to apply lipstick whilst riding now! :facepalm:

I can just imagine a line full of blnde-like woman sitting at an intersection not moving as they are completely confused.... :whistle:

thats what the lippy is for! make yourself look pretty so some dude will stop and let you through.

[Max Preload]

ahh ok, so 2 stroke 250's are shafted. and parallel 500's are all good.

sooo what if you already own a rs250 and are a learner driver. they will come around to your house and ban you from driving your vehicle?? :shutup:

Nah. They'll just wait until they catch you riding it and give you a $100 invoice and 35 demerit points.

[slofox]

I can just imagine a line full of blnde-like woman sitting at an intersection not moving as they are completely confused.... :whistle:

I see that most days now...not all blondes though...not all women either, actually...came across a guy today stopped right in the middle of the road at the head of a T intersection...just sitting there. God know what he was doing...or thinking...or not thinking. Was still there as I disappeared into the distance...

[ukusa]

I happen to like the current rules, and don't find them confusing.

I agree 100%.
I wonder how many bikers will get killed when the rules changes? We'll take our new left turn, but the dumb arse in the cage will still think they have the right of way and BAMMMM the biker is gone!

[aprilia_RS250]

ahh ok, so 2 stroke 250's are shafted. and parallel 500's are all good.

sooo what if you already own a rs250 and are a learner driver. they will come around to your house and ban you from driving your vehicle?? :shutup:

I had an RS250 with an L Plate attached :shit: nothing ever happened to me. Although I was mature and careful with it, still am.

Fuck I hate our government

[Str8 Jacket]

I agree 100%.
I wonder how many bikers will get killed when the rules changes? We'll take our new left turn, but the dumb arse in the cage will still think they have the right of way and BAMMMM the biker is gone!

We'll just have to do what we do now and treat everyone like they haven't seen us or that they are out to harm us. Simple! ;)

[slofox]

We'll just have to do what we do now and treat everyone like they haven't seen us or that they are out to harm us. Simple! ;)

Eggsackery. I never trust anyone to do the right thing under current rules let alone after a change. Scanning and planning and defensive riding will protect you better than any rule.

[pzkpfw]

A 4-way intersection with neither road having a centreline that crosses the intersection is treated like a roundabout (just like a signal controlled intersection where the signals are out) in that you give way to the right...

Well, sure. That's not confusing at all (no sarcasm to be read in here), and is no change from what currently happens. I've got no issue with that.

What annoys me is that the rule for who gives way will now be different, when both cars are turning right, depending on road layout.

219949

You now need to add the "main road" (versus "side road") distinction, to use in making give-way decisions, when before it was just "give way to your right".

[bogan]

You now need to add the "main road" (versus "side road") distinction, to use in making give-way decisions, when before it was just "give way to your right".

nah, you just need to make sure the local council has added some give way signs! I can't actually think of any 4 way intersections without signage anyway.

[Max Preload]

Well, sure. That's not confusing at all (no sarcasm to be read in here), and is no change from what currently happens. I've got no issue with that.

What annoys me is that the rule for who gives way will now be different, when both cars are turning right, depending on road layout.

You now need to add the "main road" (versus "side road") distinction, to use in making give-way decisions, when before it was just "give way to your right".
I'm in complete agreement. People who thinks this change makes it easier just haven't thought it through.

Isn't there already a 'MAIN ROAD' rule anyway? :whistle: :rofl:


nah, you just need to make sure the local council has added some give way signs! I can't actually think of any 4 way intersections without signage anyway.Me either. Even uncontrolled T-junctions are getting rare.

[pzkpfw]

Isn't there already a 'MAIN ROAD' rule anyway? :whistle: :rofl:

Me either. Even uncontrolled T-junctions are getting rare.

I think that might be part of the issue.

They stick so many Give Ways on the "side roads" that people get used to the "main road" having right of way, then get confused when they have to give way to someone on the side road (when "for a change" there's no give way sign on that "side road").


After the rule has changed and that "main road" car has right of way over the "side road" car - there will be intersections with their old give way signs, and intersections without... and the rules will be the same with or without the sign. Another oddity!

[scumdog]

Well then, consider it confusing. A 4-way intersection with neither road having a centreline that crosses the intersection is treated like a roundabout (just like a signal controlled intersection where the signals are out) in that you give way to the right...

In the USA those intersections not controlled by Stop or Yield (Give Way) sign had a four-way stop. system with a flashing red light facing all approaching roads/streets.

