ANPR vans

[oneofsix]

Did someone mention that if you're not breaking the law you don't have a problem..? :scratch:

Yeah they did but do you trust authorities whos top spy agency didn't even know a man that threw a fireworks party to celebrate his residency was an NZ resident to co-relate their databases and only pick up law breakers. Hope you have Kim's millions to fight it with. :laugh:

[oneofsix]

the WOF system is flawed, why should i need an expensive warrant the trailer i use four times a year? ditto with maybe a bike or a car that does maybe 1000kms a year. we live in a technological era that can let us have warrant on a mileage used basis.

How do the authorities or you know how many Ks that trailer has done since its last WoF a few years back?

Lets say the trailer has been sitting down the bach (lucky if you have one) since its last WoF, hasn't done more than 20k since gathering that load of wood off the beach and the axle has been quietly rusting away. Are you happy to be follow it down the road on your bike?

Distance travelled isn't the only thing that causes bearing etc to fail.

[sootie]

How do the authorities or you know how many Ks that trailer has done since its last WoF a few years back?

Lets say the trailer has been sitting down the bach (lucky if you have one) since its last WoF, hasn't done more than 20k since gathering that load of wood off the beach and the axle has been quietly rusting away. Are you happy to be follow it down the road on your bike?

Distance travelled isn't the only thing that causes bearing etc to fail.

Totally agree with oneofsix. :niceone:
I used to have a boat trailer & wheel bearings on them are a big issue irrespective of mileage.

[jellywrestler]

Clearly you are confused about how a wof works. It is a test to make sure your trailer is safe and that it doesn't have say a loose wheel that could fly off and bowl over some car, motorcyclist or other commuter. And yes time does allow for things like rust to set into bearings etc. unless they are properly maintained. How do we know the maintenance is being carried out that keeps the trailer safe? thus the point of the wof. And consequently it does need to be run at the current intervals. On the other hand registration is supposedly paying for your road usage and all its entailments and that system doesn't take usage into account which IMO makes it flawed.

Glad to clear that up for you.wonderful so why doesn't my van need a warrant every two months then as it's used a lot and the wheel could come loose at any time. what i'm saying is in this day and age a system that requires a warrant on usage etc is more acheivable. as for trailers hubometers can be used. i fucking hate having to get warrants all the time and yes i do see the need.

[oneofsix]

wonderful so why doesn't my van need a warrant every two months then as it's used a lot and the wheel could come loose at any time. what i'm saying is in this day and age a system that requires a warrant on usage etc is more acheivable. as for trailers hubometers can be used. i fucking hate having to get warrants all the time and yes i do see the need.

No matter how you base the WoF or how often you get a WoF unless it is every time you go to use the vehicle things can go wrong between obtaining the WoF and the next WoF. This is one of the reasons I don't agree with WoFs, they give operators a false sense that their vehicle is OK because it has a WoF and that the WoF check will pick up any thing before it gets too serious. What is wrong with you doing a walk around check of your vehicle every time you use it.
BTW our roads are no safer than those states that don't have WoF, we have just as many vehicle safety related crashes.

[Akzle]

Did someone mention that if you're not breaking the law you don't have a problem..? :scratch:

yes. your contiued compliance will enssure you're one of the last marching to the camps.

[RDJ]

Did someone mention that if you're not breaking the law you don't have a problem..? :scratch:


Hmmmm.... I suppose it has also occurred to said someone that we are all, all of us, in violation of some law or other most days*. There are to many laws passed to stay current with them all. And as for that "I'm OK As I Obey" attitude - whatcha gonna do when they pass a law that makes whatever you stand for illegal?

* I thought this was likely and checked Mr Google. There's a lot of scofflaws out there!

http://www.cracked.com/article_19450_6-laws-youve-broken-without-even-realizing-it.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3044794/How-we-all-break-the-law-every-day.html

http://ask.metafilter.com/55124/What-laws-do-noncriminals-commonly-break

http://stuyspectator.com/2012/04/01/we-break-the-law-every-day/

Anyone have any links for NZ specifically...?

[Scruffygit]

A mate in france says they have mobile one's over there that can recognize up to 9 separate vehicles at once, and issue you with a speeding fine too. The first thing you know about it is the ticket in the mail.


Standard fit in traffic police vehicles in the UK.

I was first told about them 12 years ago on a police run training course (BikeSafe). Apparently one of the first people they nicked was a copper from their station - his bike had expired tax (rego). Automated system had no discretion so rather than a telling off and getting it sorted, he got a fixed penalty notice. Then again, not a lot of difference between a computer and NZ traffic police


The other thing to look forward to is number plate legislation, and fines of course;

"What could happen if you display incorrect number plates

The police can issue fixed penalty fines for illegally displayed number plates. Offenders could face a maximum fine of £1,000 and in some cases the number plate may be withdrawn.".

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/PersonalisedRegAndNumberPlates/DG_181503



£1000 ($2000) for a dodgy number plate :gob: F.F.S.

Say goodbye to your clever personalised plate :buggerd:

[Blagger]

If you are referring to the hand grenade attack in the UK that killed two unarmed police officers that is in extremely poor taste

You may not agree with the automation of camera fines but I don't agree with attacking police.

If you say something lame like "I wuz only joking" I would invite you to go take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.

Perhaps you belong back on the road forums











i think i need to stock up on hand grenades. :ar15:

[Edbear]

Standard fit in traffic police vehicles in the UK.

I was first told about them 12 years ago on a police run training course (BikeSafe). Apparently one of the first people they nicked was a copper from their station - his bike had expired tax (rego). Automated system had no discretion so rather than a telling off and getting it sorted, he got a fixed penalty notice. Then again, not a lot of difference between a computer and NZ traffic police


The other thing to look forward to is number plate legislation, and fines of course;

"What could happen if you display incorrect number plates

The police can issue fixed penalty fines for illegally displayed number plates. Offenders could face a maximum fine of £1,000 and in some cases the number plate may be withdrawn.".

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/PersonalisedRegAndNumberPlates/DG_181503



£1000 ($2000) for a dodgy number plate :gob: F.F.S.

Say goodbye to your clever personalised plate :buggerd:

And the real problem is..?

[Akzle]

Anyone have any links for NZ specifically...?
legislation.govt.nz :lol:


If you are referring to the hand grenade attack in the UK that killed two unarmed police officers that is in extremely poor taste

You may not agree with the automation of camera fines but I don't agree with attacking police.

If you say something lame like "I wuz only joking" I would invite you to go take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.

Perhaps you belong back on the road forums perhaps i give not a shit how you judge me and i'll partake of whate'er forum I decide for myself.

i was not, specifically referring to that.
nor did i mention attacking police
and if you'd actually grasped ANYTHING i've previously posted that should be fairly apparent.

i DO however, have no problem with re-arranging government property with high explosive., say, a camera van and a hand grenade....

(although i also feel very-little-to-no, sympathy toward police who are killed)

[sootie]

legislation.govt.nz :lol:


(although i also feel very-little-to-no, sympathy toward police who are killed)


I am sorry to hear you say that. NZ police have always been reasonable with me, and very helpful at times.
I dare say they get a bit heavy sometimes, but perhaps you should sample some of the other varieties, eg Spanish, most Asian, African, Australian, or my personal favourite, the Indonesian Police.

A serious disagreement with Indonesian Police has been known to result in total disappearance. I have personally seen interrogation of the locals while looking for a thief by digging each in turn in the ribs with a cocked sub- machine gun. I found out what "whites of their eyes" actually means.

I remain fairly friendly with NZ & UK police, but pretty wary of most others.

[bogan]

perhaps i give not a shit how you judge me and i'll partake of whate'er forum I decide for myself.

Funny how those who keep whining about opting out or not choosing to be a part of society, are those who don't take the hint they should lead by example, starting right here :motu:

[Akzle]

I am sorry to hear you say that. NZ police have always been reasonable with me, and very helpful at times.
I dare say they get a bit heavy sometimes...

they have a fairly thankless job, it's unfortunate that it's become an "us and them" thing, however, they are often arrogant and ignorant, which is a dangerous mix when you get hated just for the gang patch you wear. and if in your arrogant ignorance you decide to overstep any authority you perceive yourself to have, and end up getting shot, my sympathies are not with you.
however they do CHOOSE that job. they are gainfully employed to enforce government policy, no-one had a gun to their head when they signed the contract.

that said, it's about 50/50 cops i deal with. some are perfectly reasonable people, and we all get on with our days, others are shit heads. and i write long green diatribe to their betters.

[Blagger]

Here's an idea

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4d5r7x2tj1rw1rr4o1_500.jpg



as for Mr Undie Skidmark -

I haven't read anything that you've previously posted because you can't spell and write in green - those two things alone are warning signs that idiocy is probably present - much like a RAV 4 driver..

As for your line about wearing a patch I call bullshit - no serious gang I know of allows an owner of a Jappa GSX750 as a member.

Perhaps you left it deliberately ambiguous to try and look hard
Perhaps the patch that you wear was knitted by your mum

Either way, you sir

are

full

of

shit

[sootie]

that said, it's about 50/50 cops i deal with. some are perfectly reasonable people, and we all get on with our days, others are shit heads. and i write long green diatribe to their betters.

Be grateful that you can write letters of complaint to their seniors & be fairly certain that you & your family will still wake up safe & sound the following few mornings. Be glad that it is even possible that a policeman (woman) might be reprimanded about your compaint!

[Akzle]

...[image ]
As for your line about wearing a patch I call bullshit - no serious gang I know of allows an owner of a Jappa GSX750 as a member.

love the pic. go teh g33ks.

as for the patch. this shit is clearly over your head. i was referring to the gang that wears blue vests....

get back to your play-doh buddy.


Be grateful that you can write letters of complaint to their seniors & be fairly certain that you & your family will still wake up safe & sound the following few mornings. Be glad that it is even possible that a policeman (woman) might be reprimanded about your compaint!

don't get me wrong, i am. but if i happened to be birthed somewhere like afghanistan, i'd be one packing an AK47 and riding a camel around, killing those who claim authority (americans).
it's a diffrent kind of fight for freedom.

[scumdog]

don't get me wrong, i am. but if i happened to be birthed somewhere like afghanistan, i'd be one packing an AK47 and riding a camel around, killing those who claim authority (americans).
it's a diffrent kind of fight for freedom.

Mwahahah you are so funny - and so full of shit.:bleh:

Well done, you made me smile...:laugh:

[_Shrek_]

don't get me wrong, i am. but if i happened to be birthed somewhere like afghanistan, i'd be one packing an AK47 and riding a camel around, killing those who claim authority (americans).
it's a diffrent kind of fight for freedom.[/COLOR]

:scratch: sounds like you were birthed in the back blocks up norf riding horse's instead of going to school, but you do make me :laugh:

[Akzle]

Well done, you made me smile...:laugh:


...but you do make me :laugh:

see... happiness, where'er i do go...

[Subike]

LOL people will be moaning about this is all about revenue gathering, but all they are doing is catching those who break the rules.

If you can't afford to put a WOF and Rego on it, you can't afford to have that vehicle.

says he who only rides a 250,

[Dodgy]

I saw a van parked along SH1 last night and it appeared to have a bank of infra-red LED type lamps as opposed to the traditional ornage strobe.

Is this correct? Wth the strobe at least you get a flash as feedback that you were going to fast - will these give no notification (other than the ticket in the mail).

I assume that there are still no measures in place to record motorcycle licence plates in such cases.

[nzspokes]

Thats the new plate cameras.

Were stuffed.

[BigAl]

and still stuffed!

[oneofsix]

I saw a van parked along SH1 last night and it appeared to have a bank of infra-red LED type lamps as opposed to the traditional ornage strobe.

Is this correct? Wth the strobe at least you get a flash as feedback that you were going to fast - will these give no notification (other than the ticket in the mail).

I assume that there are still no measures in place to record motorcycle licence plates in such cases.

rumour is that because they can id the vehicle by its size they can realise it's a bike and time a secondary camera at the front of the van to get the rear plate. Oh happy daze. :spanking:

[007XX]

Can anybody confirm / deny the assumption thoughh that there is nothing in place for bike's plates recognition?

Never mind, Ok, ta oneofsix ^

[red mermaid]

This rumour is no longer, it is true.

I was shown how it worked today.

[oneofsix]

This rumour is no longer, it is true.

I was shown how it worked today.

ouch, but thanks for confirming. Two sources agreeing both with a level in inside knowledge. You have been warned. :eek:

[steve_t]

This rumour is no longer, it is true.

I was shown how it worked today.

So those vans now have cameras front and back? And they're still low powered k-band which is really hard to detect. I guess things like Escort-Live and Trapster might start gaining more popularity

[Scouse]

Listen up you noobs, this type of van with the LED lights surounding the camera that protruds from both the rightfront and rear of the van is an ANRV (Automatic number plate recocnition van). The idea of the front and rear mounted camera's, is so it can read both front and rear number plates, for vehicals passing by on either side of the road, and also motorcycles. The camera is active at all ,so does not rely on radar as it is not setup for speed detection.

[jellywrestler]

With the strobe at least you get a flash as feedback that you were going to fast - that info is also on your speedo on your bike too.

[hayd3n]

still there is only 4 in the country that can do apnr


According to the June 2012 edition of Police News, the NZ Police have been trialling ANPR since 2009. This has involved four mobile ANPR units which are not that sophisticated in that they need two people to operate them (one to drive, one to watch the screen).

