Low road toll [Archive] - Kiwi Biker forums

MrKiwi

30th March 2011, 15:30

onearmedbandit

30th March 2011, 15:33

Price fuel at $10 per litre and see what happens (well apart from the failure of our current economy). So yes your argument does have grounding.

Latte

30th March 2011, 15:34

Price fuel at $10 per litre and see what happens (well apart from the failure of our current economy). So yes your argument does have grounding.

No way, the police have finally found the right mix of Speed Cameras, infringements, and advertising dollars spent to cause a reduction in the road toll.

Mekk

30th March 2011, 16:22

Thanks, Libya.

steve_t

30th March 2011, 16:39

No way, the police have finally found the right mix of Speed Cameras, infringements, and advertising dollars spent to cause a reduction in the road toll.

No way, it was the 5km/h speed tolerances on public holidays :facepalm:

superman

30th March 2011, 16:44

Today, the Police are extolling (couldn't resist the pun) the 'remarkable low road toll year to date". National road policing manager Paula Rose said the reduced toll could represent a sudden "societal shift" on road safety in New Zealand.

Hmmm, I'm not so sure I agree. Last time the road toll dipped it coincided with an increase in fuel price, which was in 2008 (366 for the year, the lowest in about 50 years). And what do we have now, high fuel prices and more people taking public transport. A quick glance at longer term trends suggests the every time fuel prices go up and stay up for a period there is a lowering of the road toll. Kind of makes sense, but heck what do I know...:shit:

Lower socio-economic groups can't afford to drive as often, they never learnt how to drive properly and drive bombs through getting WOFs from dodgy places. Lower road toll.

No wait I better be PC... society is equally taking the brunt of the higher fuel prices and hence forth everyone can't afford to cruise for the fun of it anymore in automobiles. Lower road toll. :yes:

Oblivion

30th March 2011, 16:47

Lower socio-economic groups can't afford to drive as often, they never learnt how to drive properly and drive bombs through getting WOFs from dodgy places. Lower road toll.

No wait I better be PC... society is equally taking the brunt of the higher fuel prices and hence forth everyone can't afford to cruise for the fun of it anymore in automobiles. Lower road toll. :yes:

An excuse for us to all build electric auto-whatchamacallits. :yes:

p.dath

30th March 2011, 16:57

We have had a recession. Less people have jobs in a recession. As a consequence, less people are driving to and from work everyday, and less people are driving for work (as in sales people driving from customer to customer). Also more people have less money to spend on driving to their favourite holiday destination or just getting away.

Any chance there are less accidents because people are driving less?

Gremlin

30th March 2011, 18:18

Any chance there are less accidents because people are driving less?
Are you crazy? You evidently don't understand the government's complex math. :shit:

:facepalm:

Katman

30th March 2011, 18:22

It would be a great arguing point if the increased fuel prices led to more people riding motorcycles and the road toll still remained low.

MrKiwi

30th March 2011, 19:21

...
Any chance there are less accidents because people are driving less?

Yes, that's my view...

and post edit, I agree Katman

bogan

30th March 2011, 19:25

Are you crazy? You evidently don't understand the government's complex math. :shit:

:facepalm:

dunno bout their math, but their logic goes: if it's good, take credit for it, if it's bad blame somebody else!

BoristheBiter

30th March 2011, 19:49

I dunno really whether it is or isn't what the traffic policy's are doing or not doing but I have noticed how slow drivers are these days and how much of the roads are now double yellow lines and how most people just don't overtake anymore.

Berries

30th March 2011, 20:22

Figures from MOT
Road deaths year to date at 30 March 2011 - 66. Same time last year - 98

Fatal crashes year to date at 30 March 2011 - 58. Same time last year - 91

I can't see a "societal shift" myself, just a blip over the first quarter. Of course the Police are going to jump up and down and claim it is due to the work they are doing. I blame the shit summer weather myself and people staying indoors to watch tragedies unfold on the TV.

pete376403

30th March 2011, 20:26

Katman

30th March 2011, 20:28

Anyone got the motorcycle stats to date?

Smifffy

30th March 2011, 20:37

Anyone got the motorcycle stats to date?

Just what I was going to ask. Maybe the levies worked and now we don't need the McSAC!

How cool would that be?

Katman

30th March 2011, 20:38

Just what I was going to ask. Maybe the levies worked and now we don't need the McSAC!

How cool would that be?

I'm holding my breath expectantly. :msn-wink:

BoristheBiter

30th March 2011, 20:51

So OK what has caused the road toll to come down??

So far we have price of fuel, thats a crock, just as many cars on the road in Auckland and the price has only just gone up so that can be ruled out.

Whats left? people riding/driving better? No surly that can't be it.
Who really cares who puts their hand up and says it was because of this as long as the toll comes down or do the nay sayers on here just need something to bag.

swbarnett

30th March 2011, 21:47

So OK what has caused the road toll to come down??
It's most likely a statistical blip and nothing has changed. One quarter is far too short a time to say anything about the trend.

Berries

30th March 2011, 22:35

Whats left? people riding/driving better? No surly that can't be it.The only 100% certain reason for the lower number of fatal crashes is that there have been less crashes this year where people have died. Strange but true.

ducatilover

30th March 2011, 22:41

Anyone got the motorcycle stats to date?

Yeah, I have two bikes and am still alive, therefore double the ACC levies is helping me and saving the kittens.

Katman

30th March 2011, 22:48

The only 100% certain reason for the lower number of fatal crashes is that there have been less crashes this year where people have died. Strange but true.

Don't be a hold-out.

Give us the motorcycle stats.

Smifffy

31st March 2011, 06:05

Don't be a hold-out.

Give us the motorcycle stats.

It will probably require an OIA request, since that is how TPTB prefer to communicate with bikers.

Berries

31st March 2011, 06:39

Don't be a hold-out.
Give us the motorcycle stats.

It will probably require an OIA request, since that is how TPTB prefer to communicate with bikers.
Here for all the world to see - http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/road-deaths/toll.html.

oneofsix

31st March 2011, 06:46

Here for all the world to see - http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/road-deaths/toll.html.

Must need coffee because what stands out to me seems to be screwed numbers. There were no pillion deaths in 2010 or 2011 and yet up until 31/03/2011 (today :woohoo:) there has been 3 pillion deaths ?? when did these occur if not from the 01/01/2010 or from 01/01/2011. Thought there should be an overlap there somewhere, or are these statistic untrustworthy :shutup:

Oops bad column headings. another read, will scroll down to the monthly stats and you see when they say "Year from 1 Jan" they neglect to say until 31/03, so the 2010 numbers don't cover the whole year, just the first 3 months of that year. :facepalm:

Berries

31st March 2011, 07:11

The first two columns are the year to date comparison that started this thread off, so only include the first three months of this year to the first three months of last year. The second two columns are a rolling 12 month period, so compare 1st April 2010 to 31st March 2011 with 1st April 2009 to 31st March 2010.