Everybody had to stop on reaching the intersection.
First to arrive at the intersection was first to drive off, it worked like a charm, nobody 'jumped the gun'

With NZ drivers and their immature attitudes it would be carnage if they implemented that system here...:blink:

[steve_t]

With NZ drivers and their immature attitudes it would be carnage if they implemented that system here...:blink:

It'll work fine as long as everyone lets me go first :innocent::shutup:

[MikeL]

Unlike most of you lot I'm old enough to remember when the present left turn law was introduced. I can vividly recall my reaction: they've got to be joking! It just didn't make any sense. All the explanations about rationalizing the "give way to the right" rule and thereby making it easier were just crap. I'm pretty sure that the MOT or whoever was responsible for the change realized within a couple of years that it was a mistake, but then rationalized further by saying that to go back to the old law would cause more confusion. More red faces, more likely.
What a balls-up. Heads should roll. Pity it's 30 years too late.

[slowpoke]

Yep, the give way rule was a cock up from the start and thank fuck the've come to their senses. The changeover will be confusing for some (most likely for those who can't manage it properly at the moment so the status quo remains) but it'll be short term pain for a long term gain.

Now we've just gotta get that stoopid 80kph car/trailer rule fucked off, it creates more log jams and hazards than any car/trailer travelling at 100kph.

For all those who winge about New Zealand's "goat tracks" best you take a look at the big picture: New Zealand is a young country, both culturally and geologically. It hasn't had the Romans and other peoples building roads since back before Jesus opened the batting for Jerusalem Old Boys Cricket Club, as in Europe etc. And the topography is fresh and jagged in comparison to the worn eroded compararatively flat lands of America, Australia etc. In New Zealand it's corners per km, in Oz or the States it's km's per corner and despite your wishes other wise there's fuck all the gooberment can do about short of picking the country up and moving it away from the fault line going up the guts. Throw in a low population density that restricts the fiscal ability to make/improve/repair our roads and it's hard to see how the situation could be made any better......unless you want even more taxes?

[steve_t]

Now we've just gotta get that stoopid 80kph car/trailer rule fucked off...

They changed the speed limit for towing trailers to 90km/h a while back

[warewolf]

About time that bloody stupid kamikaze give way rule was changed. It's so bad that when Victoria changed back to the usual rule used by the rest of the world/country, they didn't have the typical upwards spike in the accident rate that occurs with changed rules! The mexicans got rid of it in the mid-late eighties and haven't looked back.

It is quite obviously an appalling rule, notwithstanding parochial bleatings to the contrary.


only for a car up to 1300cc.No. Don't perpetuate the 250cc limit fallacies. Some kind of power-to-weight restriction, yes, and maybe some more "learner approved" conditions, but never purely a capacity limit. Young drivers should be allowed to drive the family wagon, even if it has a big mutha engine.

[PrincessBandit]

I had to smile when I read that they're delaying the introduction of this rule change till after the world cup - something to do with eliminating confusion on our roads with such a big event (and world wide media attention) happening.

We're such crap drivers that I'm surprised the world would notice any difference between our driving now and what it will be with us getting our heads around "the change".

Personally I've never been happy with trusting other drivers to observe the correct rules at controlled or uncontrolled intersections. Approach with caution has always been my rule of thumb. (Doesn't always mean I've done it, mind - had my bimbo moments behind the wheel as well).

Bottom line for me is it won't change how I drive anyway. I'll still be wary of those who look like idiots and those who don't.

[DEATH_INC.]

I'm all for the biggest vehicle gets the right of way rule. If yer on a bike you should be quick enough to get out of the way. :shutup:
BTW, the old fellas should be able to remember when we had the give way to the left rule years ago...

[Genie]

geez, some people around here are still not aware of the give way to right rule so dont' know how'll they'll cope with the change. Glad they're announcing it now so I have ages to get my head around it all, change is not good for blondes :violin:

[merv]

Unlike most of you lot I'm old enough to remember when the present left turn law was introduced. I can vividly recall my reaction: they've got to be joking! It just didn't make any sense. All the explanations about rationalizing the "give way to the right" rule and thereby making it easier were just crap. I'm pretty sure that the MOT or whoever was responsible for the change realized within a couple of years that it was a mistake, but then rationalized further by saying that to go back to the old law would cause more confusion. More red faces, more likely.
What a balls-up. Heads should roll. Pity it's 30 years too late.

Agree entirely Mike, I'm another one that had been riding and driving for many years before that stupid rule came in and it was totally illogical then and still is now, it just added too many hesitant moments to people's driving - do they stop when turning left or not to give way because someone else is going straight through so the right turner has to stop as well etc etc.

I can't believe the Gummint didn't make the change straight away - they say oh give people time to get used to it, but you can't practice with it until it is law bejesus so that is as ridiculous, and oh wait until after the RWC. I reckon it would have been better to do it before the influx of bewildered tourists.