In theory the trial ended in January 2012 but it is our understanding from Police News that they are still using the current four ANPR vehicles (2 in Auckland, 1 in Waikato/Eastern and 1 in Christchurch/Southland) and are looking at deploying another couple.
http://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDkQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftechliberty.org.nz%2Ftag%2Fanpr%2 F&ei=9jSbUOXvFvHRmAXR34CQDg&usg=AFQjCNHSrfl_2ddlRoE5EKqCyAYu1-Dc3g
and the rest just need a software upgrade

[red mermaid]

There is also one in the Wellington/Central district area.

[rastuscat]

that info is also on your speedo on your bike too.

Oh for heavens sake. Stop being so bloody sensible.

For the record, this thread appears to be confusing the speed cameras with ANPR.

Speed cameras can now recognize vehicle size as it needs to in order to enforce the 90 kmh open road speed limit for heavy motor vehicles, and cars towing trailers. Remember it's only a 4 kmh tolerance for those vehicles too. That's the infra red thing.

There's nothing in the system that targets motorcycles. Sorry to burst the conspiracy bubble, but it's urban myth. Yes, ANPR is getting better, but it's not targeted at bikers any more so than other road users.

ANPR is fitted to a standard patrol car, with cameras up at the leading and trailing corners of the light bar, on the roof.

Still, never let the facts stand in the way of a good whinge.

[bogan]

Oh for heavens sake. Stop being so bloody sensible.

For the record, this thread appears to be confusing the speed cameras with ANPR.

Speed cameras can now recognize vehicle size as it needs to in order to enforce the 90 kmh open road speed limit for heavy motor vehicles, and cars towing trailers. Remember it's only a 4 kmh tolerance for those vehicles too. That's the infra red thing.

There's nothing in the system that targets motorcycles. Sorry to burst the conspiracy bubble, but it's urban myth. Yes, ANPR is getting better, but it's not targeted at bikers any more so than other road users.

ANPR is fitted to a standard patrol car, with cameras up at the leading and trailing corners of the light bar, on the roof.

Still, never let the facts stand in the way of a good whinge.

Will it be limited to 'safety' applications only? Or will we see regos checked? vehicle movements stored temporarily?

[Edbear]

that info is also on your speedo on your bike too.

Really? How novel! :rolleyes:


Will it be limited to 'safety' applications only? Or will we see regos checked? vehicle movements stored temporarily?

Who cares? :msn-wink:

[davereid]

While ANPR is part of a gradual creep to a survelliance state, which is of course an instant path to a tyrannical state, it a wonderful dead end.

I have wondered how I will get away without licencing my motorcycle. ANPR gives me the the tool. In fact it will become so popular that they will get rid of the licence label (and the popo's brain if thats not already been done.)

An interested human being might see a heavily tattooed man on a unlicensed Harley Davidson with a person of interest flag.

The ANPR popo will see an teenage girl on a fully legal moped.

Its part of our evolving police state. But it will give me another ten years without paying a rego fee.

[swbarnett]

Yes, ANPR is getting better,
That depends on your point of view. While it may be getting better at spying. It is definitely making our society a less desireable and more difficult place to live.

And, for the record, I have nothing at the present moment to fear directly from ANPR. I have no outstanding warrants, never have and am likely to never have in the future. Anybody who ways "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to worry about" has their head permenantly planted where the sun don't shine.

[red mermaid]

I really do need to get down to the Horowhenua much more often.



While ANPR is part of a gradual creep to a survelliance state, which is of course an instant path to a tyrannical state, it a wonderful dead end.

I have wondered how I will get away without licencing my motorcycle. ANPR gives me the the tool. In fact it will become so popular that they will get rid of the licence label (and the popo's brain if thats not already been done.)

An interested human being might see a heavily tattooed man on a unlicensed Harley Davidson with a person of interest flag.

The ANPR popo will see an teenage girl on a fully legal moped.

Its part of our evolving police state. But it will give me another ten years without paying a rego fee.

[Ocean1]

I really do need to get down to the Horowhenua much more often.

Yeah?

What dates?

[BoristheBiter]

That depends on your point of view. While it may be getting better at spying. It is definitely making our society a less desireable and more difficult place to live.

And, for the record, I have nothing at the present moment to fear directly from ANPR. I have no outstanding warrants, never have and am likely to never have in the future. Anybody who ways "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to worry about" has their head permenantly planted where the sun don't shine.

Goodbye then, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Where is it might not be perfect, I do have a few things I rant about, it is a wonderful place to live.
As we have a large group of different people and cultures I think we do quite well.

[FJRider]

The ANPR popo will see an teenage girl on a fully legal moped.

Its part of our evolving police state. But it will give me another ten years without paying a rego fee.

If the ANPR system was the only readers of license plates ... it might be a fair assumption.

If the ANPR system was in each town and city throughout the country ... (which it is NOT) ... it may just be a gamble.

But the Popo in a mufti car ... that saw a Harley doing a dodgy lane change ... making other vehicles brake to avoid him (or any other minor infringement) ... will see a plate that does not match the bike it's on.

Or ... a "Random license/breath test check" on a motorcycle rider (any motorcycle rider) ... on any road ... anywhere ... might SEE things that don't match with what their computer says it is.

Good luck ...

[Scuba_Steve]

Goodbye then, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Where is it might not be perfect, I do have a few things I rant about, it is a wonderful place to live.
As we have a large group of different people and cultures I think we do quite well.

if it's such a "wonderful place to live" why are you so happy for the slow rollout of the oppression machine to make it not so???
I like it here thats why I DON'T want to see it become America or anything like it, yet these system keep taking us closer & closer

[red mermaid]

What dates do you suggest?


Yeah?

What dates?

[Ocean1]

What dates do you suggest?

Any one. I'll be doing my hair that day.

[BoristheBiter]

if it's such a "wonderful place to live" why are you so happy for the slow rollout of the oppression machine to make it not so???
I like it here thats why I DON'T want to see it become America or anything like it, yet these system keep taking us closer & closer

because I don't have a tinfoil hat on.

[steve_t]

Speed cameras can now recognize vehicle size as it needs to in order to enforce the 90 kmh open road speed limit for heavy motor vehicles, and cars towing trailers. Remember it's only a 4 kmh tolerance for those vehicles too. That's the infra red thing.


Still, never let the facts stand in the way of a good whinge.

Did I miss something? Do we have a permanent 4km/h tolerance now?

[swbarnett]

Goodbye then, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Where is it might not be perfect, I do have a few things I rant about, it is a wonderful place to live.
As we have a large group of different people and cultures I think we do quite well.
It definitely is a wonderful place to live. That's why I don't want it to change. The thought that I shouldn't worry about the slow reversal of our right to not be scrutinised every minute is quite frankly obhorent.

[rastuscat]

Did I miss something? Do we have a permanent 4km/h tolerance now?

Yes you missed something.

HMVs and cars towing trailers have a 4 kmh tolerance. Cars and bikes have a 10 kmh tolerance, apart from outside schools, long weekends etc, when it drops to 4 kmh.

HMVs and cars towing trailers have a greater issue with stopping distances, which is why the tolerance is lower permanently.

Yeah, its all about revenue collecting blah blah blah.

[caspernz]

if it's such a "wonderful place to live" why are you so happy for the slow rollout of the oppression machine to make it not so???
I like it here thats why I DON'T want to see it become America or anything like it, yet these system keep taking us closer & closer

Meh, you need to get out more. Venture thru Western Europe, cameras everyfrickinwhere, armed Police and most sizeable public facilities you go into bags get searched and you step thru a metal detector as though you're about to board a plane.

The illusion of safety is quite an inconvenience to Joe Public, but oh heck, if it keeps most whackos at bay...all fine by me :2thumbsup

[Scuba_Steve]

because I don't have a tinfoil hat on.

Nope only your blinders


Did I miss something? Do we have a permanent 4km/h tolerance now?

Only for heavy vehicles & trailers, has been for awhile

[swbarnett]

Meh, you need to get out more. Venture thru Western Europe, cameras everyfrickinwhere, armed Police and most sizeable public facilities you go into bags get searched and you step thru a metal detector as though you're about to board a plane.
Which is exactly why I think it's a very real possibility it will happen here. We can't afford to let the frog boil!


The illusion of safety is quite an inconvenience to Joe Public, but oh heck, if it keeps most whackos at bay...all fine by me :2thumbsup
This kind of thinking is going to remove all freedom. "If it save's one life it's worth it." is so naive.

[BoristheBiter]

It definitely is a wonderful place to live. That's why I don't want it to change. The thought that I shouldn't worry about the slow reversal of our right to not be scrutinised every minute is quite frankly obhorent.

You think being scrutinised is abhorrent (I do like that word anyway it's spelled) but you are on the internet. I bet you have a credit card and an EFTpos card.
You do know that they track your every purchase?


Which is exactly why I think it's a very real possibility it will happen here. We can't afford to let the frog boil!


This kind of thinking is going to remove all freedom. "If it save's one life it's worth it." is so naive.

If it saves mine then it is worth it.

[kiwi cowboy]

Yes you missed something.

HMVs and cars towing trailers have a 4 kmh tolerance. Cars and bikes have a 10 kmh tolerance, apart from outside schools, long weekends etc, when it drops to 4 kmh.

HMVs and cars towing trailers have a greater issue with stopping distances, which is why the tolerance is lower permanently.

Yeah, its all about revenue collecting blah blah blah.

See this is what gets me.
The speed limit is "supposed" to be with saftey in mind but i tow a trailor a bit on the road and i do sit on 100 or a fraction more as i know my speedo reads low if im in traffic and can stay with the flow at that speed BUT i make sure i have a gap in front of me big enough to react to situations.
To me staying with the flow of traffic is safer than sitting on 90 and having traffic build up behind then taking risks passing in places that are unbelivable.

Before i get roasted for traffic behind me and i should pull over and let them pass well i do now as im not a fuckwit that speeds up on a passing lane like i also see but actualy slow down to let any cars behind get passed.

The other issue with pulling over to let cars past is that by the time you get back on the road and up to speed you have anouther lot of cars lined up behind so no win.

To me sitting with the flow of traffic and sitting on 100 is not as important as the following distance that should be observed.

Hope that made sence lol.

[steve_t]

Yes you missed something.

HMVs and cars towing trailers have a 4 kmh tolerance. Cars and bikes have a 10 kmh tolerance, apart from outside schools, long weekends etc, when it drops to 4 kmh.

HMVs and cars towing trailers have a greater issue with stopping distances, which is why the tolerance is lower permanently.

Yeah, its all about revenue collecting blah blah blah.

Oh, sweet. Thanks :drinkup:

[steve_t]

See this is what gets me.
The speed limit is "supposed" to be with saftey in mind but i tow a trailor a bit on the road and i do sit on 100 or a fraction more as i know my speedo reads low if im in traffic and can stay with the flow at that speed BUT i make sure i have a gap in front of me big enough to react to situations.
To me staying with the flow of traffic is safer than sitting on 90 and having traffic build up behind then taking risks passing in places that are unbelivable.

Before i get roasted for traffic behind me and i should pull over and let them pass well i do now as im not a fuckwit that speeds up on a passing lane like i also see but actualy slow down to let any cars behind get passed.

The other issue with pulling over to let cars past is that by the time you get back on the road and up to speed you have anouther lot of cars lined up behind so no win.

To me sitting with the flow of traffic and sitting on 100 is not as important as the following distance that should be observed.

Hope that made sence lol.

The problem is that you're in the minority of conscientious drivers

[swbarnett]

You think being scrutinised is abhorrent (I do like that word anyway it's spelled) but you are on the internet.
What I find abhorrent is not the scrutiny itself if done in the right context but the thought that I should just lie back and accept without question any and all scrutiny some self-appointed busy-body imposes on me.

I hate being scrutinised (this is why KB is the one and only bit of social internet I'm part of) but I do recognise that a certain amount of it can't be avoided. What worries me is where this is inevitably headed if we don't stop it expanding.


I bet you have a credit card and an EFTpos card.
You do know that they track your every purchase?
I know they track every transaction. If I knew a way to avoid this (short of living of the grid) I would.


If it saves mine then it is worth it.
If the cost leads to the economic and social ruination of society you may think differently. Sure, you may still be breathing, but if you're living in a gutter getting every meal, when you get one at all, out of a fettered sewer are you really alive? Would you want to be?

[swbarnett]

The problem is that you're in the minority of conscientious drivers
Which is why the blanket enforcement of an arbitrary limit doesn't work. There is no concept of treating every case on its merits. Most of the time the enforcing body doesn't even know what the merits of a given case are.

[Coldrider]

Meh, you need to get out more. Venture thru Western Europe, cameras everyfrickinwhere, armed Police and most sizeable public facilities you go into bags get searched and you step thru a metal detector as though you're about to board a plane.

The illusion of safety is quite an inconvenience to Joe Public, but oh heck, if it keeps most whackos at bay...all fine by me :2thumbsupwaha wha wah, i am still waiting to be detaxed by a speed camera.

[BoristheBiter]

What I find abhorrent is not the scrutiny itself if done in the right context but the thought that I should just lie back and accept without question any and all scrutiny some self-appointed busy-body imposes on me.

I hate being scrutinised (this is why KB is the one and only bit of social internet I'm part of) but I do recognise that a certain amount of it can't be avoided. What worries me is where this is inevitably headed if we don't stop it expanding.


I know they track every transaction. If I knew a way to avoid this (short of living of the grid) I would.


If the cost leads to the economic and social ruination of society you may think differently. Sure, you may still be breathing, but if you're living in a gutter getting every meal, when you get one at all, out of a fettered sewer are you really alive? Would you want to be?


So please do tell how getting the licence plate checked on your car would lead to this?
And not some tinfoil hat answer, one that has some actual facts as these are all over London and the UK and I haven't seen any of what you suggest will happen.

[davereid]

I really do need to get down to the Horowhenua much more often.