The final table is the interesting one as you can see where the reduction is coming from. Auckland holding back the rest of the country as per usual.

BoristheBiter

31st March 2011, 08:21

It's most likely a statistical blip and nothing has changed. One quarter is far too short a time to say anything about the trend.

Which is why the "its because of the petrol price" is just so wrong

The only 100% certain reason for the lower number of fatal crashes is that there have been less crashes this year where people have died. Strange but true.

The one that always gets me is there are to many variables in crashes for the stats to be used as a reason to implement new policy and i guess this is what fuels most debate over the subject.

Latte

31st March 2011, 09:14

Just what I was going to ask. Maybe the levies worked and now we don't need the McSAC!

How cool would that be?

Totally off topic, but every time I see "McSAC" I think it's a new Macca's burger (although I won't buy it coz SAC makes me think of something I'd rather not have in my... err ... yeah)

... resume normal broadcast ...

onearmedbandit

31st March 2011, 09:22

Which is why the "its because of the petrol price" is just so wrong

Wrong. It is still a factor that needs to be taken into consideration. I've asked a few people recently this exact question, and all of them have stated the same. When the price of fuel goes up, they travel less.

MrKiwi

31st March 2011, 10:05

From my previous experience in working in road safety there is this trend that is hard to explain but nevertheless there to see. When the price of fuel goes up and stays up for several months at a time, the road toll goes down. It seems that several factors 'might' account for this:
- people tend to drive slower to conserve fuel. Can't be certain this is the case, but it might just be a factor;
- people drive less; and/or
- at least in urban areas, more people tend to take the bus or the train.

We also know that there was a surge in motorbike and scooter sales in 2008 when the price of fuel went up and stayed up. It was this surge in sales which led to more bikes and scooters on the roads that saw an adverse trend in motorbike fatalities, at least in absolute numbers. When these numbers are converted to relative, ie number of fatalities per 10,000 riders the stats are not that much worse than for tin top accidents.

CookMySock

31st March 2011, 10:26

oneofsix

31st March 2011, 10:38

Bugger! What about their revenue generating activities? Lean days ahead for the popo.. :woohoo:

What will they turn to for income? Perhaps put their hand in the general tax pool? Nah people wont wear that.. Put fines up? Nope, trend for people getting fines is downward.. So help me out here people? :killingme

Oh yee of little faith. You can trust our pollies better than that. Tolerance lowered to 4k permanently for a start.
Nah the slower driving that lowers the road toll, if at all, will be at the extreme end, the ones that crash when chased rather than ticketed.
If lower speed continue you will see a raise in drivers dozing off type accidents.

BoristheBiter

31st March 2011, 10:39

Wrong. It is still a factor that needs to be taken into consideration. I've asked a few people recently this exact question, and all of them have stated the same. When the price of fuel goes up, they travel less.

I have taken it into consideration but i have seen no down turn in traffic on the roads here in Auckland.
Everyone is going on about using the car less but it's still taking me an hour to get to and from work and the motorways/roads are still full during the day.

I think there are too many variables to take into account as to why there are less crashes/deaths at the beginning of this year to just have a blanket statement but that hasn't stopped anyone before.

Bald Eagle

31st March 2011, 10:43

With recent enhancements to the capital train system the reverse has occured here.
The morning traffic from the Kapiti coast in to the City has increased along with the fuel price :facepalm:

idb

31st March 2011, 10:44

We're only up to March!
It seems a bit early to me to be trumpeting an annual reduction.

Are they comparing first quarters or extrapolating over the year?

Eyegasm

31st March 2011, 12:13

I have taken it into consideration but i have seen no down turn in traffic on the roads here in Auckland.

Hence why the stats in the Auckland region haven't changed much.

Maha

31st March 2011, 12:36

The road toll dropped significantly when Kiwibiker.co.nz started in 03' and so productivity within the work place...weird I know.

Eyegasm

31st March 2011, 12:53

The road toll dropped significantly when Kiwibiker.co.nz started in 03' and so productivity within the work place...weird I know.

I am on a one man mission to get Kiwibiker on our blocked list at work.

Put it in the same basket as Facebook etc...

It'll happen...

Usarka

31st March 2011, 14:28

dunno bout their math, but their logic goes: if it's good, take credit for it, if it's bad blame somebody else!

The cops are my favourite for this. Crime stats are down we are awesome! Crime stats are up - because more people are reporting it, we are awesome!

BoristheBiter

31st March 2011, 14:37

The cops are my favourite for this. Crime stats are down we are awesome! Crime stats are up - because more people are reporting it, we are awesome!

Is that a bit like certain KB members that say "cops aren't doing their job, cunts. cops are doing their job cunts"?

CookMySock

31st March 2011, 18:16

Oh yee of little faith. You can trust our pollies better than that. Tolerance lowered to 4k permanently for a start.
Nah the slower driving that lowers the road toll, if at all, will be at the extreme end, the ones that crash when chased rather than ticketed.
If lower speed continue you will see a raise in drivers dozing off type accidents.That'd be about right. History is littered with the kings courts fining all and sundry for every little misdemeanor, no matter how trivial.

It'll change if I have anything to do with it.

Smifffy

31st March 2011, 19:25

What stands out to me are that the big frops are in the 15-19 yrs, and 25-39 yrs brackets./

Drops too

Katman

31st March 2011, 19:30

It'll change if I have anything to do with it.

Let me guess........

......you're going International?

Berries

31st March 2011, 22:11

Everyone is going on about using the car less but it's still taking me an hour to get to and from work and the motorways/roads are still full during the day.
You want to get yourself one of them there motorbike things.

miloking

31st March 2011, 22:24

Is that a bit like certain KB members that say "cops aren't doing their job, cunts. cops are doing their job cunts"?

Hmmmm that made me realise...

Cops arent doing their job...cunts..
Cops are doing their job... cunts..

Cops ...cunts..

Brian d marge

31st March 2011, 23:25

is it me or are the "born again's" overly featuring in those stats

Stephen

Get granddad off the R1 :corn:

BoristheBiter

1st April 2011, 06:23

You want to get yourself one of them there motorbike things.

I would like to but its a bit hard to carry all the gear i need for work on the back of a bike.