[Mudfart]

yeah good luck with changing ANY road rules EVER again.
over 90% of the people I see indicating at roundabouts who are going straight through, that think they are doin' it right, are doin' it WRONG.

[Crazy Steve]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4178822/Give-way-road-rule-change-confirmed

Just what we need - further dumbing down of the driving populace.

They're also removing the incentive for motorcyclists to spend money on further training to reduce their time on the restricted license. That'll do wonders.

Oh, and I see they've rolled out the misleading "Motorcyclists are 20 times more at risk of being involved in a fatal or serious injury crash than car drivers per kilometre driven." soundbite.

At least power-to-weight ratio restrictions will come in, which I'm sure will be like Australia. That is much fairer than simply engine capacity. If only that were applied to vehicle licenses ('rego') though.

Will this help me next time im being chased ?

Crazy Steve.

[Max Preload]

Will this help me next time im being chased ?Only if you don't fall off.

[Crazy Steve]

Only if you don't fall off.

Falling off from 1 out of 100 isn't bad going but....Think of all the money ive saved by no stopping and getting away 99times....:yes:

Crazy Steve.

[Banditbandit]

I see that most days now...not all blondes though...not all women either, actually...came across a guy today stopped right in the middle of the road at the head of a T intersection...just sitting there. God know what he was doing...or thinking...or not thinking. Was still there as I disappeared into the distance...

Maybe you should have checked to see if he was dead ?

[slofox]

Maybe you should have checked to see if he was dead ?

He didn't look dead...brain dead possibly...

[pzkpfw]

Something occured to me today:

After they started publicising the proper way to indicate at roundabouts, a whole bunch of numpties got it in their head they had to indicate something and started indicating - completely incorrectly. Like those dumbies who indicate right, all the way through a roundabout that they are going "straight" * on (instead of just indicating left to exit).

(* i.e. taking an exit 180 degrees (or less) round from where they entered.)

What's the bet that all this publicity about the change coming up makes some people start to behave that way now? e.g. reading the headlines and just assuming it starts next week.

I wonder how crashes that will cause...

[slofox]

BTW, the old fellas should be able to remember when we had the give way to the left rule years ago...

Yeah. I do remember it. And the fuss the change created. And I still wave a "thanks" to those left-turners who let me turn right in front of them because it has NEVER felt right to me.

Hey - who you callin' Old sonny? :angry:

[Scuba_Steve]

Im confused to why alot of people think this change back is a good thing??? It makes no logical or logistical sense.

Take a 'T' intersection currently a person turning left gives way to someone turning right, they always have space to pull into the curb thus giving passage for those going straight through & chance for them to get round the corner.
Under new/old "reverse" rule the right turning person has to give way so now not only do they have to wait for straight through traffic but also the turning traffic (which was previously their "gap" to get round the corner & out of they way), so they have to wait for all traffic and unlike when left turners give way there is no guarantee of passage for those traveling straight through so if a busy street congestion could become a major problem as the "flow" would no longer be there.
Thus as I said no logical or logistical sense the ONLY advantage I can see is that tourists would be ever so slightly better at intersections, but doesn't help the rest of their driving tho or anyone else & last I checked "tourist's" were NOT New Zealanders and did NOT live here.

And anyone who thinks it'll make intersections "safer" sorry (no offense) but your a fucking moron if people can't drive, they CAN'T drive, changing the rule aint gonna help that.

Rant over... for now. But the old saying "be careful what you wish for" does spring to mind.

[sinned]

About time that bloody stupid kamikaze give way rule was changed. It's so bad that when Victoria changed back to the usual rule used by the rest of the world/country, they didn't have the typical upwards spike in the accident rate that occurs with changed rules! The mexicans got rid of it in the mid-late eighties and haven't looked back.

It is quite obviously an appalling rule, notwithstanding parochial bleatings to the contrary.

I was around when this rule change happened.
Yes it is an appalling rule - trust NZ to be one of the first to make a stupid decision. What I remember as the main reason was so cars would not be stuck in the middle of the road waiting to turn and holding up other traffic. That doesn't sound reasonable now and didn't then either.

It wasn't too difficult making the change and there was plenty of care taken at intersections and a bit of friendly waving. So a change back should not be difficult with sufficient education. That does not take into account the drop in driver standards, attitudes, drugged drivers, and generally a lot more morons on the road.
Why it hasn't been done earlier is all about politics: no government has had the balls to make the change knowing a change like this will be unpopular and that will reflect in the polls. Even the Nats are putting the actual change out past the next election.