If you find any interesting teenage girls let me know...

[FJRider]

There is no concept of treating every case on its merits. Most of the time the enforcing body doesn't even know what the merits of a given case are.

There is actually ... and written into legislation too ..

It is up to the discretion of the officer at the time of any infringement to decide if further action ... by way of an infringement notice ... is taken. This is often based solely on the attitude of the stopped motorist ..... and often takes precedence over the perceived seriousness of the offence by the officer.

Not all officers strictly enforce the speed limits ... and it would be wrong to suggest ... ALL do.

[swbarnett]

So please do tell how getting the licence plate checked on your car would lead to this?
I take it you understand the principle of the boiling frog? If not have a read of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

APNR is just another step along the way. Another degree towards "boiling point".

The pervading ideal in the modern western world seems to be one of "eliminate all forms of human suffering no matter the cost". Even if I were to accept that this is a laudable goal, and indeed achievable, the cost would be so high as to be unbearable.

It would involve massive amounts of both Government and private spending on crime prevention, law enforcement, healthcare and medical research. Not to mention the compliance cost to businesses and private individuals.

Everyone would have to spy on their neighbour, or indeed their immediate family, for the first hint of any wrong-doing. This would remove all trust between people and a lot of innocent people are caught up in the paranoia of others. There is a thread on KB at the moment talking about how easy it is for parents hugging their kids in public to be labelled as child molesters.


And not some tinfoil hat answer, one that has some actual facts as these are all over London and the UK and I haven't seen any of what you suggest will happen.
It may not be immediately visible but the cost is there. The one and only time I was in London I swore I would never live there as it was just too unfriendly for words. All the pedestrians seemed to be wearing blinkers. Eye contact was a strict no-no.

[swbarnett]

There is actually ... and written into legislation too ..

It is up to the discretion of the officer at the time of any infringement to decide if further action ... by way of an infringement notice ... is taken. This is often based solely on the attitude of the stopped motorist ..... and often takes precedence over the perceived seriousness of the offence by the officer.

Not all officers strictly enforce the speed limits ... and it would be wrong to suggest ... ALL do.
You're talking about face-to-face encounters. On that score I agree with you and have been the benefactor of that discretion on more than one occasion.

A speed camera, on the other hand, cannot exercise discretion. It does not know how you drive. It does not know the weather conditions, the traffic level, etc...

[Swoop]

So, how does the ANPR camera perform when a Sidi boot is over the plate?

[Scuba_Steve]

So, how does the ANPR camera perform when a Sidi boot is over the plate?

pretty well I hear, it's able to distinguish the brand name 'Sidi' & even tell it's not a number plate ;)

[BoristheBiter]

I take it you understand the principle of the boiling frog? If not have a read of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

APNR is just another step along the way. Another degree towards "boiling point".

The pervading ideal in the modern western world seems to be one of "eliminate all forms of human suffering no matter the cost". Even if I were to accept that this is a laudable goal, and indeed achievable, the cost would be so high as to be unbearable.

It would involve massive amounts of both Government and private spending on crime prevention, law enforcement, healthcare and medical research. Not to mention the compliance cost to businesses and private individuals.

Everyone would have to spy on their neighbour, or indeed their immediate family, for the first hint of any wrong-doing. This would remove all trust between people and a lot of innocent people are caught up in the paranoia of others. There is a thread on KB at the moment talking about how easy it is for parents hugging their kids in public to be labelled as child molesters.


It may not be immediately visible but the cost is there. The one and only time I was in London I swore I would never live there as it was just too unfriendly for words. All the pedestrians seemed to be wearing blinkers. Eye contact was a strict no-no.

Yes I do know what the boiling frog is but I did ask for a non tin foil hat answer but I guessed I wouldn't get one.

Yep any big city where you don't know anyone is like that.
We are not in China or is that you really think that is the direction we are heading.

[davereid]

......We are not in China or is that you really think that is the direction we are heading.

I think the question should be reversed.

We see police (and many other agencies) given the right to random search and siezure for a wide range of offences, and in many cases where there IS NO offence, and none is even likely.

We have lost the right to remain silent.

We have lost the presumption of innocence.

Penalties for many offences may now be imposed before any cout hearing is even scheduled.

Our internet traffic is already censored and soon details of our surfing will be stored for "enforcement".

We need identity cards to undertake the simplest of financial transactions, and that will soon be extended to virtually all transactions with any government department or business.

(In our clever country virtual ID cards that contain your photo etc are almost here, except you dont need to carry them, government and private companies will just get them from the DIA website when they interact with you).

We are tracked by a dozen differnent government agencies, and ANPR is part if that picture, (thank god a childishly easy one to fool.)

I am watching my government give itself all the tools of tyranny.

Why would I not expect it to become tyranical ?

[scumdog]

We have lost the right to remain silent.
[/U]

"You are under arrest for being a drongo, you do not have to say anything..yadda yadda yadda...."

Doesn't it go somethting like that?<_<

[Scuba_Steve]

"You are under arrest for being a drongo, you do not have to say anything..yadda yadda yadda...."

Doesn't it go somethting like that?<_<

Not last time I was arrested... ow man did I miss out on the "full experience" <_<

[FJRider]

We see police (and many other agencies) given the right to random search and siezure for a wide range of offences, and in many cases where there IS NO offence, and none is even likely.

Actual guilt and ... guilt in the effect, that the rules of arrest were followed to the full letter of the law ... may differ.
We only hear of the cases that police got it wrong ... as decided by a judge.


We have lost the right to remain silent.

We haven't actually ... but I often wish you would ...

However ... the right to remain a complete fuckwit is still in legislation ... as anybody reading the court pages in ANY newspaper can see ...


We have lost the presumption of innocence.

Perhaps ... because few ARE ...


Penalties for many offences may now be imposed before any cout hearing is even scheduled.

If you don't agree with any fines you are awarded ... go to court and fight it. That is your right.
And the court can impose a heavier fine if you are found guilty. That is their right.


Our internet traffic is already censored and soon details of our surfing will be stored for "enforcement".

Nothing newsworthy about that ... just a few stupid's just don't know it yet.


We need identity cards to undertake the simplest of financial transactions, and that will soon be extended to virtually all transactions with any government department or business.

Identity theft is a serious problem ...

But if I can get ALL/any IRD refunds of your's ... paid to me ... you wont have a problem with that ... ???


(In our clever country virtual ID cards that contain your photo etc are almost here, except you dont need to carry them, government and private companies will just get them from the DIA website when they interact with you).

We are tracked by a dozen differnent government agencies, and ANPR is part if that picture, (thank god a childishly easy one to fool.)

I am watching my government give itself all the tools of tyranny.

Why would I not expect it to become tyranical ?


PM me your full name and address ... and I will register my vehicles to you. You get my fines and arrest warrants ... but you wont need to worry .. if YOU do nothing wrong ... eh ... !!!

[BMWST?]

PM me your full name and address ... and I will register my vehicles to you. You get my fines and arrest warrants ... but you wont need to worry .. if YOU do nothing wrong ... eh ... !!!

if your vehicles are registered in my name i expect to have full and unrestricted use of them and of course they will be stored at the place of registration,not your abode.Is that allright?

[FJRider]

if your vehicles are registered in my name i expect to have full and unrestricted use of them and of course they will be stored at the place of registration,not your abode.Is that allright?

Sorry ... it is against my own personal policy.

I may do it even WITHOUT your knowledge ... (for your own piece of mind :innocent:)

[swbarnett]

We have lost the presumption of innocence.
Perhaps ... because few ARE ...
We are all guilty of being human. For the vast majority of us it goes no further. What that means for me may be vastly different to what it means for you. That does not give us the right to label each other criminals simply because we differ.

[FJRider]

We are all guilty of being human. For the vast majority of us it goes no further. What that means for me may be vastly different to what it means for you. That does not give us the right to label each other criminals simply because we differ.

Definition of Criminal ...

crim·i·nal (krm-nl)
adj.
1. Of, involving, or having the nature of crime: criminal abuse.
2. Relating to the administration of penal law.
3.
a. Guilty of crime.
b. Characteristic of a criminal.

One that has committed or been legally convicted of a crime.

As opposed to illegal ...

il·le·gal (-lgl)
adj.
1. Prohibited by law.
2. Prohibited by official rules: an illegal pass in football.

Those that believe being caught with no current registration, or exceeding any posted speed limit ... is making them a criminal ... have a vivid imagination ...

[FJRider]

Not last time I was arrested... ow man did I miss out on the "full experience" <_<

The Taser does put a dent in your memory ... :bleh:

[swbarnett]

Those that believe being caught with no current registration, or exceeding any posted speed limit ... is making them a criminal ... have a vivid imagination ...
Sorry, I'd moved on from ANPR and was talking more generally.

[FJRider]

Sorry, I'd moved on from ANPR and was talking more generally.

So .... off topic then ... ?? :innocent:


and on the off topic subject ... most believe they are not criminals until they are found guilty. BUT (And) until then ... they are totally :innocent: harassed citizens ...

[davereid]

Definition of Criminal ...

crim·i·nal (krm-nl)
adj.
1. Of, involving, or having the nature of crime: criminal abuse.
2. Relating to the administration of penal law.
3.
a. Guilty of crime.
b. Characteristic of a criminal.

One that has committed or been legally convicted of a crime.

As opposed to illegal ...

il·le·gal (-lgl)
adj.
1. Prohibited by law.
2. Prohibited by official rules: an illegal pass in football.

Those that believe being caught with no current registration, or exceeding any posted speed limit ... is making them a criminal ... have a vivid imagination ...

Finally a post from FJRIDER that wasn't mostly comprised of dots and had some factual value.

Even if it was just cut and pasted it wasnt a bad effort.

Shame the topic had moved on from rego and you hadn't noticed.

[swbarnett]

So .... off topic then ... ?? :innocent:
From the OP, yes. A case of topic drift it seems.


and on the off topic subject ... most believe they are not criminals until they are found guilty. BUT (And) until then ... they are totally :innocent: harassed citizens ...
And most of those people are totally correct in that belief.

[Edbear]

Not last time I was arrested... ow man did I miss out on the "full experience" <_<

The "last time I was arrested"? How come I never get arrested. Not even once! What am I doing wrong? :wait:

[Scuba_Steve]

The "last time I was arrested"? How come I never get arrested. Not even once! What am I doing wrong? :wait:

Well it was my 1st & only time, & I guess technically it was more arbitrarily arrest than a legal arrest. NZ's biggest gang was just trying to display their "power" & they've never let legalities get in the way of that

[scumdog]

Well it was my 1st & only time, & I guess technically it was more arbitrarily arrest than a legal arrest. NZ's biggest gang was just trying to display their "power" & they've never let legalities get in the way of that

So what law school did you go to sonny? - the same one as SockMyCook???...

[Akzle]

so.... good piss and moan thread.
but who's going to DO anything about it?



"when democracy turns to tyrany, only armed citizens can still vote"

[rastuscat]

so.... good piss and moan thread.
but who's going to DO anything about it?



"when democracy turns to tyrany, only armed citizens can still vote"

Yawn. Come on Akzle, you can do better.

[scumdog]

---Quote (Originally by Akzle)---
so.... good piss and moan thread.
but who's going to DO anything about it?



"when democracy turns to tyrany, only armed citizens can still vote"
---End Quote---


About time YOU did.

Or are you a 'rock-thrower-from-the-back-of-the-rabble' type?

[Akzle]

Yawn. Come on Akzle, you can do better.

better than......?

[oneofsix]

---Quote (Originally by Akzle)---
so.... good piss and moan thread.
but who's going to DO anything about it?



"when democracy turns to tyrany, only armed citizens can still vote"
---End Quote---


About time YOU did.

Or are you a 'rock-thrower-from-the-back-of-the-rabble' type?
Sounds about right for a lot on here. Throw rocks from the back and bash the real leaders in the back of the head. Oh well makes life safer for the opposition and ensures NZ stays on the track it is. :bleh:

[BoristheBiter]

Blah....blah....fucking blah..... oops my foil hat has slipped off.
[/U]

No need to answer that as others have already done so.

[FJRider]

We are all guilty of being human. For the vast majority of us it goes no further. What that means for me may be vastly different to what it means for you. That does not give us the right to label each other criminals simply because we differ.

Society has it's rules and laws laid down in legislation for the benefit and safety of us all. The attitude's of some to those rules and laws may differ ... but wont make it "right".

To put into context ... the liking of, and practice of exceeding the speed limit by large degrees ...
hardly compares to the liking of, and practice of beating up/killing two year old kids ...

[rastuscat]

Went outside this morning. Realized the world is watching me. So I went back inside.

My bad. Sometimes the value of being able to go outside overcomes the fact that people will see me.

We each have our views on how much surveillance we will tolerate. Each of us thinks our view is right. Arguing on a forum won't change much.

Still, the freedom to disagree is nice to have.

[Scuba_Steve]

Went outside this morning. Realized the world is watching me. So I went back inside.

My bad. Sometimes the value of being able to go outside overcomes the fact that people will see me.

We each have our views on how much surveillance we will tolerate. Each of us thinks our view is right. Arguing on a forum won't change much.


Na dude, I've got the cameras inside your house not outside. You can see your own show right h... :pinch: I mean nothing to see here, move along :whistle:




Still, the freedom to disagree is nice to have.

While we have it. Don't worry they're working on taking that away too :yes:

[Subike]

What the truth is to me is the truth
What the truth is to you is also the truth
but both of us will believe different things as being the truth.
So which one of us is wrong?

[BoristheBiter]

What the truth is to me is the truth
What the truth is to you is also the truth
but both of us will believe different things as being the truth.
So which one of us is wrong?