BoristheBiter

1st April 2011, 06:29

is it me or are the "born again's" overly featuring in those stats

Stephen

Get granddad off the R1 :corn:

It only tells us what age they were when they died. It doesn't say anything on when they learnt to ride or if they stopped riding, what type of bike, where is was or what the cause of the crash was.

Its just a blip in some figures, :Police:move along, nothing to see here:Police:

BoristheBiter

1st April 2011, 06:30

Hmmmm that made me realise...

Cops arent doing their job...cunts..
Cops are doing their job... cunts..

Cops ...cunts..

Worst troll ever

Smifffy

1st April 2011, 07:24

It only tells us what age they were when they died. It doesn't say anything on when they learnt to ride or if they stopped riding, what type of bike, where is was or what the cause of the crash was.

Its just a blip in some figures, :Police:move along, nothing to see here:Police:

Unless I missed it, they also don't tell us whether granddad was on an R1, in an SUV or was a pedestrian.

BoristheBiter

1st April 2011, 07:45

Unless I missed it, they also don't tell us whether granddad was on an R1, in an SUV or was a pedestrian.

basically yes. all it does is say how many have crashed/died in what type of vehicle.

In other words useless.

MSTRS

1st April 2011, 08:08

It's most likely a statistical blip and nothing has changed.

Like cyclist deaths last year...
A single week, in Nov I think, saw the total double.

onearmedbandit

1st April 2011, 09:10

I have taken it into consideration but i have seen no down turn in traffic on the roads here in Auckland.
Everyone is going on about using the car less but it's still taking me an hour to get to and from work and the motorways/roads are still full during the day.

Congratulations, you've worked out that people won't stop driving to get to work, that people will pay a bit extra to avoid public transport and car pooling. You've also worked out that people during working hours still need to get around.

Now lets move out of the city (you know, where the majority of fatal road accidents occur) and into the evenings and weekends. Ah what is happening here? Oh, less people are making unnecessary trips in the car. Bored at home? Go for a drive to the lake? Nah fuck it I'll do the lawns/wash the dog/walk down to the local park. What's this? Less people on the roads? Does this possibly mean there will be less fatalities? Surely I jest.

ducatilover

1st April 2011, 09:15

Maybe a percentage of us have developed an exoskeleton? This would explain it. I'm going try get one.

oneofsix

1st April 2011, 09:52

Maybe a percentage of us have developed an exoskeleton? This would explain it. I'm going try get one.

The knight in shinning armour. Make mine shinny black.

oneofsix

1st April 2011, 09:58

Congratulations, you've worked out that people won't stop driving to get to work, that people will pay a bit extra to avoid public transport and car pooling. You've also worked out that people during working hours still need to get around.

Now lets move out of the city (you know, where the majority of fatal road accidents occur) and into the evenings and weekends. Ah what is happening here? Oh, less people are making unnecessary trips in the car. Bored at home? Go for a drive to the lake? Nah fuck it I'll do the lawns/wash the dog/walk down to the local park. What's this? Less people on the roads? Does this possibly mean there will be less fatalities? Surely I jest.

returning to the city for a moment, different city though the same need to get to work and avoid public transport. I suspect I am seeing a change in behaviour in that more drivers earlier in the mornings. I think they have decided to put up with earlier starts to try and save fuel through not being stuck in traffic jams. I do hope they will decide they need there beauty sleep

BoristheBiter

1st April 2011, 11:16

Congratulations, you've worked out that people won't stop driving to get to work, that people will pay a bit extra to avoid public transport and car pooling. You've also worked out that people during working hours still need to get around.

Now lets move out of the city (you know, where the majority of fatal road accidents occur) and into the evenings and weekends. Ah what is happening here? Oh, less people are making unnecessary trips in the car. Bored at home? Go for a drive to the lake? Nah fuck it I'll do the lawns/wash the dog/walk down to the local park. What's this? Less people on the roads? Does this possibly mean there will be less fatalities? Surely I jest.

I still don't agree. I went from akl to Ohakune at the weekend, even with the rain there still seemed like the same amount of traffic on the roads.
When we have the stats for the whole year then we can start to make assumptions, until then its just a blip.

Swoop

1st April 2011, 11:22

Maybe a percentage of us have developed an exoskeleton? This would explain it. I'm going try get one.
One made out of dead cow?:woohoo::yes::scooter:

onearmedbandit

1st April 2011, 11:27

I still don't agree. I went from akl to Ohakune at the weekend, even with the rain there still seemed like the same amount of traffic on the roads.
When we have the stats for the whole year then we can start to make assumptions, until then its just a blip.

Look at it this way. If fuel was $10 a litre would you see a reduction in the number of journeys taken in cars? If your answer is yes then fuel price does have a bearing on road use. Now $10 is an extreme, but it proves the point, as everyone has their own threshold.

StoneY

1st April 2011, 11:33

Interesting thread....from breakdowns of quaterly stats, this quater is always the quietest.

Im of the opinion, wait till Winter is over and all the long weekends prior to the Christmas break are done..... and then analyse numbers

ducatilover

1st April 2011, 11:53

One made out of dead cow?:woohoo::yes::scooter:

Mine is, 1.3-1.4mm of dead cow to be exact.

BoristheBiter

1st April 2011, 12:04

Look at it this way. If fuel was $10 a litre would you see a reduction in the number of journeys taken in cars? If your answer is yes then fuel price does have a bearing on road use. Now $10 is an extreme, but it proves the point, as everyone has their own threshold.

But its not $10 a litre, so until it is then its not a factor. also the petrol has only gone recently so over the quarter not many people would have really worried about the gas price so it can be taken out completely, IMHO.

onearmedbandit

1st April 2011, 12:05

But its not $10 a litre, so until it is then its not a factor. also the petrol has only gone recently so over the quarter not many people would have really worried about the gas price so it can be taken out completely, IMHO.

At first I thought you couldn't read, then I thought you could, now you've just confirmed my initial suspicions...

Oh and I'll be sure to tell those people that have told me they are taking less unnecessary trips due to the cost of petrol the you say they are wrong.

oneofsix

1st April 2011, 12:08

But its not $10 a litre, so until it is then its not a factor. also the petrol has only gone recently so over the quarter not many people would have really worried about the gas price so it can be taken out completely, IMHO.

You mean there has been another round of rises recently. The price of petrol rose to heights that shocked people last year. Christmas had a drop in road toll as well. Now you are also seeing people suffering the effects of the recession.