[stify]

Im confused to why alot of people think this change back is a good thing???

last I checked "tourist's" were NOT New Zealanders and did NOT live here.





I'm not confused and tourist's do tour here...and they just don't give way as our current rule stands(I see examples everyday)..I work in Katikati and we have a good number of overseas workers doing their oe/backpacking/seasonal work thing, with their "standard" cheap car and no insurance, I think it's not a bad thing really...In time I think no one will give a rats arse about the change,

[scumdog]

Take a 'T' intersection currently a person turning left gives way to someone turning right, they always have space to pull into the curb thus giving passage for those going straight through & chance for them to get round the corner.
Under new/old "reverse" rule the right turning person has to give way so now not only do they have to wait for straight through traffic but also the turning traffic (which was previously their "gap" to get round the corner & out of they way),

I was wondering when somebody would think of that let alone bring it up...

[stify]

I was wondering when somebody would think of that let alone bring it up...

I think of the very same thing every time I expect the oncoming left turning traffic to give way...but you picks your time with some luck I might add and hope they understand the give way rule, also the number of oncoming vehicles that cross the centre line to pass the left turning vehicle(vehicle that is giving way) is also a valid factor I think in this change, I find it easier to control the following traffic when turning rather than predict what the oncoming traffic is going to do even taking into account any extra space you would have kerb side

[scracha]

erson turning left gives way to someone turning right, they always have space to pull into the curb thus giving passage for

a) they don't always have space to pull into the curb
b) Reality is that even when they do have space to pull into the curb, most don't.
c) many don't always check for following traffic before turning right resulting in overtaking car striking right turning offender.
d) it's bloody dangerous turning right in front of moving traffic just because they happen to be indicating left.




congestion could become a major problem as the "flow" would no longer be there.
Thus as I said no logical or logistical sense the ONLY advantage I can see is that

Congestion not really an issue in the sticks. In busy urban areas it'll be solved via roundabouts, traffic lights and one-way systems. This will improve traffic flow.



And anyone who thinks it'll make intersections "safer" sorry (no offense) but your a fucking moron if people can't drive, they CAN'T drive, changing the rule aint gonna help that.

I could say you're a fucking moron but I'm clever enough to see both sides of the coin and adopt a wait and see approach. I personally think after the initial couple of years it'll be business as usual.


Obviously 4 million Kiwi's MUST be smarter than the 6.5 billion other fools on planet Earth who never even considered their clever give way system.

[Latte]

I cant find the source, but I remember when Victoria changed back to the "old rule" there were very few accidents caused by the confusion, and the occurence of accidents at intersections dropped notceably afterwards.

[davebullet]

Where's my hook turn in the legislation? I want my fucking hook turn!!!!

[merv]

Where's my hook turn in the legislation? I want my fucking hook turn!!!!

Well we better get some trams on the streets so that we might need the hook turn :shit:

[Berries]

The existing rule is a crock of shit, so I'm glad to see they have finally got someone with the balls to change it. Crashes going up ? Well, it takes two to have a crash at an intersection and I wouldn't trust the other driver now or after the changes. Crap drivers will always be crap drivers. And NZ has a shed load of them.

[slofox]

Here's a concrete example for you as to why the rule should revert...happened to me last night.

I'm waiting to turn right into the side street. A car is approaching from the opposite direction and indicates he will turn left into the same side street. Current rule gives me ROW. But this guy is approaching with some alacrity and gives me pause. Just as friggin well cause he barrels round the corner despite me having the go ahead. He stopped in the supermarket that I was going to. I saw him inside and said "that rule hasn't changed yet y'know". Answer? "I'm from England and we have it the other way there. Sorry, I realised I had made a mistake when you blasted the horn at me..."

So there ya go. First hand experience.

[Kickaha]

Here's a concrete example for you as to why the rule should revert...happened to me last night.

That's a piss poor example of why it should change but a good example of why that guy should have his licence pulled if doesn't know the road rules he's meant to be currently obeying

[Mudfart]

Something occured to me today:

After they started publicising the proper way to indicate at roundabouts, a whole bunch of numpties got it in their head they had to indicate something and started indicating - completely incorrectly. Like those dumbies who indicate right, all the way through a roundabout that they are going "straight" * on (instead of just indicating left to exit).

(* i.e. taking an exit 180 degrees (or less) round from where they entered.)

What's the bet that all this publicity about the change coming up makes some people start to behave that way now? e.g. reading the headlines and just assuming it starts next week.

I wonder how crashes that will cause...

yep i am the great mambozo...i can see the future, and the future shows insurance premiums going up, and ACC levies, followed by more rises in registrations...its a good time to be a panelbeater or a mortitian.