Well you of course.:innocent:

[FJRider]

Went outside this morning. Realized the world is watching me. So I went back inside.

My bad. Sometimes the value of being able to go outside overcomes the fact that people will see me.

We each have our views on how much surveillance we will tolerate. Each of us thinks our view is right. Arguing on a forum won't change much.

Still, the freedom to disagree is nice to have.

I never saw you so it's all ok. ;)

As you were ... :innocent:

[Max Preload]

Still, the freedom to disagree is nice to have.Until dissent is made illegal and TPTB have all the tools to enforce it and there's not a damned thing you can do about it. Don't we already have "hate speech" laws or some such complete fucking bullshit?

[Akzle]

Until dissent is made illegal and TPTB have all the tools to enforce it and there's not a damned thing you can do about it. Don't we already have "hate speech" laws or some such complete fucking bullshit?

well. not so much. we do have freedom of speech.

((but only if you're speeching the party line.)) :facepalm:

it's illegal to deny the holocaust happened, or write, print or publish anything saying so.
you're right. hate speech is illegal.
it's illegal to give instruction on the cultivation of cannabis plants.
it's illegal to give instruction or advice on euthanasia.
it's illagal to speak in a manner that will "incite a riot" (whether or not it does)

you should see how many books your government bans (i'm working on getting them all.. y'know, just to stick it to the man)

thems just the ones i know of...

[rastuscat]

well. not so much. we do have freedom of speech.

((but only if you're speeching the party line.)) :facepalm:

it's illegal to deny the holocaust happened, or write, print or publish anything saying so.
you're right. hate speech is illegal.
it's illegal to give instruction on the cultivation of cannabis plants.
it's illegal to give instruction or advice on euthanasia.
it's illagal to speak in a manner that will "incite a riot" (whether or not it does)

you should see how many books your government bans (i'm working on getting them all.. y'know, just to stick it to the man)

thems just the ones i know of...

It's also illegal to have discussions about how to entice children into paedophilia.

Now, I'm not so sure I agree with totally unrestricted freedom of expression, I'm just not sure who to trust the decision to as to what should and shouldn't be okey dokey.

Given that we can't agree on everything, and defend our right to disagree, could we agree on a definitive list of what's acceptable? Totally subjective that.

[scumdog]

---
well. not so much. we *do* have freedom of speech.

((but only if you're speeching the party line.)) :facepalm:

it's illegal to deny the holocaust happened, or write, print or publish anything saying so.
you're right. hate speech is illegal.
it's illegal to give instruction on the cultivation of cannabis plants.
it's illegal to give instruction or advice on euthanasia.
it's illagal to speak in a manner that will "incite a riot" (whether or not it does)

you should see how many books your government bans (i'm working on getting them all.. y'know, just to stick it to the man)
thems just the ones i know of...

Keep jousting at them windmills - SOMEBODY has to be the token windmill jouster, otherwise we're all doomed, doomed I say...l

[Swoop]

SOMEBODY has to be the token windmill jouster, otherwise we're all doomed, doomed I say...l
The question remains "Who represents the windmills?" eh, eh?

[swbarnett]

Society has it's rules and laws laid down in legislation for the benefit and safety of us all.
If only this were true. Even those laws that are truly there for our benifit are only for the benifit of the majority.


Still, the freedom to disagree is nice to have.
Yes it is. What I want is the freedom to act on my own beliefs where it's only me directly involved. I think driving to the conditions above the speed limit is fine, the law doesn't. Therefore I don't get to live by my beliefs and stay legal.


Given that we can't agree on everything, and defend our right to disagree, could we agree on a definitive list of what's acceptable?
No. God help us if we did. Life would not be worth living it would be so boring. What is required is the legal incarnation of a "live and let live" attitude.

[rastuscat]

Totally agree that we should be free to do whatever we want, as long as it doesn't effect anyone else.

Thing is, driving virtually always effects someone else. Even if it's only the person paying tax to fund the facial reconstruction you are having due to not wearing your seatbelt.

Doing 111 down the Lindis Pass seems so damn innocent and undangerous. So do so many other things, at least subjectively. I could reel off the party line on justifying the enforcement of such rules, but given that the justifications can't be agreed as being definitive, is there much point?

Everyone caught in excess of a speed limit can find a dozen reasons why their speed was safe, why the ticket is unjust, why it's not their bad.

Thing is, the Gubbermint enacts rules, then sends the coercive arm of the state out to enforce those rules. Same with the ANPR thing. Is a question of how they are used. They can be used totally mercilessly to target inconsequential trivial things, though even that's a subjective thing. Some folk see licensing a vehicle as important, though to be fair, it's not on my hit list.

Still, the freedom to disagree is important to have, and I sure hope that it doesn't change. Remember though, that I have the right, just as you might have, to disagree with your, um, disagreement.

Of course, I entirely disagree.:brick:

[Akzle]

Therefore I don't get to live by my beliefs and stay legal.
...What is required is the legal incarnation of a "live and let live" attitude.
legal and lawful are two different things. look it up. play the game i do. the more people that do, the less force the government is going to have in future.
the only way it's going to change is from teh populi.

Totally agree that we should be free to do whatever we want, as long as it doesn't effect anyone else.
(...etc)

Of course, I entirely disagree.:brick:

rasty. :wait:
are you... awake??! :crazy:

[rastuscat]

legal and lawful are two different things. look it up. play the game i do. the more people that do, the less force the government is going to have in future.
the only way it's going to change is from teh populi.


rasty. :wait:
are you... awake??! :crazy:

Awake? Grrrrrrrrr..........

[steve_t]

Awake? Grrrrrrrrr..........

A victim of selective quoting at its best :clap:

[swbarnett]

Totally agree that we should be free to do whatever we want, as long as it doesn't effect anyone else.

Thing is, driving virtually always effects someone else. Even if it's only the person paying tax to fund the facial reconstruction you are having due to not wearing your seatbelt.
This argument just doesn't hold water. The ACC argument will see the removal of all bikes from existence. Along with removing anything else from life that is vaguely dangerous.

The fact that I exist affects EVERYONE else on the planet to some degree. Are you saying that I should cease to exist because I may cause harm to another human simply by being here?


Thing is, the Gubbermint enacts rules, then sends the coercive arm of the state out to enforce those rules. Same with the ANPR thing. Is a question of how they are used. They can be used totally mercilessly to target inconsequential trivial things, though even that's a subjective thing. Some folk see licensing a vehicle as important, though to be fair, it's not on my hit list.
Even if the current Government or enforcement arm uses these laws and technologies with the interests of the public in mind (and I'm not saying that they do), what's to say any subsequent Government will?



Still, the freedom to disagree is important to have, and I sure hope that it doesn't change. Remember though, that I have the right, just as you might have, to disagree with your, um, disagreement.

Of course, I entirely disagree.:brick:
Exactly. I will tolerate everything except intolerance.

[BoristheBiter]

I think the question should be reversed.

We see police (and many other agencies) given the right to random search and siezure for a wide range of offences, and in many cases where there IS NO offence, and none is even likely.

We have lost the right to remain silent.

We have lost the presumption of innocence.

Penalties for many offences may now be imposed before any cout hearing is even scheduled.

Our internet traffic is already censored and soon details of our surfing will be stored for "enforcement".

We need identity cards to undertake the simplest of financial transactions, and that will soon be extended to virtually all transactions with any government department or business.

(In our clever country virtual ID cards that contain your photo etc are almost here, except you dont need to carry them, government and private companies will just get them from the DIA website when they interact with you).

We are tracked by a dozen differnent government agencies, and ANPR is part if that picture, (thank god a childishly easy one to fool.)

I am watching my government give itself all the tools of tyranny.

Why would I not expect it to become tyranical ?



I take it you understand the principle of the boiling frog? If not have a read of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

APNR is just another step along the way. Another degree towards "boiling point".

The pervading ideal in the modern western world seems to be one of "eliminate all forms of human suffering no matter the cost". Even if I were to accept that this is a laudable goal, and indeed achievable, the cost would be so high as to be unbearable.

It would involve massive amounts of both Government and private spending on crime prevention, law enforcement, healthcare and medical research. Not to mention the compliance cost to businesses and private individuals.

Everyone would have to spy on their neighbour, or indeed their immediate family, for the first hint of any wrong-doing. This would remove all trust between people and a lot of innocent people are caught up in the paranoia of others. There is a thread on KB at the moment talking about how easy it is for parents hugging their kids in public to be labelled as child molesters.


It may not be immediately visible but the cost is there. The one and only time I was in London I swore I would never live there as it was just too unfriendly for words. All the pedestrians seemed to be wearing blinkers. Eye contact was a strict no-no.

Just in case you in the tinfoil hat brigade need something to really worry about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=F7pYHN9iC9I

I think ANPR vans are the least of your worry's.

[GTRMAN]

How many of those that complain that the government is monitoring them through multiple means still have a facebook account in which they document every detail of their existence.......

George Orwell wrote about a future where big brother was watching you. With Facebook, twitter and every other social media interaction, big brother doesn't need to watch you, for the most part you are screaming every detail of your life at him anyway.

[swbarnett]

How many of those that complain that the government is monitoring them through multiple means still have a facebook account in which they document every detail of their existence.......
Not I. That's exacly why I stay well away from it.


George Orwell wrote about a future where big brother was watching you.
Actually, he didn't. He wrote about the time in which he lived and swappd the last two digits.

[Zedder]

Not I. That's exacly why I stay well away from it.


Actually, he didn't. He wrote about the time in which he lived and swappd the last two digits.

Orwell's book was actually set in the future, he thought all the things he wrote about would come to pass by then but was a bit out in his projection.

Until there's a cop for every kilometre of road or every person, the numbers are very stacked in our favour.

And, if you still want to do something about Big Brother then get out and protest about something to do with it.

[Edbear]

If only this were true. Even those laws that are truly there for our benifit are only for the benifit of the majority.


Yes it is. What I want is the freedom to act on my own beliefs where it's only me directly involved. I think driving to the conditions above the speed limit is fine, the law doesn't. Therefore I don't get to live by my beliefs and stay legal.

No. God help us if we did. Life would not be worth living it would be so boring. What is required is the legal incarnation of a "live and let live" attitude.


Totally agree that we should be free to do whatever we want, as long as it doesn't effect anyone else.

Thing is, driving virtually always effects someone else. Even if it's only the person paying tax to fund the facial reconstruction you are having due to not wearing your seatbelt.

Doing 111 down the Lindis Pass seems so damn innocent and undangerous. So do so many other things, at least subjectively. I could reel off the party line on justifying the enforcement of such rules, but given that the justifications can't be agreed as being definitive, is there much point?

Everyone caught in excess of a speed limit can find a dozen reasons why their speed was safe, why the ticket is unjust, why it's not their bad.

Thing is, the Gubbermint enacts rules, then sends the coercive arm of the state out to enforce those rules. Same with the ANPR thing. Is a question of how they are used. They can be used totally mercilessly to target inconsequential trivial things, though even that's a subjective thing. Some folk see licensing a vehicle as important, though to be fair, it's not on my hit list.

Still, the freedom to disagree is important to have, and I sure hope that it doesn't change. Remember though, that I have the right, just as you might have, to disagree with your, um, disagreement.

Of course, I entirely disagree.:brick:

Therein lies the issue. Show me an incompetent driver/rider who knows he is incompetent and I will show you a pedestrian/ passenger.

Everyone reckons they are safe and competent and should be allowed to make their own judgement as to what speed or vehicle condition is appropriate. So did all those who crashed and died and/or maimed and killed others. So does every boy racer, or aged Grandpa in his dented Corolla.

So to take swbarnett's opinion, there should be no road rules at all, and all should be able to do as they please. Or is he being a hypocrite and believes only "good" riders and drivers should? Of course he is emminently qualified to judge this, is he not, both in his own behalf and in behalf of all other road users?

[swbarnett]

Orwell's book was actually set in the future, he thought all the things he wrote about would come to pass by then but was a bit out in his projection.
It was stated in the sequal "1985", apparently, that Orwell wanted to comment on the society he lived in. Of course, they could be wrong.

[BoristheBiter]

If only this were true. Even those laws that are truly there for our benifit are only for the benifit of the majority.



:brick:

Don't know how I missed this little gem.

[swbarnett]

Therein lies the issue. Show me an incompetent driver/rider who knows he is incompetent and I will show you a pedestrian/ passenger.
This is one thing I loved about Switzerland. The public transport was so good that those that didn't want to drive didn't have to. The driving standard was, therefore, very high.


Everyone reckons they are safe and competent and should be allowed to make their own judgement as to what speed or vehicle condition is appropriate. So did all those who crashed and died and/or maimed and killed others. So does every boy racer, or aged Grandpa in his dented Corolla.
The fact of the matter is that there are a large number of roads in NZ that are dangerous if taken at speeds near but under the speed limit. On these roads we are allowed to use our own judgement so why not on those that are safe over the current limit?


So to take swbarnett's opinion, there should be no road rules at all, and all should be able to do as they please. Or is he being a hypocrite and believes only "good" riders and drivers should? Of course he is emminently qualified to judge this, is he not, both in his own behalf and in behalf of all other road users?
There should be no road rules where they cannot be fairly applied under all circumstances. For example, on a two lane road, the driving conditions have no bearing on which side of the road we drive on. One side can be fairly enforced over the other under all circumstances. A speed limit, on the other hand cannot be applied fairly because the need to stay under a set speed may or may not be present. Flawed as it still would be, I'd far rather do away with speed limits and have a charge of "driving without due care and attention" applied to speed beyond what is prudent for the conditions.