Subike

1st April 2011, 12:14

Maybe its due to us here in Christchurch having to drive on roads that are barley drivable,
or due to the central city being closed, thus less traffic in areas that were accident prone,
or that so many cars are still stuck in carparks etc, that are owned by those who could afford to travel every weekend.
Remove the spendable incomes of 300000 people, who are now stuck at home digging out the long drops,
fixing lives that are full of cracks,
dont go for drives anymore for anything other than essentual things....
could be.....

BoristheBiter

1st April 2011, 13:54

At first I thought you couldn't read, then I thought you could, now you've just confirmed my initial suspicions...

Oh and I'll be sure to tell those people that have told me they are taking less unnecessary trips due to the cost of petrol the you say they are wrong.

O go ahead, and tell them you can't read as well, as i never said that people weren't cutting back on trips, i was saying it isn't a factor in the road toll as there are still just as many cars on the roads.

onearmedbandit

1st April 2011, 14:09

O go ahead, and tell them you can't read as well, as i never said that people weren't cutting back on trips, i was saying it isn't a factor in the road toll as there are still just as many cars on the roads.

Amazing, you manage to contradict yourself within one sentence, very impressive. You say you don't argue that people are cutting back on trips (ie not using their car as much -ergo they are not on the roads - ergo less cars on the road) yet you state there are just as many cars on the roads...

Explain that to me Paul Daniels.

Smifffy

1st April 2011, 14:29

I just burned up a tank and a half of gas on a joyride.

Luvverly.

BoristheBiter

1st April 2011, 14:34

Amazing, you manage to contradict yourself within one sentence, very impressive. You say you don't argue that people are cutting back on trips (ie not using their car as much -ergo they are not on the roads - ergo less cars on the road) yet you state there are just as many cars on the roads...

Explain that to me Paul Daniels.

Maybe if you read it again you might understand but i won't hold my breath.

Usarka

1st April 2011, 14:34

red mermaid

1st April 2011, 14:42

Does it really matter because where is the evidence that people are taking less trips due to the price petrol?

Yes, I know KB does not deal in evidence and facts!

But to be a valid point actual traffic number counts would have to be used, plus litres of petrol sold,etc.

Bytor

1st April 2011, 15:08

Congratulations, you've worked out that people won't stop driving to get to work, that people will pay a bit extra to avoid public transport and car pooling. You've also worked out that people during working hours still need to get around.

Now lets move out of the city (you know, where the majority of fatal road accidents occur) and into the evenings and weekends. Ah what is happening here? Oh, less people are making unnecessary trips in the car. Bored at home? Go for a drive to the lake? Nah fuck it I'll do the lawns/wash the dog/walk down to the local park. What's this? Less people on the roads? Does this possibly mean there will be less fatalities? Surely I jest.

Also bear in mind that the 'period' was the holiday season - less people going on holiday coz they can't afford it + less overseas tourists on the road coz they can't afford it either = less accidents and road deaths, or is that too logical?

onearmedbandit

1st April 2011, 16:27

Maybe if you read it again you might understand but i won't hold my breath.

You say that you don't argue that people are cutting back on their trips, ie road usage. Ok so lets assume that there are say 10,000,000 trips in x year. So that means 10,000,000 instances of a vehicle being on the road (assuming a trip is both to and from). So lets take 200,000 away from that. Now we have 9,800,000 instances of a vehicle being on the road.

Can you see the fucking difference? I'll give you a hint, the answer is in my second to last sentence. There are less cars on the road. Less cars on the road, less chances of a fatality.

To those adding in that there are other factors, I'm not claiming this is the sole reason, or if there is actually any notable difference in the current fatality stats compared to other years or quaters. All I'm saying is petrol price has an affect on motorists habits.

BoristheBiter

1st April 2011, 16:45

You say that you don't argue that people are cutting back on their trips, ie road usage. Ok so lets assume that there are say 10,000,000 trips in x year. So that means 10,000,000 instances of a vehicle being on the road (assuming a trip is both to and from). So lets take 200,000 away from that. Now we have 9,800,000 instances of a vehicle being on the road.

Can you see the fucking difference? I'll give you a hint, the answer is in my second to last sentence. There are less cars on the road. Less cars on the road, less chances of a fatality.

To those adding in that there are other factors, I'm not claiming this is the sole reason, or if there is actually any notable difference in the current fatality stats compared to other years or quaters. All I'm saying is petrol price has an affect on motorists habits.

See now you are just making shit up.
first you say a few friends don't use their cars as much now its in the 100k.

What i said was, NOW PAY ATTENTION, there might be a few people that have stopped using their vehicles due to the fuel price but it has made no difference on the road as the traffic is still the same, so therefore it is such a small number that this can not be really considered when looking at the cause of the crash stats coming down and if you look at the Auckland region it is still the same as last year.

Do you have that now or should i get the crayons out?

Smifffy

1st April 2011, 16:49

Hawkeye

1st April 2011, 16:51

:corn::wait:

onearmedbandit

1st April 2011, 16:55

See now you are just making shit up.
first you say a few friends don't use their cars as much now its in the 100k.

What i said was, NOW PAY ATTENTION, there might be a few people that have stopped using their vehicles due to the fuel price but it has made no difference on the road as the traffic is still the same, so therefore it is such a small number that this can not be really considered when looking at the cause of the crash stats coming down and if you look at the Auckland region it is still the same as last year.

Do you have that now or should i get the crayons out?

Actually now I do understand. I see the red rep you left for me with the friendly little note and a see you like to play in the arcade a bit here. No wonder you offered me crayons, I'm dealing with a fucking child.

Do you not understand examples? I give an example of fuel being $10 a litre. You come back with 'but it's not $10 a litre'. :facepalm: Now I use an arbitrary number, 200,000, as an example (ie it's not a real figure) and once again you come back disputing my numbers. :facepalm: Of course they are not real numbers, they are made-up numbers to illustrate a point.

Now how can the traffic 'be the same' if there are fewer people using their cars? Have you surveyed the traffic numbers? Sat there and compared actual numbers with different months? For every period of every day? And for that matter how many of our national road fatalities does Auckland city contribute? Have you observed road usage out in the country?

swbarnett

1st April 2011, 17:52

When we have the stats for the whole year then we can start to make assumptions, until then its just a blip.
Even a whole year is just a blip in the long run.

BoristheBiter

1st April 2011, 20:27

Actually now I do understand. I see the red rep you left for me with the friendly little note and a see you like to play in the arcade a bit here. No wonder you offered me crayons, I'm dealing with a fucking child.

Do you not understand examples? I give an example of fuel being $10 a litre. You come back with 'but it's not $10 a litre'. :facepalm: Now I use an arbitrary number, 200,000, as an example (ie it's not a real figure) and once again you come back disputing my numbers. :facepalm: Of course they are not real numbers, they are made-up numbers to illustrate a point.

Now how can the traffic 'be the same' if there are fewer people using their cars? Have you surveyed the traffic numbers? Sat there and compared actual numbers with different months? For every period of every day? And for that matter how many of our national road fatalities does Auckland city contribute? Have you observed road usage out in the country?

I understand examples fine, i just think yours are too far fetched.
as for the red rep i just returned the favor.

BoristheBiter

1st April 2011, 20:28

Even a whole year is just a blip in the long run.

Yep it is that.

onearmedbandit

1st April 2011, 20:35

I understand examples fine, i just think yours are too far fetched.
as for the red rep i just returned the favor.

They are far fetched for a reason, and to be perfectly honest 200,000 out of 10,000,000 isn't really a high number, considering how many journeys are undertaken each year in our country. Using large numbers though makes it a lot easier for some people to understand. A while ago on here there was a debate about whether weight affected acceleration. The point was proven when someone suggested imagining a very large weight on the car, would that affect acceleration? The same can be done with motorists driving habits and the price of petrol.

No matter how small the weight, it would make a difference. Same with fuel costs. Remember there are people out there, apparently a lot, that don't have any disposable income, so using the car when fuel increases even by a little makes things a lot harder, and one way of saving money is using the car less.

Gremlin

2nd April 2011, 02:23

Even a whole year is just a blip in the long run.
Just how big is this scale? :scratch:

The human race is a blip on some scales :D

swbarnett

2nd April 2011, 06:55

Just how big is this scale? :scratch:
That can be fairly subjective but it is certainly more than a single year. If the trend continued for a second year I would say there might be more going on than a mere statistical blip but it's still to early too tell. After five years you could probably conclude that a trend was indeed in evidence.

The human race is a blip on some scales :D
Indeed it is. Even the life span of our planet is a mere blip to the age of the universe.

Mekk

2nd April 2011, 07:54

National road policing manager Paula Rose said the reduced toll could represent a sudden "societal shift" on road safety in New Zealand.

Is anything "societal" really sudden?

Did we all just have an epiphany? - actually, fuck it, I'm going to drive safely this year!

we should have one of those things for murder and theft.

ducatilover

2nd April 2011, 10:04

You're all blips.

baptist

2nd April 2011, 10:11

No way, the police have finally found the right mix of Speed Cameras, infringements, and advertising dollars spent to cause a reduction in the road toll.

:laugh::Police::laugh::laugh::laugh:

dunno bout their math, but their logic goes: if it's good, take credit for it, if it's bad blame somebody else!

Don't we all do this at some time or another? they are just better at it than the rest of us (maybe more practice?)

The only 100% certain reason for the lower number of fatal crashes is that there have been less crashes this year where people have died. Strange but true.

Logic!!!!! a philosopher will now ask you why.... I am not so I won't:innocent:

You want to get yourself one of them there motorbike things.

OOohh dangerous, those things should be banned....

See now you are just making shit up.
first you say a few friends don't use their cars as much now its in the 100k.

What i said was, NOW PAY ATTENTION, there might be a few people that have stopped using their vehicles due to the fuel price but it has made no difference on the road as the traffic is still the same, so therefore it is such a small number that this can not be really considered when looking at the cause of the crash stats coming down and if you look at the Auckland region it is still the same as last year.

Do you have that now or should i get the crayons out?

:girlfight::girlfight::girlfight::corn::corn::corn :

May be time for some silly hats soon

Oblivion

2nd April 2011, 10:13

:girlfight::girlfight::girlfight::corn::corn::corn :

May be time for some silly hats soon

Beer first?

baptist

2nd April 2011, 15:24

Beer first?

uuummmmm let me think :woohoo::woohoo::yes: or maybe a beer silly hat....:drinkup:235735

Berg

2nd April 2011, 15:42

I sat and looked at the figures today at work. Good to see a trend downwards no matter what causes it:niceone:. I think we can all agree a lowering road toll trend is a good thing.
:gob:Shocking to see the numbers back from the dark old days of the 80s and 90s. I remember them well having driven tow-trucks right through that disastrous period.

MSTRS

3rd April 2011, 10:07

red mermaid

3rd April 2011, 10:25

Its amazing that you have this insight when it can often take months to investigate fully a crash and find all of the relevant factors.

I wonder why you aren't employed as a crash investigator?

I see that 6 years of complaints to the local council and NZTA wasn't enough to get something done about what was described as a dangerous intersection on Hobsonville Rd. Now a rider has been killed there (no idea of the circumstances, mind) tptb are promising to 'sort it out'.
It's a pity that it takes a death (at least) to get some of this stuff done, but over time we are seeing better intersection design - that must help too.

MSTRS

3rd April 2011, 10:29

Its amazing that you have this insight when it can often take months to investigate fully a crash and find all of the relevant factors.

I wonder why you aren't employed as a crash investigator?

Fuck off, knobend. I made NO claims as to the reasons/whose fault - just the facts. Locals have complained for years and a rider has now been killed there.

Ocean1

3rd April 2011, 10:54

I wonder why you aren't employed as a crash investigator?

'Cause he's not qualified.

He can't cobble up a report attributing excess speed and lack of a dayglo tee shirt to every incident without hurling.

speedpro

3rd April 2011, 10:55

All it'll take to screw up this quarters stats is a car load of clowns to toss themselves off a cliff. It's good that less people are dead but far too short a time to be attributing the change to much in particuler.
FWIW - the traffic between Henderson and Glen Innes seems worse than ever.

Usarka

3rd April 2011, 11:00

FWIW - the traffic between Henderson and Glen Innes seems worse than ever.

That's auckland town planning - chuck in a new suburb with 10,000+ new homes and have no rail or major arterial route upgrade to cater for the increased traffic. They'll no doubt do something about it in 30 years.

MSTRS

3rd April 2011, 11:08

'Cause he's not qualified.

He can't cobble up a report attributing excess speed and lack of a dayglo tee shirt to every incident without hurling.

Not only that, but having to 'work' with arrogant little form-filling robots all day would do my head in...

scumdog

3rd April 2011, 11:37

Which is why the "its because of the petrol price" is just so wrong
.

Damn right!
i.e. In the last three weeks I've burned up $1,600 + worth of petrol cruising around the North & South Islands in a 'gas-guzzler' enjoying myself.:yes:

scumdog

3rd April 2011, 11:40

I see that 6 years of complaints to the local council and NZTA wasn't enough to get something done about what was described as a dangerous intersection on Hobsonville Rd.

How many complaints in total? And how often?