[scumdog]

The fact of the matter is that there are a large number of roads in NZ that are dangerous if taken at speeds near but under the speed limit. On these roads we are allowed to use our own judgement so why not on those that are safe over the current limit?

Because the 'judgement' of so many wax-heads on our roads is abysmal, our road toll shows that.

I've seen a drunk wood-louse with better judgement than a lot of road-users in NZ.

Just sayin...

[FJRider]

If only this were true. Even those laws that are truly there for our benifit are only for the benifit of the majority.

So ... WHO are the "Special People" .. those laws DON"T apply to ... ??? :scratch:


What I want is the freedom to act on my own beliefs where it's only me directly involved. I think driving to the conditions above the speed limit is fine, the law doesn't. Therefore I don't get to live by my beliefs and stay legal.

Question answered ... YOU think you are "Special" then ... it must be a bugger being part of a minority group. <_<

The majority benefit from the extra contributions ... those special people make to society too ... :laugh:

[Zedder]

It was stated in the sequal "1985", apparently, that Orwell wanted to comment on the society he lived in. Of course, they could be wrong.

Yes, they are wrong. The sequel wasn't even written by Orwell but his earlier book was a prescient (ie: showing knowledge of things before they exist) novel actually describing the world in 2008 quite closely according to literary and historical experts. Cheers.

[Edbear]

This is one thing I loved about Switzerland. The public transport was so good that those that didn't want to drive didn't have to. The driving standard was, therefore, very high.

The fact of the matter is that there are a large number of roads in NZ that are dangerous if taken at speeds near but under the speed limit. On these roads we are allowed to use our own judgement so why not on those that are safe over the current limit?

There should be no road rules where they cannot be fairly applied under all circumstances. For example, on a two lane road, the driving conditions have no bearing on which side of the road we drive on. One side can be fairly enforced over the other under all circumstances. A speed limit, on the other hand cannot be applied fairly because the need to stay under a set speed may or may not be present. Flawed as it still would be, I'd far rather do away with speed limits and have a charge of "driving without due care and attention" applied to speed beyond what is prudent for the conditions.

Idealistic you are, realistic and practical you are not.


Because the 'judgement' of so many wax-heads on our roads is abysmal, our road toll shows that.

I've seen a drunk wood-louse with better judgement than a lot of road-users in NZ.

Just sayin...

Don't see too many wood louse around these parts, especially drunk one's but my six year old Grandson shows a better understanding of the practicalities of driving on a public road. You know, the roads where the public drive?

On a race track one can generally count on the other "road users" being fairly competent and going in the same direction and having reasonably good judgement. Much like swbarnett I expect... :innocent:

[Ocean1]

So ... WHO are the "Special People" .. those laws DON"T apply to ... ??? :scratch:



Question answered ... YOU think you are "Special" then ... it must be a bugger being part of a minority group. <_<

The majority benefit from the extra contributions ... those special people make to society too ... :laugh:

He's not a minority. Ask a bunch of Kiwis if they've exceeded the speed limit this week, becha most have. So we've got a law that most people don't obey, now do you think that's the majority's fault? or the law's?

See, while you deride him for failing to conform, I reckon those who insist on others behaving according to rules set by a clear minority are far more worthy targets.

He's not "special" in the off-handed, derogatory sense you mean. If you have to label people like him then you could see what he thinks of "rational anarchist".

[FJRider]

He's not a minority. Ask a bunch of Kiwis if they've exceeded the speed limit this week, becha most have. So we've got a law that most people don't obey, now do you think that's the majority's fault? or the law's?

See, while you deride him for failing to conform, I reckon those who insist on others behaving according to rules set by a clear minority are far more worthy targets.

He's not "special" in the off-handed, derogatory sense you mean. If you have to label people like him then you could see what he thinks of "rational anarchist".

Regardless of the fact that he ... or anybody else doesn't like the rules relating to speed allowed on the road ... they are STILL lawful legislation. And they ARE there for the benefit and safety of ALL members of New Zealand society.

If he believes his actions can ... and will (could) not affect any other member of society ... at any time. Then he is truly special (gifted even .. to know for sure), but the label would only be "Traffic offender" ... sorry to burst your (his) bubble.

[scumdog]

He's not a minority. Ask a bunch of Kiwis if they've exceeded the speed limit this week, becha most have. So we've got a law that most people don't obey, now do you think that's the majority's fault? or the law's?

See, while you deride him for failing to conform, I reckon those who insist on others behaving according to rules set by a clear minority are far more worthy targets.



Hmmm, a lot of life is the same - minority 'causing' laws to be created - laws then expected to be obeyed by the majority...

Like drink-driving...

[FJRider]

See, while you deride him for failing to conform, I reckon those who insist on others behaving according to rules set by a clear minority are far more worthy targets.



I did a Google search on ... penalties for "Failing to conform" as stated in legislation ... 0 results. So that in itself is not a crime.

What is interesting ... that no political party (that I am aware of) has as yet, indicated ANY intention of raising the existing open road speed limit .... if they were to become the political party in power.

[Ocean1]

Regardless of the fact that he ... or anybody else doesn't like the rules relating to speed allowed on the road ... they are STILL lawful legislation. And they ARE there for the benefit and safety of ALL members of New Zealand society.

The majority don't agree with you.


If he believes his actions can ... and will (could) not affect any other member of society ... at any time. Then he is truly special (gifted even .. to know for sure), but the label would only be "Traffic offender" ... sorry to burst your (his) bubble.

And obviously he believes that his actions are for him to decide, calling him names probably won't change that.



Hmmm, a lot of life is the same - minority 'causing' laws to be created - laws then expected to be obeyed by the majority...

Like drink-driving...

And how many drunk drivers take much notice of that law?

How many of the fatalities and injuries occuring on our roads occured at below the speed limit? Fuck all.

See, nobody actually gives a fuck what the law says, they behave pretty much exactly as they choose. The fact that most choose to behave in ways that don't break many rules too often has nothing to do with the rules.

Enforcing rules that the majority don't agree with doesn't make them obedient wee pixies all of a sudden, it just puts them firmly on the other side.

[FJRider]

The majority don't agree with you.

I DONT care ... (few do) :laugh: ... but until the legislation is changed ... Traffic Offenders they will be.


And obviously he believes that his actions are for him to decide, calling him names probably won't change that.

My actions are for me to decide. As ... he too is free to decide HIS ... (right up to the time he's caught) ... :yes:

Then .. it gets more expensive ... :facepalm:

And ... YOU started his name calling ... :shifty:



And how many drunk drivers take much notice of that law?

How many of the fatalities and injuries occuring on our roads occured at below the speed limit? Fuck all.

See, nobody actually gives a fuck what the law says, they behave pretty much exactly as they choose. The fact that most choose to behave in ways that don't break many rules too often has nothing to do with the rules.

Enforcing rules that the majority don't agree with doesn't make them obedient wee pixies all of a sudden, it just puts them firmly on the other side.

[Scuba_Steve]

And they ARE there for the benefit and safety of ALL members of New Zealand society.


God I'm concerned you might actually believe the shit you are spouting there. The speed scam is NOT inforced for safety, merely money.


Hmmm, a lot of life is the same - minority 'causing' laws to be created - laws then expected to be obeyed by the majority...

Like drink-driving...

Majority think drink drive law is a good thing & obey it.
If it ever became 0 limit, thats when it'd be comparable to the speed scam. As it stands it is fine

[avgas]

This is why you should buy an old bike. I gather they have a lot of difficulty reading old black plates.
Or one with 0's O's and 8's
1 or I's even the odd H.
Or its bent.
Or it has that new silver fern pattern on it.
Or the surround is slightly on both ends of the plate.

(fucking pips)

....ah I mean I know nothing <_<

Also who says you need a van? There is a certain Smart car with it......... In fact it can be motorbike mounted

....shit! Ignore that I KNOW NOTHING!!!!!:laugh:

[FJRider]

God I'm concerned you might actually believe the shit you are spouting there. The speed scam is NOT inforced for safety, merely money.

So ... if everybody obeyed the speed limits .. and NO money was paid in fines ... they would lower the limits more so people would break them again. OR ... would they RAISE the limits .... ???

Don't blame the cops ... they just enforce the legislation. NOT make it ....


Majority think drink drive law is a good thing & obey it.
If it ever became 0 limit, thats when it'd be comparable to the speed scam. As it stands it is fine

A majority of the drunk driver don't like it ... so it must be wrong. Just like a majority of speeders think it's OK to exceed the speed limits ...

[cave weta]

This is why you should buy an old bike. I gather they have a lot of difficulty reading old black plates.

Also - if you respray your plate with ordinary white paint with no reflective quality it makes a massive difference....

[Coolz]

Because the 'judgement' of so many wax-heads on our roads is abysmal, our road toll shows that.

I've seen a drunk wood-louse with better judgement than a lot of road-users in NZ.

Just sayin...

Down the end of my road there is a lefthand bend with a T intersection 20m further on. Most right turning cars cut the corner at the intersection. As I am aware of this I take the bend slowly approaching the intersection. Yesterday I rounded the bend and saw a Highway Patrol car blatantly cutting the corner. When he saw me he changed his line and got most of his car back onto his side of the road. No drama, I gave him the evil eye and he smiled and waved acknowledging his error.

It shows even a highly trained profesional driver can have moments of laziness and inattention.

My point is there are no good drivers or bad drivers, just humans who all occasionly have a dumb moments.

[Scuba_Steve]

So ... if everybody obeyed the speed limits .. and NO money was paid in fines ... they would lower the limits more so people would break them again. OR ... would they RAISE the limits .... ???

Don't blame the cops ... they just enforce the legislation. NOT make it ....


They would lower the limits... look around it's already happening.
I don't remember blaming the cops here, but then some does lay with them. They ignore many more serious crimes (theft, child abuse, rape) so why do they inforce this scam so heavily??? endangering lives while doing so.



A majority of the drunk driver don't like it ... so it must be wrong.

Even if true that'd be a majority of a minority, still a minority... I hope for your sake your sig relates to this & you're just trollin' now

[scumdog]

They ignore many more serious crimes (theft, child abuse, rape) so why do they inforce this scam so heavily??? endangering lives while doing so.


What a crock-o-shit (as usual)

I'll let you know the first time I (or for that matter, the guys I work with) ignore any of the crimes you mentioned...<_<

[Scuba_Steve]

What a crock-o-shit (as usual)

I'll let you know the first time I (or for that matter, the guys I work with) ignore any of the crimes you mentioned...<_<

coming from The Police gangs finest troll, that don't mean alot... But here some ignored child abuse cases to start. (http://www.ipca.govt.nz/Site/media/2009/2009-Aug12-Wairarapa.aspx)

Something that might be worth noting tho, is my experience is with the corrupt North Island, South Island still appears to have some justice left in it.

[scumdog]

coming from The Police gangs finest troll, that don't mean alot... But here some ignored child abuse cases to start. (http://www.ipca.govt.nz/Site/media/2009/2009-Aug12-Wairarapa.aspx)

.

Hmmmm..."The Police in 2008 also conducted a review which found widespread failings including poor case management and workload management, poor supervision, and a lack of accountability and responsibility."

Not what I would instantly catagorise as 'ignoring'

But maybe four years in '08 it was??

[FJRider]

They would lower the limits... look around it's already happening.
I don't remember blaming the cops here, but then some does lay with them. They ignore many more serious crimes (theft, child abuse, rape) so why do they inforce this scam so heavily??? endangering lives while doing so.

They've lowered the speed limits in a few places around here in Paradise ... but only seems to be in places where lots of people seem to crash. Into other vehicles ... or ... run off the road, and do great harm to themselves ... (or to others ... including bikers ... lately). And (the new PC crime) damage the environment. :pinch:

Never underestimate the enthusiasm of some of those that are paid to enforce the rules. Don't break the rules ... you take a risk and they will too .... :yawn:

And how far over the speed limits (anywhere) do you need to travel ... before you start endangering lives ... ??? I'm obviously out of touch on this ... :blink:


Even if true that'd be a majority of a minority, still a minority... I hope for your sake your sig relates to this & you're just trollin' now

Is there a difference (in principle) between everyone speeding thinking its ok, and everyone that drinks and drives thinking it's ok ... ??? Or is it just a numbers thing .. ?? the more that think is ok ... makes it more ok'er ... ??

[huff3r]

How many of the fatalities and injuries occuring on our roads occured at below the speed limit? Fuck all.


So the speed limits should be followed then, and the cops are right that speed kills? That seems to be what you are implying...

[FJRider]

So the speed limits should be followed then, and the cops are right that speed kills? That seems to be what you are implying...

More people die on the (straight) roads of the Canterbury Plains ... than the Lindis pass. Same speed limits in both areas too ... Why/How would/could that be .. ???

[Berries]

Depression?

I'd top myself if I lived in Canterbury.

[rastuscat]

.................so why do they inforce this scam so heavily???

Coz there's a Police division called the Road Policing Branch. They do road policing. Fancy that.

There's also a Police Photography Section. They do photography. And a Youth Aid Section. They work with youth offenders.

Funny ol' thing, the names they use for various branches. Spooky really.

[huff3r]

More people die on the (straight) roads of the Canterbury Plains ... than the Lindis pass. Same speed limits in both areas too ... Why/How would/could that be .. ???

Speed limit is far too high for the straight roads no doubt.

But seriously... it's boredom, leading to inattention, coupled with being a southie.

[Ocean1]

So the speed limits should be followed then, and the cops are right that speed kills? That seems to be what you are implying...

I'm implying that speeds are reduced in high accident areas whether speed is the cause of accidents or not.

The country's most dangerous road has had it's speed whittled down to 60k over several years and several fatal accidents in spite of the fact that all of them have occured significantly over the existing limit. If people are killing themselves at 140k in an 80k area what the fuck's the point of reducing it to 60k?