And how specific? ("I fink Hobsonville Rd has a bad intersectin" won't cut it)

steve_t

3rd April 2011, 11:41

Damn right!
i.e. In the last three weeks I've burned up $1,600 + worth of petrol cruising around the North & South Islands in a 'gas-guzzler' enjoying myself.:yes:

Just remember that not everyone has the disposable income of those that are salaried by the government :innocent::shutup:

ducatilover

3rd April 2011, 11:43

Damn right!
i.e. In the last three weeks I've burned up $1,600 + worth of petrol cruising around the North & South Islands in a 'gas-guzzler' enjoying myself.:yes:

Elaborate? I hope it has 8 cylinders and pushrods.

scumdog

3rd April 2011, 11:47

Elaborate? I hope it has 8 cylinders and pushrods.

:yes: and 7+ litres...:shutup:

ducatilover

3rd April 2011, 11:48

:yes: and 7+ litres...:shutup:

:love::love::love: Gooooood! 490?

MSTRS

3rd April 2011, 11:50

How many complaints in total? And how often?

And how specific? ("I fink Hobsonville Rd has a bad intersectin" won't cut it)

I couldn't say...I don't live there.

But I can tell you about one such case in HB, first hand....
Transit rejigged a road layout/major intersection...Complaints of dangerous, including a phone call from me to the local office, flooded in. Transit ignored them, until there was a big prang with lots of injury, then they changed the signs from GiveWay to Stop. Still the complaints rolled in, with no result. Three weeks after the Stop signs went in, there was a fatal there. "Told you so" said us locals. Within a couple of days, new islands and traffic lights were installed. I believe there's been no further problems with that intersection.

red mermaid

3rd April 2011, 12:09

And you make this claim with "NO claims as to the reasons/whose fault - just the facts. Locals have complained for years and a rider has now been killed there."

For all you know it may have been nothing to do with the intersection.

So many assumptions, but obviously a chance to jump in and attempt to prove your 'expertise.'

Fuck off, knobend. I made NO claims as to the reasons/whose fault - just the facts. Locals have complained for years and a rider has now been killed there.

MSTRS

3rd April 2011, 12:59

If what I say offends you so much, I suggest you make use of the natty little feature on KB called "ignore". You may need to ask someone (else) how to do it.
In the meantime, I'll just repeat the pertinent part of my first reply to you...
Fuck off, knobend.

red mermaid

3rd April 2011, 13:33

So eloquent, and I would suggest an example of how you can't back up anything you say and resort to the gutter when challenged.

If what I say offends you so much, I suggest you make use of the natty little feature on KB called "ignore". You may need to ask someone (else) how to do it.
In the meantime, I'll just repeat the pertinent part of my first reply to you...
Fuck off, knobend.

scracha

3rd April 2011, 13:45

And you make this claim with "NO claims as to the reasons/whose fault - just the facts. Locals have complained for years and a rider has now been killed there."

For all you know it may have been nothing to do with the intersection.

Hey wait a minute, the boys and girls in blue, ACC, Transit, etc are always making assumptions without all the facts. Case in point, low road toll being attributed to anti-speeding campaign.

Oh and accident caused by non speeding motorcyclist swerving to avoid car pulling out in front of him at intersection...according to newspaper...but they can be wrong so we won't make any assumptions.

Latte

3rd April 2011, 13:46

I see that 6 years of complaints to the local council and NZTA wasn't enough to get something done about what was described as a dangerous intersection on Hobsonville Rd. Now a rider has been killed there (no idea of the circumstances, mind) tptb are promising to 'sort it out'.
It's a pity that it takes a death (at least) to get some of this stuff done, but over time we are seeing better intersection design - that must help too.

Sounds like the Intersection at Hobby shops reading where the diversions were put in, once the motorway bypass is through and the traffic reduces a roundabout would be the best bet there imo (But I'm not a traffic engineer or anything). Right turns out of there are a bitch.

MSTRS

3rd April 2011, 14:16

Sounds like the Intersection at Hobby shops reading where the diversions were put in, once the motorway bypass is through and the traffic reduces a roundabout would be the best bet there imo (But I'm not a traffic engineer or anything). Right turns out of there are a bitch.

That was the comment (amongst others) that I read. It was on last night's TV News and in this morning's paper/s. The bike, 'a newly rebuilt classic Moto-Guzzi', went under an SUV.
Somehow, I doubt it is the only incident on that intersection, if people have been complaining about it being dangerous. Sad that it takes a death to get the relevant authorities off their arses....well, at least talking about getting off their arses.

steve_t

3rd April 2011, 14:19

Hey wait a minute, the boys and girls in blue, ACC, Transit, etc are always making assumptions without all the facts. Case in point, low road toll being attributed to anti-speeding campaign.

Oh and accident caused by non speeding motorcyclist swerving to avoid car pulling out in front of him at intersection...according to newspaper...but they can be wrong so we won't make any assumptions.

Car pulling out in front of a motorcyclist?! Non-speeding?! :shit::innocent:

BoristheBiter

3rd April 2011, 18:42

That was the comment (amongst others) that I read. It was on last night's TV News and in this morning's paper/s. The bike, 'a newly rebuilt classic Moto-Guzzi', went under an SUV.
Somehow, I doubt it is the only incident on that intersection, if people have been complaining about it being dangerous. Sad that it takes a death to get the relevant authorities off their arses....well, at least talking about getting off their arses.

there are so many intersections around the country that could fall under the same category. In the end it is driver error, not the intersection that causes these problems. Sure there could be something done to make it better, you could even put lights in, but you will still get driver error.

I'm not really having a go but maybe you should be more concerned about driver education more than what a road does because a road has never pulled out in front of me before.

scracha

3rd April 2011, 23:29

there are so many intersections around the country that could fall under the same category. In the end it is driver error, not the intersection that causes these problems. Sure there could be something done to make it better, you could even put lights in, but you will still get driver error.

I'm not really having a go but maybe you should be more concerned about driver education more than what a road does because a road has never pulled out in front of me before.

Crash barriers and trees don't pull out in front of people either but as motorcyclists, a hell of a lot of us manage to hit them all by ourselves.

Sure, probably 99% of accidents out there are caused by driver error. However, we're all human beings. Humans make mistakes. Driver training is only part of the answer as all the training & education in the world won't stop people making mistakes. Mistakes should be mitigated as much as possible as making a simple mistake shouldn't result in the loss of someones life. More enlightened (or just wealthier) countries such as in Scandinavia do this by analysing risky junctions, slipper surfaces and assessing what's likely to make people go spat when they go off the road.

If a particular junction has injured/killed multiple people who've made or been victims of mistakes then we still need to do something about it. Thus crash barriers, cheese wire removal, better lighting at intersections, roundabouts, better road surfaces, etc etc. Despite previous warnings, nothing was done about the intersection this chap became another unfortunate statistic on and I'll betchya $100 nobody at that Council concerned will get so much as a finger waggled at them.

miloking

4th April 2011, 03:11

So OK what has caused the road toll to come down??

So far we have price of fuel, thats a crock ........

Are you sure that prices of petrol have nothing to do with the low road toll?

Kinda strange that this is whats happening in USA as well...

http://jalopnik.com/#!5788159/us-dot-says-2010-traffic-fatalities-lowest-theyve-ever-been

Damn... that anti-speeding and safety campaign police and ACC came up with is so good it works all the way in USA! :bleh:

Thank you so much Judith Colins and Nick Smith...you are saving lives all over the globe for sure...

(and i better slow down and wear mi hi-viz then......bugger i hate to admit i was wrong all along!)

BoristheBiter

4th April 2011, 07:57

Crash barriers and trees don't pull out in front of people either but as motorcyclists, a hell of a lot of us manage to hit them all by ourselves.

Sure, probably 99% of accidents out there are caused by driver error. However, we're all human beings. Humans make mistakes. Driver training is only part of the answer as all the training & education in the world won't stop people making mistakes. Mistakes should be mitigated as much as possible as making a simple mistake shouldn't result in the loss of someones life. More enlightened (or just wealthier) countries such as in Scandinavia do this by analysing risky junctions, slipper surfaces and assessing what's likely to make people go spat when they go off the road.

If a particular junction has injured/killed multiple people who've made or been victims of mistakes then we still need to do something about it. Thus crash barriers, cheese wire removal, better lighting at intersections, roundabouts, better road surfaces, etc etc. Despite previous warnings, nothing was done about the intersection this chap became another unfortunate statistic on and I'll betchya $100 nobody at that Council concerned will get so much as a finger waggled at them.

Why don't we just put foam mats around anything hard, wrap us all up in cotton wool, and restrict all vehicles to walking speed, cut down anything 100m either side of the road? that should stop shit loads of deaths and crashes. And after all that you will still get crashes.

Its called personal responsibly and is an topic that has gone back and forth since before I was here and I'm sure it will carry on well after I'm gone.

Which part of Scandinavia are you referring to and what the fuck does wealth have to to do with enlightenment?

BoristheBiter

4th April 2011, 08:05

Are you sure that prices of petrol have nothing to do with the low road toll?

No, but then like I said I only live in Auckland, what happens in the rest of the country could be completely different.
The news is going on about more people using public transport and less people on the roads but i have yet to see it.
Sure maybe there are less cars on the roads, but are these the ones that would have crashed if they were using them.
There are just too many variables to take into consideration to make the blanket statement of "the fuel price is the reason".

MSTRS

4th April 2011, 08:49

There are just too many variables to take into consideration to make the blanket statement of "the fuel price is the reason".

Correct. Other posters have suggested a variety of possible reasons.
Any of which, in isolation, or combined with one or more others, could be having this effect (lowered road toll). That was where my suggestion about 'safer' intersections came in.

Another local example is the HB Expressway/Meeanee Rd junction...busy 100kph road crossed by a busy 50kph road. A fatal there almost every year. Locals screamed for something to be done about it. Authorities 'listened' and replaced the Give Way with a Stop. Several fatals later, and locals still screaming "Do something!!" and lights were installed. More fatals, and the authorities did nothing. Until 5 drunk teenagers ran the red, and were taken out by a B-train. Work began almost immediately on a fly-over/cloverleaf. Prangs of any sort just don't happen there anymore.

Which brings me back to the point of my original post...
There are intersections that are dangerous, or are perceived as dangerous by the users. However, they are being 'fixed'. Eventually. Which must help with the overall road toll.
Unfortunately, it is dollar-driven, and the much-vaunted (maligned?) cost-benefit ratio is measured in terms of human lives.

Of course, virtually all crashes are due to some sort of human error. But I doubt that any of us would think that the motoring public is suddenly making less mistakes? Any more than we believe the cops' stories of 'enforcement is working'.

Interestingly, NZTA has a policy that guides what they do, as far as roadsides, barriers, corner alignments, etc. That is - no-one deserves to die because they made a mistake.

BoristheBiter

4th April 2011, 08:55

Of course, virtually all crashes are due to some sort of human error. But I doubt that any of us would think that the motoring public is suddenly making less mistakes? Any more than we believe the cops' stories of 'enforcement is working'.

Don't say that too loud, Katman maybe listening.:shutup:

BoristheBiter

4th April 2011, 09:02

Correct. Other posters have suggested a variety of possible reasons.
Any of which, in isolation, or combined with one or more others, could be having this effect (lowered road toll). That was where my suggestion about 'safer' intersections came in.

Another local example is the HB Expressway/Meeanee Rd junction...busy 100kph road crossed by a busy 50kph road. A fatal there almost every year. Locals screamed for something to be done about it. Authorities 'listened' and replaced the Give Way with a Stop. Several fatals later, and locals still screaming "Do something!!" and lights were installed. More fatals, and the authorities did nothing. Until 5 drunk teenagers ran the red, and were taken out by a B-train. Work began almost immediately on a fly-over/cloverleaf. Prangs of any sort just don't happen there anymore.

Which brings me back to the point of my original post...
There are intersections that are dangerous, or are perceived as dangerous by the users. However, they are being 'fixed'. Eventually. Which must help with the overall road toll.
Unfortunately, it is dollar-driven, and the much-vaunted (maligned?) cost-benefit ratio is measured in terms of human lives.

Of course, virtually all crashes are due to some sort of human error. But I doubt that any of us would think that the motoring public is suddenly making less mistakes? Any more than we believe the cops' stories of 'enforcement is working'.

Interestingly, NZTA has a policy that guides what they do, as far as roadsides, barriers, corner alignments, etc. That is - no-one deserves to die because they made a mistake.

Where i agree with most of that, i still feel we have now become a nation of pass the blame. I know most don't deserve to die from making a mistake but to pass the blame onto an inanimate object that has been in place for years I feel is just wrong.

If those teenagers had killed someone else (they might of i don't know) who would you blame? I don't think it would be the intersection, it might have been a factor but not the cause but i know where you are coming from as there are many like that around here.

MSTRS

4th April 2011, 10:12

Where i agree with most of that, i still feel we have now become a nation of pass the blame. I know most don't deserve to die from making a mistake but to pass the blame onto an inanimate object that has been in place for years I feel is just wrong.