[FJRider]

Speed limit is far too high for the straight roads no doubt.

But seriously... it's boredom, leading to inattention, coupled with being a southie.

But these are the very roads that "everybody" wants the speed limit increased :blink:

Do YOU want bored, inattentive, southie's .... coming at YOU at 120 km/hr ... ??? ... :facepalm:

At least in the NORTH island ... we just put it down to suicidal Jaffa's :shifty:

[_Shrek_]

Depression?

I'd top myself if I lived in Canterbury.

thats coz you live in Dunners :bleh:

[Zedder]

But these are the very roads that "everybody" wants the speed limit increased :blink:

Do YOU want bored, inattentive, southie's .... coming at YOU at 120 km/hr ... ??? ... :facepalm:

At least in the NORTH island ... we just put it down to suicidal Jaffa's :shifty:

The speeding issue is always guaranteed to get peoples talkng.

I was quite intrigued to hear that no speed limit on the open road could happen again in Oz's Northern Territory. It's a very contentious subject over there at the moment. I've been there when it was a very high speed area and we often cruised at 140ks but were overtaken regularly. According to the stats less deaths etc though.

Apparently, they've now found it's not speeding but drink driving and lack of seat belt wearing that cause most accidents and deaths there.

[imdying]

George Orwell wrote about a future where big brother was watching you. With Facebook, twitter and every other social media interaction, big brother doesn't need to watch you, for the most part you are screaming every detail of your life at him anyway.I agree... Orwell was right on the money with regards to monitoring, but even his forward thinking brain didn't for see a future where Big Brother would get all the information he could ever need thrown at him by the masses.

[Scuba_Steve]

Apparently, they've now found it's not speeding but drink driving and lack of seat belt wearing that cause most accidents and deaths there.

Speeding's not the problem here either, it causes shit all deaths in the grand scheme. But it is the most heavily inforced. In fact the inforcement to "speed" cause more detrimental effects that the "speed" itself.

[Zedder]

Speeding's not the problem here either, it causes shit all deaths in the grand scheme. But it is the most heavily inforced. In fact the inforcement to "speed" cause more detrimental effects that the "speed" itself.

The "enforcement effect" was mentioned as well. I did notice quite different behaviour while over there this time also. People I spoke with and rode with said everyone was more on edge (including cops) and it's not a good place to be.

[FJRider]

Apparently, they've now found it's not speeding but drink driving and lack of seat belt wearing that cause most accidents and deaths there.

ANY two of those three factors are the cause of most vehicle accident deaths in New Zealand.

And ANY one of those factors will be found in most vehicle injury accidents in New Zealand.

[swbarnett]

Because the 'judgement' of so many wax-heads on our roads is abysmal, our road toll shows that.

I've seen a drunk wood-louse with better judgement than a lot of road-users in NZ.

Just sayin...
What makes the judgement of our politicians any better?

Note that I'm not talking about front-line police. You guys don't set the speed limits.

[swbarnett]

So ... WHO are the "Special People" .. those laws DON"T apply to ... ??? :scratch:
Laws "for our benifit" almost always have a small humber of people that they are detrimental to. Just look at the WRBs.


Question answered ... YOU think you are "Special" then ... it must be a bugger being part of a minority group.
I honestly don't think I'm in a minority. Just because something becomes law does not mean it relects the view of the majority. Remember that we live under a parliamentery democracy, not a true democracy.


The majority benefit from the extra contributions ... those special people make to society too ... :laugh:
I very much doubt that the ticket revenue of which you speak benifits the majority.

[FJRider]

... Just look at the WRBs.

Just look at the result ... if they weren't there.

Not ideal for motorbikes I agree. But they will have prevented more injury accidents (that could have involved motorcyclists) .... than they have caused to motorcyclists already.

And your choice of alternative is .. ???


I honestly don't think I'm in a minority. Just because something becomes law does not mean it relects the view of the majority. Remember that we live under a parliamentery democracy, not a true democracy.

It reflects the view of those in power. Voted in by majority. Is there a political party in New Zealand that would support the increase, of the national (excuse the pun) open road maximum speed limit ... ???

If there is not .. maybe we could form one. The political system we have in NZ would allow it.


I very much doubt that the ticket revenue of which you speak benifits the majority.

Lets test that theory. If nobody exceeds any posted speed limit ... how long do you think it would take Mr Key to raise the income tax level ... ??? (or just invent another tax to cover the shortfall)

I would be very surprised if revenue from traffic infringements not included in Government predicted financial budgets. AND counted on. (and the [freethinking] multitude oblige)

[swbarnett]

Just look at the result ... if they weren't there.
Has the road toll dropped significantly since their introduction?


And your choice of alternative is .. ???
I would support concrete barriers where they can be shown to be truly needed (which is a tiny fraction of the places where they have or want to put WRBs).


It reflects the view of those in power. Voted in by majority.
Which means that we can't know if any given law is supported by the majority. Like I said, we live under a Parliamentary democracy. In a true democracy every law change would be voted on by referendum. In Switzerland we even got the opportunity to cast a vote approving or disapproving the next year's budget.


Is there a political party in New Zealand that would support the increase, of the national (excuse the pun) open road maximum speed limit ... ???
I honestly don't know. I've never heard the topic debated at that level.


Lets test that theory. If nobody exceeds any posted speed limit ... how long do you think it would take Mr Key to raise the income tax level ... ??? (or just invent another tax to cover the shortfall)

I would be very surprised if revenue from traffic infringements not included in Government predicted financial budgets. AND counted on. (and the [freethinking] multitude oblige)
You may well have a point here that I hadn't considered. I would like to see all fine "revenue" withdrawn from the "offender's" bank accounts as paper money and burnt. That way there's no fine revenue to argue about.

[FJRider]

Has the road toll dropped significantly since their introduction?
Have they increased ... ???
Did any of the road toll deaths so far ... involve WRB's .... ?? (and were motorcyclists)
Or a life could have been saved if barriers of any kind were in place .. ??


I would support concrete barriers where they can be shown to be truly needed (which is a tiny fraction of the places where they have or want to put WRBs).

Some (idiot) person drives off the road and the knee-jerk reaction of the do-gooders is to scream for barriers to be installed to prevent anybody else going off there. Then in similar places ... more go up. They are truly needed at spots people might drive off the road and kill themselves. Until they're truly needed ... they're just an eyesore.


Which means that we can't know if any given law is supported by the majority. Like I said, we live under a Parliamentary democracy. In a true democracy every law change would be voted on by referendum. In Switzerland we even got the opportunity to cast a vote approving or disapproving the next year's budget.

Perhaps those against the WRB's should write to their MP and ask for a statement on their opinion / policy on the matter. And a letter/E.mail to all political parties and ask the same.
I believe referendums are a waste of tax-payers money (in NZ) The government is no obligation to hold one ... AND ... under no obligation to make ANY changes whatsoever afterwards. Regardless of the result. (as was proved after the last one about changes to MMP)


I honestly don't know. I've never heard the topic debated at that level.

Those that want to know should ask their local MP.


You may well have a point here that I hadn't considered. I would like to see all fine "revenue" withdrawn from the "offender's" bank accounts as paper money and burnt. That way there's no fine revenue to argue about.

There are plenty of more appropriate things to spend that funding on ... like roads ... and driver training ...

[Scuba_Steve]

Have they increased ... ???


relatively speaking yes it is quite possible



I believe referendums are a waste of tax-payers money (in NZ) The government is no obligation to hold one ... AND ... under no obligation to make ANY changes whatsoever afterwards. Regardless of the result. (as was proved after the last one about changes to MMP)


As they stand you are right, we live in a dictatorship by another name. But he was talking about legally binding referendums



There are plenty of more appropriate things to spend that funding on ... like roads ... and driver training ...

But the money doesn't go to anything worth while, just the MP's back pockets.

[rastuscat]

The speeding issue is always guaranteed to get peoples talkng.

I was quite intrigued to hear that no speed limit on the open road could happen again in Oz's Northern Territory. It's a very contentious subject over there at the moment. I've been there when it was a very high speed area and we often cruised at 140ks but were overtaken regularly. According to the stats less deaths etc though.

Apparently, they've now found it's not speeding but drink driving and lack of seat belt wearing that cause most accidents and deaths there.

A drunk driver who crashes at 50 is safer than a drunk driver who crashes at 70.

Just statins' da obvious.

[scumdog]

A drunk driver who crashes at 50 is safer than a drunk driver who crashes at 70.

Just statins' da obvious.

Especially if they're wearing their seat-belt.

[Zedder]

A drunk driver who crashes at 50 is safer than a drunk driver who crashes at 70.

Just statins' da obvious.

The speeding was targetted as the only issue originally. Just stating the obvious money scam.

[rastuscat]

Especially if they're wearing their seat-belt.

We catch quite a few 58s just coz they get stopped for not wearing their seatbelt.

Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump.

[swbarnett]

A drunk driver who crashes at 50 is safer than a drunk driver who crashes at 70.

Just statins' da obvious.
And an attentive driver at 80 is 100 times safer than a distracted one at 50.

Just statins' da obvious.

[scumdog]

The speeding was targetted as the only issue originally. Just stating the obvious money scam.

Money scam - honey scam.

I haven't paid into it since '87.
And it's been the only time I HAVE paid.

SO how hard is it to avoid the 'scam'?
Not hard at all.

Some people pay lots into it - and regularly
They must be enjoying the experience...

[oneofsix]

Money scam - honey scam.

I haven't paid into it since '87.
And it's been the only time I HAVE paid.

SO how hard is it to avoid the 'scam'?
Not hard at all.

Some people pay lots into it - and regularly
They must be enjoying the experience...

Poor confused scummy. The scam aint the paying its the enforcing and scummy you are a scammer. :laugh:

[scumdog]

Poor confused scummy. The scam aint the paying its the enforcing and scummy you are a scammer. :laugh:

Wow, paid to 'scam':woohoo::2thumbsup

[oneofsix]

Wow, paid to 'scam':woohoo::2thumbsup

yeah some people have all the luck :angry: ;)

[Zedder]

Wow, paid to 'scam':woohoo::2thumbsup

Scummy is a (paid) scammer, scummy is a scammer!

[scumdog]

Scummy is a (paid) scammer, scummy is a scammer!

You-are-jealous, you-are-jealous!!:bleh:i

[rastuscat]

Is day pickin on you Scummie?

[oneofsix]

Is day pickin on you Scummie?

Is you offering to take some of the heat off him? ;)

[rastuscat]

Is you offering to take some of the heat off him? ;)

Bring it on...............donuts R us

[Edbear]

I'd be interested to know how fast those ride who moan and complain about getting speeding tickets "just over the limit." I'd take a guess that they regularly exceed 130km/h and completely ignore the speed limit except for considering the odds of getting caught. :yes:

[oneofsix]

Bring it on...............donuts R us

:lol: looking forward to a long hot summer with plenty of donuts. Didn't you get enough in the Akaroa thread?

[Zedder]

Bring it on...............donuts R us

Right then (rolls sleeves up) I'm absolutely sick and tired of you coming on here with your dedicated and professional attitude to making driving/riding safer. You and your Traffic Safety Branch mates need to just bloody well back off and leave us alone.

[swbarnett]

I'd be interested to know how fast those ride who moan and complain about getting speeding tickets "just over the limit." I'd take a guess that they regularly exceed 130km/h and completely ignore the speed limit except for considering the odds of getting caught. :yes:
You'd be wrong. There will definitely be some of the mindset of which you speak but there are also plenty of those whose own preferred speed is closer to the limit.

[Scuba_Steve]

I'd be interested to know how fast those ride who moan and complain about getting speeding tickets "just over the limit." I'd take a guess that they regularly exceed 130km/h and completely ignore the speed limit except for considering the odds of getting caught. :yes:

nup only breached that a handful of times in my driving.
couple times on Wellington Motorway, got upto 140 & was still the slowest fucker on the road back when everyone else was breaching 160
Desert road once (don't travel up that ways much) got to about 180 before a cop started following me, she turned off pretty fast tho once she realised who I was :cool: ... :whistle:(there might be slightly more to it than that)
& there's been a couple other times else where but always where safe to do so

I travel at a safe comfortable speed. I have gone from one of the slowest people on NZ roads to one of the fastest & my speed hasn't changed, which for me is usually round 110-120 (highways/motorways) I have done this my whole life & don't plan on stopping anytime soon.
I enjoy driving, I love it! & I'd rather do it at a safe comfortable speed than an unsafe dictated one it'll keep me alive & driving longer!

[Edbear]

You both have points, but you may be in the majority rather than the minority who do habitually travel at higher speeds.

However you can't seriously say that 100 is unsafe and 110-120 is safe.

The thing with human psychology is that, and the lawmakers know it well, people will travel in general above whatever the speed limit is set at so they set it about 10km/h lower than they think is ideal knowing that people will travel about that much over.

Not everyone will of course as up this way it is plain that some drivers can't get within 10km/h of the posted speed whether it is 100, 80 or 70!

[Ocean1]

However you can't seriously say that 100 is unsafe and 110-120 is safe.

Then why does the carnage increse when speed limits are lowered, and vice versa?


The thing with human psychology is that, and the lawmakers know it well, people will travel in general above whatever the speed limit is set at so they set it about 10km/h lower than they think is ideal knowing that people will travel about that much over.

Dunno what books you've been getting your psych 101 from but you might want to get some different ones. Humans behave, physically according to their risk profile They drive at speeds that match that profile, lower the limits all you want the only people who's speeds will change are the small minority who are insecure enough to allow someone else's beliefs to control their lives.