If those teenagers had killed someone else (they might of i don't know) who would you blame? I don't think it would be the intersection, it might have been a factor but not the cause but i know where you are coming from as there are many like that around here.

Intersection design/control can and does have a big part to play in crashes that occur there. Of course, no amount of improvement (unless it is removal of the intersection) can save everyone from the mistakes they make. And I blame the drunk driver of that carful of teens. It certainly wasn't the truck driver's fault. I think the poor bastard picked up one of the teen's head to get it off the road.
However, the wisdom of having 2 busy roads intersect each other like those ones did was asking for trouble.

avgas

4th April 2011, 10:26

Low road toll aye...

Must be all the short bastards dying then

scracha

4th April 2011, 15:47

Why don't we just put foam mats around anything hard, wrap us all up in cotton wool, and restrict all vehicles to walking speed, cut down anything 100m either side of the road? that should stop shit loads of deaths and crashes. And after all that you will still get crashes.

Its called personal responsibly and is an topic that has gone back and forth since before I was here and I'm sure it will carry on well after I'm gone.

Yeah mate, you'd still get crashes but you'd also get less death and serious injuries. By your logic I assume you'd be as happy riding in shorts, jandals and put an 8" spike on your fuel tank. Your chances of getting killed are far higher but by god the personal responsibility message would hit home. You're still responsible for an accident if you come off the road.

Which part of Scandinavia are you referring to and what the fuck does wealth have to to do with enlightenment?
Wealth has little to do with enlightenment, that's why I put it in brackets with a question mark.

Anyhoo....the country is Sweden and yes, they've cut down trees, posts etc and there's lots and lots of space next to their roads so you don't go splat if you have a wee woopsie. Actually, wealth may have something to do with their enlightened attitude as these measures probably costs a fuck load less than dealing with the mess afterwards like we do over here.

And why the fuck do you have to keep fucking swearing? It doesn't bring your fucking point across any fucking better.

scumdog

4th April 2011, 16:48

Where i agree with most of that, i still feel we have now become a nation of pass the blame.

You said a mouthful there bro!

The 21st century syndrome: "It's not my fault...":yes:

idb

4th April 2011, 16:50

You said a mouthful there bro!

The 21st century syndrome: "It's not my fault...":yes:

Well it's certainly bloody well not mine!!!

StoneY

4th April 2011, 17:10

Low road toll aye...

Must be all the short bastards dying then

Huh? I'm still alive mate what you on about????
:bleh:

MrKiwi

4th April 2011, 20:47

I do think the fuel price is a factor in the low road toll. But is is only one factor. And for those saying there are just as many people still on the roads interesting to hear that in Auckland and Wellington bus and train operators are reaching record levels of passenger movements, suggesting less people are driving on the roads.

Note I said 'suggesting', although I reckon that's a pretty sound assessment.

I've said it a couple of times in this thread and I will say it again, when the fuel price goes up and stays up there appears a corresponding trend of lower fatalities. This trend is observable in the USA, Australia and in European countries.

I also reckon with higher fuel prices we might see more motor bike and scooter sales again, just as we did in 2008. Wouldn't it be interesting if we see an increase in the sales of these and combined with a lower road toll...

BoristheBiter

4th April 2011, 20:48

Yeah mate, you'd still get crashes but you'd also get less death and serious injuries. By your logic I assume you'd be as happy riding in shorts, jandals and put an 8" spike on your fuel tank. Your chances of getting killed are far higher but by god the personal responsibility message would hit home. You're still responsible for an accident if you come off the road.
.

I really am lost for words. how do you come by this statement? where have i said anything to support this?

Yes i would be happy to ride about in shorts on a nice hot day, but i don't as I know if i come off its going to hurt so i protect myself, you know it's called personal responsibility.
I guess you are just part of the new breed of "it's not my fault".

Oh and i'll fucking swear if i like. If you don't like it go somewhere else.

Pixie

5th April 2011, 11:33

No way, the police have finally found the right mix of Speed Cameras, infringements, and advertising dollars spent to cause a reduction in the road toll.

They'll have to increase bookings to meet budget

avgas

5th April 2011, 12:05

Huh? I'm still alive mate what you on about????
:bleh:
Sorry should have said
"Must be those that are shorter than normal, but not so stumpy that they fit underneath a bumper..."

scracha

5th April 2011, 18:08

I really am lost for words. how do you come by this statement? where have i said anything to support this?

Err...your rant implying that improving roadside safety was a waste of time and we're all personally responsible, blah blah blah.

Yes i would be happy to ride about in shorts on a nice hot day, but i don't as I know if i come off its going to hurt so i protect myself, you know it's called personal responsibility.
I guess you are just part of the new breed of "it's not my fault".

I really am lost for words. how do come by this statement.....etc etc.

Oh and i'll fucking swear if i like. If you don't like it go somewhere else.

Never said I didn't fucking like it, I just don't see the fucking point of swearing like a trooper for no apparent reason. Unless I'm really really drunk of course.

BoristheBiter

5th April 2011, 20:17

Err...your rant implying that improving roadside safety was a waste of time and we're all personally responsible, blah blah blah.

I really am lost for words. how do come by this statement.....etc etc.

Never said I didn't fucking like it, I just don't see the fucking point of swearing like a trooper for no apparent reason. Unless I'm really really drunk of course.

1) It is and we are.

2) stop nicking my posts

3) i had had a few

shrub

7th April 2011, 10:47

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/regional/71665/auckland-public-transport-use-highest-in-60-years

Suppose that trend is also happening around the country.

the Police will have no problem claiming the credit from this

Nah, piece of piss. "Police Minister Judith Collins says the increase in patronage of public transport is a direct result of government policies, especially the increase in registration costs, decrease in tolerance for speed meaning people are afraid to drive and the rise in unemployment meaning less people can afford to drive cars"

MrKiwi

7th June 2011, 22:18

Thankfully no fatalities this holiday weekend, but what led to this. Police say the 4km/hr limit and good driving, the AA says high fuel costs making people drive better...

Which is it?

bogan

7th June 2011, 22:26

Thankfully no fatalities this holiday weekend, but what led to this. Police say the 4km/hr limit and good driving, the AA says high fuel costs making people drive better...

Which is it?

None of the above, it's all down to us being in mantrol :lol:

My theory is the 4kmhr is more of an exercise in marketing than lowering the speed by 6kmhr. People hear about it and realise there will be more cops on the road also, so take a bit more care. I bet a permanent implementation would have no discernible effect. Mind you I don't think even the weekends of it has had any discernible effect either.