All the rules in the world don't change human nature.

[oneofsix]

Then why does the carnage increse when speed limits are lowered, and vice versa?



Dunno what books you've been getting your psych 101 from but you might want to get some different ones. Humans behave, physically according to their risk profile They drive at speeds that match that profile, lower the limits all you want the only people who's speeds will change are the small minority who are insecure enough to allow someone else's beliefs to control their lives.

All the rules in the world don't change human nature.

I'd make one slight change to what you said. "lower the limits all you want the only people who's speeds will change are the small minority who are insecure" in their driving ability to only be surviving by the book. A spin off from the Top Gear theory that only shitty drivers are happy to own boring cars. Because they have no feeling for driving and can't drive properly they go for safety by numbers and fall for the propaganda.

[Zedder]

It's a bit simplistic to use risk profile or the shitty car/boring driver as reasons for speeders. It's a bit more complex than that.

Other reasons could be someone with a Type A personality who just has to win or a show off smart arse driver or someone who doesn't believe any laws apply to them.

[Edbear]

Then why does the carnage increse when speed limits are lowered, and vice versa?



Dunno what books you've been getting your psych 101 from but you might want to get some different ones. Humans behave, physically according to their risk profile They drive at speeds that match that profile, lower the limits all you want the only people who's speeds will change are the small minority who are insecure enough to allow someone else's beliefs to control their lives.

All the rules in the world don't change human nature.

I take note of what the Police, motoring interests and safety experts say, I also
my own studies to find where they get their references from.

The comment about the 10km/h adjustment was I think from memory a Police observation but Rastuscat or Scummy might be able to correct me or clarify that.

The fact is that the NZ road toll resists efforts to lower it for three main reasons. Driver innattention, driving too fast for the conditions and driving too fast for their ability. Speed, per se, is not the issue as many have driven/ridden at very high speeds including me. And I also noted that far too many drivers are incapable of reaching even 100km/h and far too many are unsafe at any speed. Witness the LOL I was unfortunate enough to have to follow in from Silverdale this afternoon. She simply couldn't control her car at 50km/h and changed lanes and took gentle curves at sudden, jerky bites veering left before veering right to go right.

Of course a lower speed is safer if that is the only factor.

[scumdog]

Humans behave, physically according to their risk profile They drive at speeds that match that profile,
All the rules in the world don't change human nature.

Hence why non-thinking unaware people speed up on passing lanes.

The 'risk profile' sez that the wider road is safer, ergo they speed up.

Numpties.

[davereid]

Hence why non-thinking unaware people speed up on passing lanes.

The 'risk profile' sez that the wider road is safer, ergo they speed up.

Numpties.

Yes they are the same drivers that pull out in front of me causing me to brake hard, yet if they had waited until I had passed they could have pulled out, and toddled along at their leisure without being in front of anyone.

But I guess they know that they get everywhere they are going entirely safely at 70 km/hr. So the chap on the motorbike they are about to pull out in front of must be doing 70 as well.

[Bassmatt]

Yes they are the same drivers that pull out in front of me causing me to brake hard, yet if they had waited until I had passed they could have pulled out, and toddled along at their leisure without being in front of anyone.

But I guess they know that they get everywhere they are going entirely safely at 70 km/hr. So the chap on the motorbike they are about to pull out in front of must be doing 70 as well.

ARRRRGHH I FUCKEN HATE THAT.
"I'm in such a hurry I cant wait 2 seconds for you to go past but I'm not in enough of a hurry to go anywhere near 100km/hr"

[rastuscat]

Right then (rolls sleeves up) I'm absolutely sick and tired of you coming on here with your dedicated and professional attitude to making driving/riding safer. You and your Traffic Safety Branch mates need to just bloody well back off and leave us alone.

.................and I'm sick to death of the whining about being caught doing things we have said we are going to catch people doing...........

[Zedder]

.................and I'm sick to death of the whining about being caught doing things we have said we are going to catch people doing...........

Fair enough.

[Ocean1]

I take note of what the Police, motoring interests and safety experts say, I also
my own studies to find where they get their references from.

Can't know what your own studies might have provided, but the other three usually have mutually exclusive views on a wide range of motoring issues, so I wouldn't be surprised if you were a bit confused, there.


The fact is that the NZ road toll resists efforts to lower it for three main reasons. Driver innattention, driving too fast for the conditions and driving too fast for their ability.

NZ's road toll resists efforts to lower it recently because little's changed in the design of vehicles, the road environment or humans recently. I know you like to blame people for behaving in ways you don't approve of, but it's not something you get to change. In a better age complaining about other people was, in itself risky behaviour. Would that were still the case.



Speed, per se, is not the issue as many have driven/ridden at very high speeds including me. Of course a lower speed is safer if that is the only factor.

What other factors were changed at the time Queensland introduced speed limits on state highways, other than the accident rate increasing?



Hence why non-thinking unaware people speed up on passing lanes.

The 'risk profile' sez that the wider road is safer, ergo they speed up.

Numpties.

You got it.

[rastuscat]

Why the big deal about speed enforcement?

[swbarnett]

Why the big deal about speed enforcement?
That's easy. The speed limit is an arbitrary number based flawed reasoning and emotional half-truths that has no relevance in the real world. The blind enforcement of which does nothing to improve public safety - the stated reason for it's existance.

[BoristheBiter]

That's easy. The speed limit is an arbitrary number based flawed reasoning and emotional half-truths that has no relevance in the real world. The blind enforcement of which does nothing to improve public safety - the stated reason for it's existance.

In your opinion........

[GTRMAN]

That's easy. The speed limit is an arbitrary number based flawed reasoning and emotional half-truths that has no relevance in the real world. The blind enforcement of which does nothing to improve public safety - the stated reason for it's existance.




No one is asking you to agree with, or obey the speed laws. If you choose to disregard them then you can do so, just do so in the acceptance of the consequences if you do.

[swbarnett]

In your opinion........
Not just mine.

If the laws around speeding were about speed too fast for the conditions that would be different. I fail to understand how anyone can defend a law that implies the same speed is safe on both a straight four-lane motorway and the Waikaremoana road (100km of tight, twisty gravel).

[oneofsix]

Not just mine.

If the laws around speeding were about speed too fast for the conditions that would be different. I fail to understand how anyone can defend a law that implies the same speed is safe on both a straight four-lane motorway and the Waikaremoana road (100km of tight, twisty gravel).

Careful what you wish for. The Waikaremoana Road will be 60km/h next thing you know. :yes: :cry:

[scumdog]

Not just mine.

If the laws around speeding were about speed too fast for the conditions that would be different. I fail to understand how anyone can defend a law that implies the same speed is safe on both a straight four-lane motorway and the Waikaremoana road (100km of tight, twisty gravel).

Duuh!
People have enough trouble remembering what particular speed zone they're travelling in at any given time without complicating things by adding yet ANOTHER type of speed zone...

[oneofsix]

Duuh!
People have enough trouble remembering what particular speed zone they're travelling in at any given time without complicating things by adding yet ANOTHER type of speed zone...

You getting old Scummy? Can't remember the LSZ? Still exists in law but a long long time since I've seen one.

[avgas]

Also - if you respray your plate with ordinary white paint with no reflective quality it makes a massive difference....
Nah PIP cams will still see ya. Won't get your plate right but will still find the plate.
I'm having issues with PIP ANPR today - fucking thing has retentive memory and keeps thinking the next plate is the same as the last one.
Quite keen to try out their new HD camera's

[Zedder]

I've dug up some info from a course I did a while back.

At least half of all drivers (except buses, coaches and HGVs) exceed the speed limit of 50kmph. It goes up to 55% for highways.

Fear of penalties or risk of being caught appeared to be outweighed by belief the speeder was in control of the situation.

Speed limits in the interest of safety just doesn't wash with these people.

[avgas]

You getting old Scummy? Can't remember the LSZ? Still exists in law but a long long time since I've seen one.
Last time I checked they had changed them all to ones with numbers....then they decreased the whole hway connecting to them. :mad:

[BoristheBiter]

Not just mine.

If the laws around speeding were about speed too fast for the conditions that would be different. I fail to understand how anyone can defend a law that implies the same speed is safe on both a straight four-lane motorway and the Waikaremoana road (100km of tight, twisty gravel).

Funny how i have had more near misses on the motorway than the Waikaremoana road or any gravel road for that matter.

[avgas]

Speed limits in the interest of safety just doesn't wash with these people.
That's not bad when you consider the number of stoopid people in NZ.

[Zedder]

That's not bad when you consider the number of stoopid people in NZ.

Or the ones who can't spell.

[Edbear]

Duuh!
People have enough trouble remembering what particular speed zone they're travelling in at any given time without complicating things by adding yet ANOTHER type of speed zone...

People don't read signs.


I've dug up some info from a course I did a while back.

At least half of all drivers (except buses, coaches and HGVs) exceed the speed limit of 50kmph. It goes up to 55% for highways.

Fear of penalties or risk of being caught appeared to be outweighed by belief the speeder was in control of the situation.

Speed limits in the interest of safety just doesn't wash with these people.

Sounds about right.

[scumdog]

You getting old Scummy? Can't remember the LSZ? Still exists in law but a long long time since I've seen one.

Gee, I wonder why you don't see them these days...?

[scumdog]

by belief the speeder was in control of the situation.

.

Yep, they all believe that, - up until the point of impact...:pinch:

[BoristheBiter]

Not just mine.

If the laws around speeding were about speed too fast for the conditions that would be different. I fail to understand how anyone can defend a law that implies the same speed is safe on both a straight four-lane motorway and the Waikaremoana road (100km of tight, twisty gravel).

I think you need to go and have a lie down or take more water with what ever your'e drinking as you have now started repeating yourself.

[swbarnett]

No one is asking you to agree with, or obey the speed laws. If you choose to disregard them then you can do so, just do so in the acceptance of the consequences if you do.
Pardon? The very fact that it's been set down in law means that we are being asked to obey them (whether we agree with them or not).

[swbarnett]

Careful what you wish for. The Waikaremoana Road will be 60km/h next thing you know. :yes: :cry:
Of course I'd prefer the opposite but at least that would be consistent.

[Zedder]

Yep, they all believe that, - up until the point of impact...:pinch:

But Scummy think about the guaranteed income from the speeders. They don't care about being pinged so it's cha-ching for the gummint. Funny that.

[Bassmatt]

Funny how i have had more near misses on the motorway than the Waikaremoana road or any gravel road for that matter.

So the problem isn't speed then, its traffic volume. Glad you agree.

[swbarnett]

Duuh!
People have enough trouble remembering what particular speed zone they're travelling in at any given time without complicating things by adding yet ANOTHER type of speed zone...
Easily fixed. Do away with speed limits entirely and start doing people for bad driving instead.

[swbarnett]

I think you need to go and have a lie down or take more water with what ever your'e drinking as you have now started repeating yourself.
:doh: Came back to my PC to find the preview of the post still open. Thought I'd forgotten to post.

[BoristheBiter]

So the problem isn't speed then, its traffic volume. Glad you agree.

No it is inattention.

[Zedder]

Easily fixed. Do away with speed limits entirely and start doing people for bad driving instead.

Even in Oz's Northern Territory they've only been talking about the open road speed going up again. Around town (residential) is not a good idea because there's a strong psychological need for lower speeds ie: Kids learn speed of cars etc for safe road crossing.

Bad driving and drink driving should be hammered though.

[scumdog]

Easily fixed. Do away with speed limits entirely and start doing people for bad driving instead.


"by belief the speeder was in control of the situation."

Therein lies the problem - generally most people are not KNOWINGLY/INTENTIONALLY a bad driver.

So the Courts would end up cluttered by people defending their 'bad driving' charge.


Telling people they're a bad driver is like telling them they have a small dick/flat chest/bad hair etc. (Pick your gender...;))

[Bassmatt]

"by belief the speeder was in control of the situation."

Therein lies the problem - generally most people are not KNOWINGLY/INTENTIONALLY a bad driver.

So the Courts would end up cluttered by people defending their 'bad driving' charge.


Telling people they're a bad driver is like telling them they have a small dick/flat chest/bad hair etc. (Pick your gender...;))

You're not going to ticket them for "bad driving" though are you? It will be "failing to stop", or whatever.

[_Shrek_]

"Telling people they're a bad driver is like telling them they have a small dick/flat chest/bad hair etc. (Pick your gender...;))

well I've fixed the bad hair day :rolleyes: as for the rest :shifty:

[swbarnett]

"by belief the speeder was in control of the situation."

Therein lies the problem - generally most people are not KNOWINGLY/INTENTIONALLY a bad driver.

So the Courts would end up cluttered by people defending their 'bad driving' charge.
I agree this would be very hard to implement. To do it properly you have to have knowledge of the driver's state of mind at the time (is their mind on the job at hand for instance).

[Zedder]

I agree this would be very hard to implement. To do it properly you have to have knowledge of the driver's state of mind at the time (is their mind on the job at hand for instance).

If the driver's around to defend themselves that is.

[rastuscat]

Not just mine.

If the laws around speeding were about speed too fast for the conditions that would be different. I fail to understand how anyone can defend a law that implies the same speed is safe on both a straight four-lane motorway and the Waikaremoana road (100km of tight, twisty gravel).

Ah, the old subjective limit chestnut.

It's unenforceable, that's why the law is what it is.

Tell you what, come up with a way of actually enforcing your suggestion, and I'll support you. Remember though, that I work in the real world of enforcement, so I know what the practical application of law looks like.

What do you suggest?

[oneofsix]

Ah, the old subjective limit chestnut.

It's unenforceable, that's why the law is what it is.

Tell you what, come up with a way of actually enforcing your suggestion, and I'll support you. Remember though, that I work in the real world of enforcement, so I know what the practical application of law looks like.

What do you suggest?

I got one that worked, seeing as we are talking of camera vans and all that. A return to the 80 percentile rule but I would like to add a lower 80 percentile as well. I'm sure you remember the old rules back when cameras were first introduced, black spots only, clearly visible, and only pinged you if you were exceeding what others drove at on that road providing it was over the 9k tolerance, back when they were trying to use cameras to enhance road safety.

[swbarnett]

Ah, the old subjective limit chestnut.

It's unenforceable, that's why the law is what it is.
Ah, the old one bad apple so let's chuck out the whole barrel chestnut.

Just because you can't distinguish that small percentage that are truly driving too fast for the conditions you'd rather penalise everybody?


Tell you what, come up with a way of actually enforcing your suggestion, and I'll support you. Remember though, that I work in the real world of enforcement, so I know what the practical application of law looks like.

What do you suggest?
I do have a solution for all this but I know it will never be implemented because it would require a strong stomach and a willingness to spend money on the part of the voting public.

The first step is intensive training before even being allowed on the road. Train drivers like fighter pilots and be prepared to fail a large percentage. Add to this compulsary refresher courses every five years that must be passed to renew your license.

Issue tickets for apparent bad behaviour on the road to your heart's content but the one and only penalty for said tickets would be to bring forward the five year refresher course. Fail the course, no license.

The next step is to let drivers have the road. There is only one way to know within reasonable doubt who the bad drivers are once they are let loose. Wait until the accident happens and then throw the book at them.

[scumdog]

The next step is to let drivers have the road. There is only one way to know within reasonable doubt who the bad drivers are once they are let loose. Wait until the accident happens and then throw the book at them.


And it's even easier to hit them with said book if they're lying dead in their car!!:woohoo:

[oneofsix]

And it's even easier to hit them with said book if they're lying dead in their car!!:woohoo:

Shit yeah, the way you fuckers aim you need a stationary target. :laugh:

[swbarnett]

And it's even easier to hit them with said book if they're lying dead in their car!!:woohoo:
Indeed.

One other thing I forgot to add that has to be taken on board to make this work. People die, get used to it! A zero road toll is unacheivable.

[oneofsix]

Indeed.

One other thing I forgot to add that has to be taken on board to make this work. People die, get used to it! A zero road toll is unacheivable.

like with the alcohol thing, it is not the them that worries us it is the us they might take out with them. But also like the alcohol thing there is a point where the prevention goes beyond that and becomes a problem in itself. we have reached that point with alcohol where it is those 2 to 3 times the current limit that are the issue so what answer is considered politically correct, lower a limit that is already low enough instead of thumbing the fuckers that are way over the limit. As I said earlier don't get anal about the 100k limit and stupid mini tolerance but go for the reasonable speed. Anybody else noticed how dickheads worry about staying below but cruse throw 50k areas, where most accidents happen, at 60+, they have no real idea about what really causes accidents or how to drive.

[BoristheBiter]

The next step is to let drivers have the road. There is only one way to know within reasonable doubt who the bad drivers are once they are let loose. Wait until the accident happens and then throw the book at them.

Great, more ambo's at the bottom of the cliff.

tell this idea to someones family thats just been taken out by some fucktard that thinks they can drive.

[swbarnett]

Great, more ambo's at the bottom of the cliff.
I'd rather have them at the bottom of the cliff trusting most people to stay back from the precipise than blocking the view from the top.


tell this idea to someones family thats just been taken out by some fucktard that thinks they can drive.
Obviously that someone is going to have their view coloured by the event. What they will miss is that, under the regime I propose the chances of this happening will be less than they are currently because those that truly shouldn't be driving are mostly weeded out at the training stage.

[scumdog]

Obviously that someone is going to have their view coloured by the event. What they will miss is that, under the regime I propose the chances of this happening will be less than they are currently because those that truly shouldn't be driving are mostly weeded out at the training stage.

Or as they do right now - just don't bother to get a licence and drive crappy cars...

[Zedder]

As long as money from fines/infringements goes into the gummint consolidated fund, and is not channelled to road safety initiatives, there will be little change.

Also, speeding etc appears to be like all crimes, it's a "don't give a crap about others rights, safety, possessions" mentality. Respect has gone out the window.

[swbarnett]

Or as they do right now - just don't bother to get a licence and drive crappy cars...
Just think of the revenue from car confiscations. No ticket, just take the car and scrap it.

Also, there are a number of people who, given the choice, would elect not to drive at all. I saw this in Switzerland. The public transport was so good that a motorised vehicle was not the necessity it is here. You could get to the most remote part of the country at least once a day (or was that once a week?) by bus or train. The nett result was that those drivers left on the road were of a higher standard.

[swbarnett]

Also, speeding etc appears to be like all crimes, it's a "don't give a crap about others rights, safety, possessions" mentality. Respect has gone out the window.
The point I am trying to make is that a lot of the speeding tickets are given out for "offences" that don't have any affect whatsoever on others rights, safety or possessions.

[caspernz]

Just think of the revenue from car confiscations. No ticket, just take the car and scrap it.

Also, there are a number of people who, given the choice, would elect not to drive at all. I saw this in Switzerland. The public transport was so good that a motorised vehicle was not the necessity it is here. You could get to the most remote part of the country at least once a day (or was that once a week?) by bus or train. The nett result was that those drivers left on the road were of a higher standard.

The idea of refresher training and traffic school type of punishments is a valid one.

But making it happen will take a herculian effort to undo the brainwashing that various Govt agencies have inflicted on their own staff, just for starters.

The punishment in this country for driving without a licence, or a vehicle that is not warranted or registered...just a joke. And that is if you even get caught...

As for drunk drivers...I favour roadside executions for repeat offenders :ar15:

[Berg]

The idea of refresher training and traffic school type of punishments is a valid one.

But making it happen will take a herculian effort to undo the brainwashing that various Govt agencies have inflicted on their own staff, just for starters.

The punishment in this country for driving without a licence, or a vehicle that is not warranted or registered...just a joke. And that is if you even get caught...

As for drunk drivers...I favour roadside executions for repeat offenders :ar15:
Something we definitely agree on, courts don't take serious offending seriously enough. 9 months loss of licence plus PD for speeding (180kph), failing to stop and dangerous driving. That's a fucking joke and pisses of police who do their best to get these dangerous wankers off the road.
Minimum loss of licence for failing to stop, repeat drink drivers, dangerous driving etc should be two years then when, not if (trust me, most drive) they drive while disq take the car and sell it at Turners. Don't give a shit if its mummy or daddy's or works car, truck or bike, its gone. Our courts need to harden the fuck up!

[Zedder]

The point I am trying to make is that a lot of the speeding tickets are given out for "offences" that don't have any affect whatsoever on others rights, safety or possessions.

I understand. I wasn't writing about the driver who goes a few ks over the limit or the one who gives their vehicle/bike a good squirt on a nice low traffic road somewhere out in the countryside.

It's the retard who tears around everywhere at a speed way higher than they can handle that I'm on about. My point there is they don't have the social interest that most other drivers have and are a danger to themselves and others. Also, because of those types to a certain degree, we're all suffering from collective pinging.

[scumdog]

The idea of refresher training and traffic school type of punishments is a valid one.

:

Add that to Mr Barnetts other ideas and it would improve things.

Trouble is; it would instantly lose votes for the party that implemented/proposed to implement it.

And not losing votes is top priority for ANY political party.

Look how much whinging there was from the plebs when the driving age was lifted by ONE year, "oh my, calamity is me, the world is ending!!" (And that was BEFORE the Mayans got into the act...)

[Ocean1]

The idea of refresher training and traffic school type of punishments is a valid one.

It's an expensive one. $167billion divided by mumblemumble.... 'prox $10 million per year, just for the lost productivity.

Could probably double that for implimentation and administration.

[swbarnett]

Don't give a shit if its mummy or daddy's or works car, truck or bike, its gone. Our courts need to harden the fuck up!
Trouble is that you can't take the car if it's stolen. Mummy or daddy's car may have been taken without permission.

Rather than take the car, give the prick a custodial scentence.

[swbarnett]

I understand. I wasn't writing about the driver who goes a few ks over the limit or the one who gives their vehicle/bike a good squirt on a nice low traffic road somewhere out in the countryside.

It's the retard who tears around everywhere at a speed way higher than they can handle that I'm on about. My point there is they don't have the social interest that most other drivers have and are a danger to themselves and others. Also, because of those types to a certain degree, we're all suffering from collective pinging.
Ah, with you on that one.

[Berg]

Trouble is that you can't take the car if it's stolen. Mummy or daddy's car may have been taken without permission.

Rather than take the car, give the prick a custodial scentence.
Yep, agree with that. Make the deal, mummy and daddy lay vehicle theft charges on little Johny/Mary and if convicted they get to keep their car. Too many softarse parents in NZ won't have their darlings charged when they "borrow" the family car and either incur fines or wrap it round something.

[Zedder]

It's an expensive one. $167billion divided by mumblemumble.... 'prox $10 million per year, just for the lost productivity.

Could probably double that for implimentation and administration.

Make the bastards who offend pay for it themselves.

[Zedder]

Add that to Mr Barnetts other ideas and it would improve things.

Trouble is; it would instantly lose votes for the party that implemented/proposed to implement it.

And not losing votes is top priority for ANY political party.

Look how much whinging there was from the plebs when the driving age was lifted by ONE year, "oh my, calamity is me, the world is ending!!" (And that was BEFORE the Mayans got into the act...)

Arr ya scummy dog, since when did the prospect of losing votes deter politicians when it suits them to change things.

[swbarnett]

Make the deal, mummy and daddy lay vehicle theft charges on little Johny/Mary and if convicted they get to keep their car. Too many softarse parents in NZ won't have their darlings charged when they "borrow" the family car and either incur fines or wrap it round something.
Now you're on to it. Would also work for commercial vehicles.

[scumdog]

Arr ya scummy dog, since when did the prospect of losing votes deter politicians when it suits them to change things.

Like the recent changes (not!) to the liquor laws?

[caspernz]

Trouble is that you can't take the car if it's stolen. Mummy or daddy's car may have been taken without permission.

Rather than take the car, give the prick a custodial scentence.

Like Berg mentioned, take the vehicle...which leads to your problem. So perhaps the custodial sentence needs to be more like a chaingang or hard labour approach? Which would really only lead to more failing to stop incidences wouldn't it?

For Joe Public, doing the right thing on an individual basis is still the best approach in my book. The funny thing is that if I behave myself and drive/ride in a considerate manner, then in general the responses I get from those around me are considerate as well. When I act like a tosser, then the number of tosser like responses I get increases proportionally.

The irony is that we want an improvement in road safety, but we want the other guy to show an improvement first. Wise words ring in my ears "improve the world, start with the person you see in the mirror" and I for one try to follow that...:wacko:

My two cents :sweatdrop

[Zedder]

Like the recent changes (not!) to the liquor laws?

The Alcohol Law Reform changes were at least something. Is that all ya got?

[scumdog]

The Alcohol Law Reform changes were at least something. Is that all ya got?

Something?
Barely more than nothing...:oi-grr:

And didn't really affect those 18 and up - shee-it, might lose votes...

[Zedder]

Something?
Barely more than nothing...:oi-grr:

And didn't really affect those 18 and up - shee-it, might lose votes...

Yeah, but it has to start somewhere and let's face it, they need to offset the projected loss of revenue due to things like the decline in cigarette smoking and people leaving the country.....

[Akzle]

mwaha. Thred dredg cos anpr.
It is in whangareigas.
Unfortunately didnt get the rego of the car it was deployed in, but had a colours car camped at end of road.
Get around the corner and it's roadblock on.
"we pulled you over cos your car came up as you passed the guy down the road" (no wof, no reg)

anyway. No license, either. And i drove off without being breath tested or given infringement notices.

Science, bitches.

[nzspokes]

mwaha. Thred dredg cos anpr.
It is in whangareigas.
Unfortunately didnt get the rego of the car it was deployed in, but had a colours car camped at end of road.
Get around the corner and it's roadblock on.
"we pulled you over cos your car came up as you passed the guy down the road" (no wof, no reg)

anyway. No license, either. And i drove off without being breath tested or given infringement notices.

Science, bitches.

Do you need a licence for a Healing 10spd?

[Maha]

mwaha. Thred dredg cos anpr.
It is in whangareigas.
Unfortunately didnt get the rego of the car it was deployed in, but had a colours car camped at end of road.
Get around the corner and it's roadblock on.
"we pulled you over cos your car came up as you passed the guy down the road" (no wof, no reg)

anyway. No license, either. And i drove off without being breath tested or given infringement notices.

Science, bitches.

.... you have to add 'no job' to the list, your kids must be real proud of their twat dad.

[Akzle]

.... you have to add 'no job' to the list, your kids must be real proud of their twat dad.


Do you need a licence for a Healing 10spd?

u gaiz:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vAw9lJ9iTPU/VVrLO4O6CEI/AAAAAAAAIns/9SOfdP9PhrE/s1600/the-human-centipede-wallpaper_111317-1152x864.jpg

[jim.cox]

Do you need a licence for a Healing 10spd?

Nah, just a rich Mummy and Daddy to buy it for you...

[scumdog]

Do you need a licence for a Healing 10spd?

Dunno, but I did get 35,000km+ out of my one before it was retired.

Only used three forks, two frames and about ten tyres to do it.

[rastuscat]

Dunno, but I did get 35,000km+ out of my one before it was retired.

Only used three forks, two frames and about ten tyres to do it.


Ten tyres?

Don't you mean Ten Guitars?